See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262581617

Modified septic tank-anaerobic filter unit as a two-stage onsite domestic

wastewater treatment system

Article  in  Environmental Technology · March 2014

DOI: 10.1080/09593330.2014.896950

CITATIONS READS

22 805

3 authors, including:

Meena Kumari Sharma Anwar Khursheed

Manipal Academy of Higher Education Aligarh Muslim University
14 PUBLICATIONS   149 CITATIONS    29 PUBLICATIONS   385 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Meena Kumari Sharma on 09 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee]
On: 03 April 2014, At: 09:03
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environmental Technology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tent20

Modified septic tank-anaerobic filter unit as a two-

stage onsite domestic wastewater treatment system
a b a
Meena Kumari Sharma , Anwar Khursheed & Absar Ahmad Kazmi
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee,
Uttarakhand, India
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, India
Published online: 01 Apr 2014.

To cite this article: Meena Kumari Sharma, Anwar Khursheed & Absar Ahmad Kazmi (2014): Modified septic tank-
anaerobic filter unit as a two-stage onsite domestic wastewater treatment system, Environmental Technology, DOI:
10.1080/09593330.2014.896950

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.896950

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Environmental Technology, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.896950

Modified septic tank-anaerobic filter unit as a two-stage onsite domestic wastewater

treatment system
Meena Kumari Sharmaa,∗ , Anwar Khursheedb and Absar Ahmad Kazmia
a Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India; b Department of Civil
Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, India
(Received 30 September 2013; accepted 17 February 2014 )

This study demonstrates the performance evaluation of a uniquely designed two-stage system for onsite treatment of domestic
wastewater. The system consisted of two upflow anaerobic bioreactors, a modified septic tank followed by an upflow anaerobic
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014

filter, accommodated within a single cylindrical unit. The system was started up without inoculation at 24 h hydraulic retention
time (HRT). It achieved a steady-state condition after 120 days. The system was observed to be remarkably efficient in
removing pollutants during steady-state condition with the average removal efficiency of 88.6 ± 3.7% for chemical oxygen
demand, 86.3 ± 4.9% for biochemical oxygen demand and 91.2 ± 9.7% for total suspended solids. The microbial analysis
revealed a high reduction (>90%) capacity of the system for indicator organism and pathogens. It also showed a very good
endurance against imposed hydraulic shock load. Tracer study showed that the flow pattern was close to plug flow reactor.
Mean HRT was also found to be close to the designed value.
Keywords: domestic wastewater, indicator organism, pathogens, two-stage system, onsite treatment, tracer study

1. Introduction anaerobic filter has been one of the most recommended

Most of the population living in rural and peri-urban areas
of developing countries depend upon onsite systems for the
treatment of domestic wastewater. The conventional sep-
tic tank (CST) is the oldest and the most popular mode
of onsite wastewater treatment in such areas. According
to the census of India 2011, total sanitation coverage is
50.2%, which comprises 22.2% septic tank, 11.9% piped
sewer system and 15.4% other different options (pit toilets
with or without slab, public toilets and others).[1] Due to
some favourable economical and functional features, such
as simple design, low-cost easier installation and minimum
maintenance, septic tanks are the most popular option of
onsite wastewater treatment in such areas of the developing
countries. But, there are several inherent drawbacks associ-
ated with existing form of septic tank, the most significant
one being its low treatment efficiency.[2,3] To overcome the
issue of low efficiency and certain other drawbacks, there
is a need for improvement in the existing design of the
system. Hence, this study was undertaken with the objec-
tive of developing an advanced septic system for the onsite
treatment of domestic wastewater, which is possible either
by modifications in the existing septic tank design or by
additional post-treatment measures. A number of alterna-
tives have been suggested to overcome the drawbacks of
the CST.[4–6] For the post-treatment of septic tank efflu-
ent, several options have been reported,[7–9] out of which
one.[10,11] However, all these alternatives require larger
size reactors associated with high operational and construc-
tional costs. In addition, sometimes it demands a completely
new structure.
Thus, the present study was carried out to develop a
new modified version of CST, expecting it to maintain
the favourable features of the existing system as well as
overcoming its major drawbacks. Recently, several stud-
ies have been reported that the two-stage systems can
achieve higher treatment efficiency than the single-stage
treatment systems.[12,13] In fact, the typical feature of the
two-stage systems, a high-loaded first stage followed by a
methanogenic-stage treatment, has been found to improve
the treatment efficiency. Therefore, for the present study
an advanced onsite treatment system was developed to uti-
lize the benefits of two-stage systems while minimizing the
requirement of land and cost of operation and maintenance.
The present two-stage system consisted of two upflow
anaerobic reactors accommodated within a single unit.
The system was designed to incorporate the two possible
options, the first modification in septic tank and the sec-
ond of the post-treatment measure, collectively within the
same unit. The first anaerobic reactor worked as a sep-
tic tank with modification in the direction of flow from
horizontal to upflow mode. The second anaerobic reactor
worked as an anaerobic filter following the septic tank. As

∗ Corresponding author. Email: meenaiitr@gmail.com

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

 2 M.K. Sharma et al.
the flow direction through the system was changed to the
upflow mode rather than the conventional horizontal flow in
CST, removal of suspended solids improved due to enmesh-
ments. It also helped in enhancing the degree of contact
between influent raw domestic wastewater and anaerobic
sludge accumulated at the bottom of the tank.[6] Most of the
volume of designed system occupied vertical space rather
than horizontal, which minimized its footprint.
The removal of pathogens was given equal importance
as the removal of organic matter considering their health
hazards. The domestic wastewater contains a wide vari-
ety of faecal indicators and pathogens. The mechanism for
their removal mainly depends on sedimentation, attach-
ment, filtration and the presence of harsh environmental
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014
conditions of extreme pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen
and dissolved solids.[14,15] Hence, the present study pro-
vides quantitative information about the fate of indicator
organisms and pathogens in a two-stage treatment sys-
tem. In addition, the study also incorporated the other
major aspects, such as (a) long-term performance of the
system, (b) performance during hydraulic shock load, (c)
sludge characteristics and its morphological study and (d)
hydrodynamics characteristics of the system.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Experimental set-up
A laboratory-scale treatment unit was designed, fabricated
and installed at the campus of Indian Institute of Technology
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the laboratory scale two-stage onsite wastewater treatment unit.
Roorkee, India. The schematic diagram of the experimental
set-up of the two-stage system is illustrated in Figure 1.
The treatment unit was cylindrical in shape and fabricated
by using a transparent acrylic plastic pipe having the unit
dimensions as 450 mm (height) × 300 mm (diameter) with
a total working volume of 24 L. The unit was connected
with inlet and outlet pipes to work as a CST designed as
per Indian Standards for a single family. Furthermore, to
convert the unit into a two-stage system, it was divided
into two equal chambers by inserting a partition wall in the
middle of the unit.
A vertically positioned inlet pipe having a length of
about three-fourth of the height of the water level was pro-
vided in chamber I. This modified arrangement of the inlet
pipe facilitated the movement of the raw wastewater fed into
the system in an upflow mode (modified septic tank). Then,
the partially treated wastewater in chamber I was directed
to the bottom of chamber II, which was packed with baked
clay media (upflow anaerobic filter). The medium was kept
on a semi-circular perforated plastic plate, placed at a height
of 60 mm from the bottom of the tank. The partially treated
wastewater received from chamber I got distributed uni-
formly and moved upwards while being in contact with
the media present in chamber II and left the treatment unit
continuously through an outlet positioned at the top of the
chamber II.
The baked clay used in the filter chamber had nearly
identical particle size of about 10–12 mm with 46%
porosity. The media were obtained by crushing the locally
 Environmental Technology 3

available bricks into small pieces and then subsequently
passing it through three consecutive sieves of diameter 8–
10–12 mm. Finally, the material retained by the sieve of
diameter 10 mm was used as the supporting media.
2.2. Start-up and operation of the system
The system was started up in December 2011 without using
inoculums and operated for a period of 250 days. The mon-
itoring was carried out throughout the study period at an
ambient temperature of 12–40◦ C. The system was continu-
ously fed with domestic wastewater at a constant flow rate
of 24 L/day, which corresponded to a hydraulic retention
time (HRT) of 24 h till the system achieved steady-state
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014
Other parameters such as total Kjeldhal nitrogen (TKN),
sulphate, sulphide, volatile fatty acid (VFA) and alkalin-
ity were analysed on a weekly basis. The samples drawn
from the primary chamber (modified septic tank) were anal-
ysed monthly for all parameters. All the analyses were
performed according to Standard Methods,[17] except alka-
linity and VFA. Alkalinity and VFA were measured by
titration method suggested by DiLallo and Albertson.[18]
Measurement of pH was carried out by using HQ Series
portable pH probes (Model 40 D Hach, USA). A COD
digester (Model AL 38SC, Aqualytic, Germany) and an
UV–Vis spectrophotometer (Model DR 4000 Hach, USA)
were used for the COD analysis.
All the samples were assayed for microbial analysis and

condition. Pseudo steady-state condition was assumed to their enumeration was carried out for indicator organism
be achieved when the variation in effluent COD concentra- and pathogens. Indicator organisms such as total coliform
tion was found to be insignificant. After that, the effect of (TC) and faecal coliform (FC) were enumerated weekly,
hydraulic shock load on the performance and stability of whereas faecal streptococci (FS), Escherichia coli as well
the system was evaluated to identify its feasibility in actual as pathogenic bacteria such as Salmonella and Shigella
onsite conditions. were enumerated once in a month. The concentration of
TC, FC and FS was enumerated by Multiple Tube Fermen-
tation Technique,[17] whereas E. coli was enumerated by
2.3. Feed flow pattern
serial dilutions of the sample plated on MacConkey Agar
In the actual conditions, onsite systems generally receive the medium and incubated in an inverted position for 24–48 h
wastewater having large variations in quantity and quality at 37◦ C. Salmonella species were enumerated by culturing
both throughout the day. Therefore, the feed pattern was on the plates of Modified Semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis
kept according to the daily variations in the flow rate of (MSRV) medium and incubated for 17 h at 42◦ C. Suspected
wastewater. The daily variation in the flow was determined colonies were subcultured for confirmation on xylose lysine
on the basis of peak flow factor (PFF), which is the ratio deoxycholate (XLD) agar with 21-h incubation at 35◦ C.[19]
of peak to average hourly flow. The value of PFF 1 and Shigella species were enumerated by plating serial dilution
PFF 2 was simulated for constant flow and hydraulic shock of samples on MacConkey agar and XLD medium. The
load, respectively, at a fixed HRT of 24 h. At the time of plates were incubated in an inverted position for 24 h at
PFF 1, the system was continuously fed at a constant flow 37◦ C.
rate of 16.6 ml/min, while at PFF 2, variable feed flow was
supplied during a day. Peak flows were set twice a day in the
morning and evening for the duration of 1 h each to simulate 2.5. Raw wastewater characteristics
the household wastewater flow pattern. The peak flow rate The system was fed with inherently large variable concen-
at the time of PFF 2 was maintained by increasing it two trations of all the characteristic parameters of raw domestic
times the average flow and it came out with the value of wastewater as illustrated in Table 1. During the study
33.2 ml/min. Furthermore, the hourly flow rate before and period, organic loading rates (OLR) varied from 0.13 to
after the peak flow periods was regulated at half of the peak
flow rate with the value of 16.6 ml/min. For the remaining
Table 1. Raw wastewater characteristics.
18 h, the system was fed with a flow rate of 14.9 ml/min
to indicate the water volume of 0.9-fold of the average as Parameter Unit Concentrationa
maintained by Sarathai et al.[16]
pH – 7.6 ± 0.3
Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 310 ± 47
2.4. Sampling and analysis COD mg/L 411.4 ± 156
BOD mg/L 173.5 ± 61.9
Wastewater samples were drawn from the points of influ- TSS mg/L 242.3 ± 108.2
ent, primary chamber of the system (effluent of modified VFA mg/L 8.2 ± 2.6
septic tank) and the finally treated effluent. The samples NH+4 -N mg/L 29.1 ± 9.8
of influent and the finally treated effluent were monitored TKN mg/L 37.0 ± 9.3
TP mg/L 9.2 ± 2.6
daily for chemical oxygen demand (COD), pH and temper-
Sulphates mg/L 27.1 ± 19.8
ature; whereas biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total Sulphides mg/L 1.4 ± 0.4
suspended solids (TSS), ammonia nitrogen (NH+ 4 − N)
and total phosphorous (TP) were measured twice a week.
a Average value ± standard deviation.
 4 M.K. Sharma et al.
1.09 kg COD/m3 day, with an average BOD to COD ratio
of the influent being 0.45. The value of this ratio is an agree-
ment, which indicates the suitability for its treatment by
biological means.[20]
The microbial quality of the raw domestic waste-
water was quite consistent with an average concentra-
tion of TC, FC, FS and E. coli observed as 1.2 × 107 ±
1.0 × 107 , 1.7 × 106 ± 1.1 × 106 , 9.3 × 105 ± 2.9 × 105
MPN/100 ml and 5.0 × 105 ± 2.2 × 105 CFU/100 ml,
respectively, throughout the study period. In addition,
the major pathogens such as Salmonella and Shigella
were quantified as 3.4 × 105 ± 1.1 × 105 MPN/100 ml and
1.4 × 104 ± 9.0 × 103 CFU/100 ml, respectively.
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014
2.6. Specific methanogenic activity
Anaerobic sludge is characterized by its specific
methanogenic activity (SMA), which represents the max-
imum methane production capacity of methanogenic bac-
teria present in the accumulated sludge. At the end of the
run, methanogenic activity of anaerobic sludge withdrawn
from the bottom of the primary chamber of the system
was assessed according to the procedure reported by Isa
et al.[21] The test was carried out in Oxitop bottles (WTW,
Germany) of 250 ml working volume and performed in the
shaking condition at 30 ± 2◦ C. Methanogenic activity of
the sludge was calculated on the basis of the following
equation:
(G)(CF)
SMA = (1)
(VSS)(S)(T)
where SMA is the specific methanogenic activity in
(gCOD−CH4 )/gVSS day), G is the methane produced in
(ml), CF is the conversion factor in (gCOD−CH4 in a stan-
dard condition of temperature 0◦ C and pressure of 1 atm/ml
CH4 at experimental condition), VSS is the volatile sus-
pended solids (gVSS/g of sludge), S is the sludge added to
the bottle (g) and T is the time duration (days).
2.7. Sludge morphology
The morphology of the withdrawn sludge was examined
using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Sample was
first fixed for 1 h at 4◦ C with 2.5% (w/v) glutaraldehyde in
phosphate buffer solution. It was then dehydrated through a
graded series of acetone–water mixtures (10%, 25%, 50%,
75%, 90% and 100%). These samples, in each mixture, were
then brought to equilibrium for 10 min and finally dried off
by the critical-point drying method before being sputter-
coated with gold particles.[22] Finally, the samples were
examined using SEM (LEO 435 VP).
2.8. COD mass balance
COD mass balance is a useful tool to quantify the electron
sinks in an anaerobic reactor. The influent COD fed to the
treatment unit gets transformed into different components,
such as biomass COD and methane COD, whereas a fraction
of COD is consumed in the reduction of sulphates present in
the raw domestic wastewater. Therefore, the examination of
COD mass balance of the whole system for the entire study
period was carried out by using the following equation:
CODinf = CODeff + CODCH4 + CODaqCH4 + CODbiomass
+ CODSO4 + CODunacc (2)
where CODinf and CODeff are the total masses of influ-
ent and effluent COD, respectively, in g/day, calculated
by multiplying the respective concentration of COD with
the volume of treated wastewater. The terms CODCH4
and CODaqCH4 represent the COD of methane produced
in gaseous and aqueous forms, respectively, in g/day.
Aqueous methane escaped with the effluent was calculated
according to Henry’s law.[20] CODbiomass is the COD of the
sludge developed in the system, in g/day, calculated on the
basis of the total growth of VSS within the reactor multi-
plied by a factor of 1.42. CODSO4 is the COD consumed in
sulphate reduction, in g/day, calculated stoichiometrically
by multiplying the reduced mass of sulphates with a factor
of 0.67.
2.9. Tracer study
Tracer study was performed to analyse the hydrodynamic
characteristics of the system at both the flow conditions of
PFF 1 and PFF 2 after attaining the steady-state condition.
The tracer step input technique was used for the study
by introducing lithium chloride as a tracer (feed concen-
tration of 100 mg/L). Lithium chloride was chosen as the
tracer because of its several favourable features.[23] The
response was detected as a tracer–response curve by taking
grab samples from the outlet of the reactor at an interval of
30 min from 6 h onwards till 12 h. Thereafter, the sample
collection interval was reduced to 15 min till the effluent
concentration matched with the influent concentration. The
chloride ion concentration was measured with a conductiv-
ity meter (Hach Model CDC 401) after suitable calibration
with 0.1 N KCl solution.
To compare the results of the tracer study at differ-
ent flow conditions, normalized (with dimensionless unit)
time and concentration were used to obtain the normalized
residence time distribution (RTD) curves. The normalized
RTD curves were further analysed to calculate the mean
HRT, variance and dead space within the system by using
a model.[22,24]
Generally, the upflow anaerobic reactors are consid-
ered to operate as plug flow reactors. However, there is
always a small amount of deviation from the ideal plug
flow condition. This deviation is expressed by a dimen-
sionless dispersion number (d), calculated on the basis of
variance of the RTD curve. A large dispersion number,
 Environmental Technology 5

d = ∞, indicates a perfectly mixed system; a small disper-

sion number, d = 0, suggests an ideal plug-flow system;
d = 0.02 is defined as an intermediate and d = 0.2 shows
a large degree of dispersion.[25]

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Physico-chemical characteristics
During the start-up period, average pollutant removal effi-
ciency in terms of COD was observed to be 75.3% with
the contribution of 54.3% by the modified septic tank,
which might be attributed to the settling and interception
of the organic matter in the accumulated sludge at the bot-
tom of the primary chamber. Thereafter, the system was
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014

assumed to achieve the steady-state condition after 120 days

and considered to be matured or acclimatized. During the
steady-state condition, the overall performance of the sys-
tem improved with the average COD removal efficiency
increasing up to 88.7%, which is found to be almost constant
thereafter. The average performance characteristics of the
two-stage system in steady-state condition are summarized
in Table 2.
During the study period, it was observed that the anaer- Figure 2. Evolution of the COD removal efficiency with variable
obic biodegradation of organic matter was influenced by (a) sewage temperature and (b) organic loading rate.
temperature. A diurnal variation in wastewater temperature
was observed to vary in the range of 11–34◦ C. The effect of
OLRs is illustrated in Figure 2(b). It shows that the over-
variable temperature on the COD removal efficiency is illus-
all COD removal efficiency of the system increased with
trated in Figure 2(a). The system was started in winter time;
the increasing OLRs and it attained the maximum value of
and with the increase in temperature over time, the overall
94.9% at the highest OLR of 1.09 kg COD/m3 . However, at
COD removal efficiency of the system was observed to be
the lower OLR of 0.13 kg COD/m3 the removal efficiency
increased. At the time of maximum temperature of sewage
dropped down to 64.4%.
at 34◦ C, the COD removal efficiency was observed to be
Figure 3(a) and 3(b) illustrates the influent and efflu-
92.5%.
ent concentration patterns for BOD and TSS with their
Similarly, the COD removal efficiency was also influ-
respective removal efficiencies during the study period. In
enced by OLR. At a steady-state condition, the variation in
spite of large fluctuations in the influent concentration, the
the weekly averages of COD removal efficiency at different
characteristics of the effluent were stable and the system
achieved a consistent performance level after attaining the
Table 2. Average performance of the treatment unit at steady-state condition with the average removal efficiencies
steady-state condition. for BOD and TSS as 86.3% and 91.2%, respectively. The
final average effluent BOD and TSS concentrations were
Effluent concentrationa
observed as 22.3 ± 8.5 and 19.6 ± 8.7 mg/L, respectively,
Final removal
Parameter Unit Stage I Stage II efficiencya (%) which fulfilled the disposal standards prescribed in India
that the treated sewage should not contain BOD and TSS
pH – 7.2 ± 0.3 7.7 ± 0.4 – more than 30 and 100 mg/L, respectively.
Alkalinity mg/L as 319 ± 20 359 ± 46 – It was observed that the two-stage system with its new
CaCO3
configuration produced much better quality of the effluent
COD mg/L 176.3 ± 75.9 44.1 ± 4.4 88.6 ± 3.7
BOD mg/L 87.6 ± 30.9 22.3 ± 8.5 86.3 ± 4.9 than the CST for onsite domestic wastewater treatment. The
TSS mg/L 123.7 ± 60.9 19.6 ± 8.7 91.2 ± 9.7 system delivered a high-quality effluent with substantially
VFA mg/L 30.2 ± 8.0 17.5 ± 4.0 – higher removal efficiencies, which could be accomplished
NH+4 -N mg/L 30.5 ± 10.2 33.3 ± 11.0 – by an effective modification and a novel combination of
TKN mg/L 33.4 ± 7.7 30.2 ± 7.8 18.3 ± 3.8 the two stages of treatment. The modified septic tank was
TP mg/L 8.4 ± 1.9 7.2 ± 2.1 20.9 ± 9.5
observed with improved removal efficiency of BOD and
Sulphates mg/L 16.4 ± 4.3 10.2 ± 3.1 63.3 ± 6.2
Sulphides mg/L 4.3 ± 0.4 5.7 ± 1.7 – TSS with the individual contributions of 48.3% and 53.8%,
respectively, in the overall efficiency of the system. The
a Average value ± standard deviation. average concentrations of BOD and TSS in the effluent from
 6 M.K. Sharma et al.
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014
Figure 3. Evaluation of the parameter concentration of influent and effluent with percentage removal (a) BOD and (b) TSS.
the primary chamber (modified septic tank) were observed
as 87.6 and 123.7 mg/L, respectively. Hence, the suspended
loading rate on the secondary chamber (anaerobic filter)
varied in the range of 0.13–0.60 kg/m3 day on the basis of
TSSs leaving from the primary chamber.
The VFA conjunction with pH is an essential prereq-
uisite parameter for maintaining the desired environmental
condition in anaerobic treatment systems.[26] The average
pH value of the treated effluent during the experimental
period was observed as 7.7 ± 0.4, which is the optimal
pH range for anaerobic metabolism.[20] Though the pH
of the primary chamber was always lower than the influent
pH, it increased at the effluent point of the system. This
phenomenon may be attributed to the occurrence of hydrol-
ysis, acidogenesis and acetogenesis in the primary chamber,
which resulted in the accumulation of fatty acids.[27] The
maximum concentration of VFA in the primary chamber
was 64 mg/L, which was not detrimental to methanogens
as it was lower than 150 mg/L.[28] Further, the increase in
pH in the final effluent might be due to the consumption of
VFA by methanogens present within the system. However,
the lesser presence of VFA in the finally treated effluent than
the primary chamber might be due to the low methanogenic
activity of the biomass present in the treatment unit.
The alkalinity is another stability measure of the anaer-
obic process. The concentration of alkalinity in treated
effluent was always found to be 11–22% higher than the
influent alkalinity. This may be attributed due to the for-
mation of carbonates and bicarbonates within the system,
which indicated a proper anaerobic functioning.
The effluent concentration of ammonia nitrogen was
found to be increased by 14.7 ± 2.9%. However, the TKN
was partially removed by 18.3% with a contribution of 9.8%
of the modified septic tank. This phenomenon of increased
ammonia level and partial removal of Kjeldhal nitrogen may
be attributed to anaerobic degradation of biodegradable and
removal of non-biodegradable nitrogen compounds, respec-
tively. The system demonstrated 20.9% average removal
efficiency of TP, including 7.2% contribution of primary
chamber of modified septic tank. Removal of phosphorous
may be due to its utilization in biomass development and
entrapment within the accumulated sludge present in the
system.
During the shock loading of PFF 2, the performance
of the primary chamber (modified septic tank) in terms of
COD, BOD, TSS and FC reduced to 45.2%, 41.9%, 44.8%
and 28%, respectively. This unfavourable performance
might be due to high turbulence, which led to washing out of
 Environmental Technology 7

Table 3. Results of microbial analysis at steady-state condition.

Parameter Unit Raw wastewatera Final effluenta Efficiencya (%)

TC MPN/100 ml 1.2 × 107 ± 1.0 × 107 1.2 × 106 ± 3.5 × 105 94.3 ± 5.7
FC MPN/100 ml 1.7 × 106 ± 1.1 × 106 2.0 × 105 ± 9.8 × 104 93.3 ± 7.1
FS MPN/100 ml 9.3 × 105 ± 2.9 × 105 7.5 × 104 ± 1.3 × 104 91.0 ± 3.0
E. coli CFU/100 ml 5.0 × 105 ± 2.2 × 105 4.1 × 103 ± 2.2 × 103 99.2 ± 2.2
Salmonella MPN/100 ml 3.4 × 105 ± 1.1 × 105 2.3 × 104 ± 1.8 × 103 99.6 ± 4.5
Shigella CFU/100 ml 1.4 × 104 ± 9 × 103 1.3 × 102 ± 1.1 × 102 99.1 ± 1.2
a Average value ± standard deviation.
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014

Figure 4. Faecal coliform (FC) removal pattern.

the influent solids and settled biomass. However, the two-
stage system demonstrated appreciable tolerance against
hydraulic shock load with the pollutant removal efficien-
cies dropping down slightly to 87.1%, 85.6%, 87.6% and
96.7% for COD, BOD, TSS and FC, respectively. The sys-
tem exhibited appreciable stability and trimness because the
configuration was strong enough for minimizing the effect
of hydraulic shock load. The resilience displayed by the
system could be attributed to the suitable modifications and
confinement of both the separate treatment processes in a
single unit. The upflow mode provided in both the chambers
resulted in an increased resistance to hydraulic and organic
shock loads.
3.2. Microbial characteristics
World Health Organization [29] has recognized TC and FC
as indicators, which provide a total spectrum of water borne
diseases. The microbial characteristics of the finally treated
effluent at steady-state condition are summarized in Table 3.
In general, FC is recognized as a key indicator organism
that represents the presence of bacterial pathogens as well
as enteric viruses. Thus, keeping it in view as a primary con-
cern, the effectiveness of a two-stage system with respect to
elimination of FC during the complete study period is illus-
trated in Figure 4. The average removal of FC was found to
be 93.3% (log 1.4) with the effluent concentrations in the
range of log 3.4–7.0 per 100 ml.
The average reduction of other indicator organisms of
TC, FS and E. coli were found to be 94.3%, 91% and
99.2%, respectively. This high removal efficiency could be
attributed to the combination of two mechanisms of phys-
ical (adsorption onto the suspended solids) and biological
(natural die-off and nutrient depletion) means under anaer-
obic conditions.[30] The pathogens such as Salmonella and
Shigella were observed to be removed by 99.6% and 99.1%,
respectively, during the steady-state condition at PFF 1.
However, during shock load period of PFF 2, the removal
efficiency of indicator organisms was slightly reduced and
quantified by 92.8% for TC, 89.4% for FC, 84.7% for FS
and 96.1% for E. coli. However, the removal of Salmonella
species was quantified as 98.2%, whereas for Shigella it was
observed to be reduced to 97.4%.
3.3. Sludge characteristics and activity
During the experimental period, no sludge was thrown off
from the reactor to identify its sludge holding capacity. After
220 days of operation period, the primary chamber was
filled up with sludge. At this time, about 75% of the total
generated sludge was withdrawn from the primary chamber.
The characteristics of the withdrawn sludge indicated the
concentrations of TSS and VSS to be as 25.7 and 19.3 g/L,
respectively, with a VSS to TSS ratio of 0.75, which is an
agreement that the sludge still needs further digestion before
its final disposal.[31]
 8 M.K. Sharma et al.
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014

Figure 5. SEM images showing different types of bacteria: (a) low-resolution view, (b) colony of methanosarcina-like cell, (c) protozoa,
(d) rod-shaped bacteria – methanosaeta, (e) filamentous group of bacteria – methanothrix and (f) clumps of methanosarcina clustered-cocci,
diplococci.

The SMA value of the withdrawn sludge using acetate
as the substrate was observed to be 0.02 g COD-CH4 /gVSS
day. The activity of the sludge indicated low methanogenic
activity, as active anaerobic sludge represents the value of
activity between 0.08 and 0.20 g CH4 -COD/gVSS day.[32]
3.4. Scanning electron microscopic
SEM images of microbes on the surface of the sludge
are illustrated in Figure 5. It indicated that the sludge
flocs seemed to be an agglomeration of methanothrix-like
filaments and revealed the presence of various bacterial
diversity and inert materials in the sludge flocs.
The reactor contained a large variety of hydrolysing
and acid-producing microorganisms, predominated by clus-
ters of filamentous bacteria and cocci of varying sizes and
shapes. Two types of cocci were observed within the reac-
tor: large and small. These cocci resembled species of
the methanococcus genus and it plays an important role
in methanogenesis, the final stage of anaerobic digestion
process.[33] Figure 5(b) and 5(f) illustrates the varia-
tion and relative abundance of two types of cocci within
the reactor during the study. The other morphotypes as
illustrated in Figure 5(d) and 5(e) were observed to be
bamboo-shaped rods, which is a typical characteristic of
the acetoclastic methanogen and methanosaeta. These
microorganisms typically occurred in pairs and were often
enmeshed in flocs of filaments.
3.5. Mass balance
The COD mass balance over the total period of operation
is illustrated in Figure 6. The mass balance was applied to
the system with the average input and output COD being
9.02 and 1.86 g COD/day respectively. Results indicated
that 80% of the input COD was removed within the reactor
and got converted into different forms during the anaerobic
treatment. The measurement of the methane gas generated
from the reactor was determined by means of calculation,
which also included the fraction of unaccounted COD.
Mass balance analyses indicated that the input COD was
mainly converted into CH4 , both in gaseous and aqueous
forms. Out of the total removed COD, 26% and 47% were
recovered in aqueous and gaseous forms, respectively. The
sludge accounted for 23% of COD consumed in the sys-
tem. COD consumed in sulphate reduction was quite low at
3% only. Additionally, the calculated results of methane
gas generation were compared with the results of the
methanogenic activity test, which revealed that the results
of the onsite methane production were in agreement with
 Environmental Technology 9
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014

Figure 6. Mass balances of influent COD in the treatment unit: (a) total distribution and (b) percent distribution.

the activity test performed on the sludge in the laboratory

bioassay.

3.6. Hydrodynamic characteristics

Hydrodynamic characteristics are essential to identify the
mixing characteristics and flow pattern, which indicate
the actual exposure time and substrate distribution within
the system and it also affect the treatment efficiency. The
normalized RTD curves of two different flow conditions of
PFF1 and PFF 2 are illustrated in Figure 7.
The hydrodynamic characteristics indicated that the
mean HRT of the system was observed as 19.7 and 18.1 h
Figure 7. Normalized residence time distribution (RTD) curves
at PFF 1 and PFF 2 loading, respectively. It was found that
for treatment unit under the steady and variable loading.
the mean HRT of the system did not change significantly
by the change in loading conditions at a fixed 24 h HRT.
The modified arrangement of the inlet pipe in the septic
tank chamber and the presence of filter media in the sub-
sequent chamber helped in maintaining the HRT as well as the system at the time of shock load. It was observed that the
the removal efficiency. designed system maintains the similar hydraulic character-
Dead volume increased to 24% from its initial value of istics at PFF 1 and PFF 2, which resulted in good stability
17.9% when the system moved from PFF 1 to PFF 2. This even at the time of hydraulic shock load. The calculated
might be due to the occurrence of more channelling within dispersion numbers of 0.037 and 0.035 for PFF 1 and PFF2
 10 M.K. Sharma et al.
indicated that the flow pattern within the system was inter-
mediate between plug-flow and perfectly mixed flow during
both conditions of hydraulic loading.
4. Conclusions
The designed two-stage system is highly efficient, com-
pactly designed and low-cost alternative to the existing sep-
tic tank. It delivered a better-quality effluent with average
COD, BOD and TSS concentrations of 44.1 ± 4.4, 22.3 ±
8.5 and 19.6 ± 8.7 mg/L, respectively, during steady-state
condition at 24 h HRT. The system was highly efficient
in removing indicator organism and pathogens. The new
design enabled the system to be highly resilient to the
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014
hydraulic shock loads up to twice the average flow, as there
was no significant change noted on the performance of the
system during these shock loading conditions.
Therefore, the present two-stage system is a feasible
option of onsite domestic wastewater treatment for the peo-
ple living in the unsewered rural and peri-urban areas of the
developing countries like India.
Funding
The authors thank the Ministry of Drinking Water Supply and
Sanitation, Government of India, New Delhi, India, for financial
support.
References
[1] Census of India. Houses household Amenities and Assets:
Latrine Facility. 2011. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011
census/hlo/Data_sheet/India/Latrine.pdf
[2] Cullimore DR, Viraraghavan T. Microbiological aspects
of anaerobic filter treatment of septic tank effluent at low
temperatures. Environ Technol. 2008;15:165–173.
[3] Nasr FA, Mikhaeil B. Treatment of domestic wastewa-
ter using conventional and baffled septic tanks. Environ
Technol. 2013;34;2337–2343.
[4] Bogte JJ, Breure AM, Van Andel JG, Lettinga G. Anaerobic
treatment of domestic sewage in small-scale UASB reactors.
Water Sci Technol. 1993;27(9):75–82.
[5] Mendoza L, Carballa M, Zhang L, Verstraete W. Treatment
of low and medium strength sewage in a lab-scale grad-
ual concentric chambers (GCC) reactor. Water Sci Technol.
2008;57:1155–1160.
[6] Moussavi G, Kazembeigi F, Farzadkia M. Performance of a
pilot scale up-flow septic tank for on-site decentralized treat-
ment of residential wastewater. Process Saf Environ Protect.
2010;88:47–52.
[7] Panswad T, Komolmethee L. Effects of hydraulic shock loads
on small onsite sewage treatment unit. Water Sci Technol.
1997;35:145–152.
[8] Iyo T, Yoshino T, Tadokoro M, Ogawa T, Ohno S.
Advanced performance of small-scale domestic sewage
treatment plants using anaerobic–aerobic filter systems
with flow-equalization and recirculation. Environ Technol.
1996;17:1235–1243.
[9] Wu S, Austin D, Liu L, Dong R. Performance of integrated
household constructed wetland for domestic wastewater
treatment in rural areas. Ecol Eng. 2011;37:948–954.
[10] US Environmental Protection Agency. Onsite wastewa-
ter treatment systems manual. Washington, DC: Office of
Research and Development; 2002.
[11] Raman V, Chakladar N. Upflow filters for septic tank
effluents. J Water Poll Cont Fed. 1972;41:1552–1560.
[12] Elmitwalli TA, Sayed S, Groendijk L, van Lier J, Zee-
man G, Lettinga G. Decentralized treatment of concentrated
sewage at low temperature in a two-step anaerobic sys-
tem: two upflow-hybrid septic tanks. Water Sci Technol.
2003;48:219–226.
[13] Zuo Z, Wu S, Zhang W, Dong R. Effects of organic load-
ing rate and effluent recirculation on the performance of
two-stage anaerobic digestion of vegetable waste. Bioresour
Technol. 2013;146:556–561.
[14] Tyagi VK, Sahoo BK, Kazmi AA, Ahmad Z, Khursheed A,
Chopra AK. Fate of coliforms and pathogenic parasite in four
full-scale sewage treatment systems in India. Environ Monit
Assess. 2011;181:123–135.
[15] Awuah E. Pathogen removal mechanisms in macrophyte
and algal waste stabilization ponds [PhD dissertation].
Netherland: Wageningen University; 2006.
[16] Sarathai Y, Koottatep T, Morel A. Hydraulic characteristics
of an anaerobic baffled reactor as onsite wastewater treatment
system. J Environ Sci. 2010;22:1319–1326.
[17] APHA. Standard methods for examination of water and
wastewater. 21st ed. Washington, DC: American Public
Health Association; 2005.
[18] DiLallo R, Albertson OE. Volatile acids by direct titration. J
Water Pollut Control Fed. 1961;33(3):356–365.
[19] US Environmental Protection Agency. Method 1682:
salmonella in sewage sludge (biosolids) by modified
semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) medium. Wash-
ington, DC: Office of Water; 2006.
[20] Metcalf and Eddy. Wastewater engineering: treatment and
reuse. 4th ed. New Delhi, India: Tata McGraw-Hill Publish-
ing Company Limited; 2003.
[21] Isa MH, Farooqi IH, Siddiqi RH. Methanogenic activity test
for study of anaerobic processes. Indian J Environ Health.
1993;35:1–8.
[22] Gopal Krishna GVT, Kumar P, Kumar P. Treatment of
low-strength soluble wastewater using an anaerobic baffled
reactor (ABR). J Environ Manage. 2009;90:166–176.
[23] Anderson GK, Campos CMM, Chernicharo CAL, Smith LC.
Evaluation of the inhibitory effects of lithium when used as a
tracer for anaerobic digesters. Water Res. 1991;25:755–760.
[24] Morgan-Sagastume JM, Jimenez B, Noyola A. Tracer stud-
ies in a laboratory and pilot scale UASB reactor. Environ
Technol. 1997;18:817–825.
[25] Levenspiel O. Chemical reaction engineering. 3rd ed. India:
Wiley; 2004.
[26] Bodkhe SY. A modified anaerobic baffled reactor for munici-
pal wastewater treatment. J Environ Manage. 2009;90:2488–
2493.
[27] Baloch MI, Akunna JC. Granular bed baffled reactor
(GRABBR): solution to a two-phase anaerobic digestion
system. J Environ Eng. 2003;129(11):1015–1021.
[28] Langenhoff AAM, Stuckey DC. Treatment of dilute wastew-
ater using an anaerobic baffled reactor: effect of law temper-
ature. Water Res. 2000;34(15):3867–3875.
[29] World Health Organization. Water quality: guideline, stan-
dards and health. London: IWA Publishing; 2002.
[30] Polprasert C, Hoang LH. Kinetics of bacteria and bac-
teriophages in anaerobic filters. J Water Poll Cont Fed.
1983;55:385–391.
[31] Alrajoula M, Halalsheh M, Fayyad M. Anaerobic filter for
polishing effluent of UASB reactor treating strong sewage at
23◦ C. Water Sci Technol. 2009;59:1975–1982.
 Environmental Technology 11

[32] Lettinga G, Van Velsen AFM, Hobma SW, De Zeeuw W,
Klapwijk A. Use of the upflow sludge blanket (USB) reactor
concept for biological wastewater treatment, especially for
anaerobic treatment. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1980;22:699–734.
Downloaded by [Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee] at 09:03 03 April 2014
[33] Jetten MSM, Stams AJM, Zehnder AJB. Methanogenesis
from acetate: a comparison of the acetate metabolism in
Methanothrix soehngenii and Methanosarcina spp. FEMS
Microbiol Rev. 1992;88:181–198.

View publication stats