Alexander Szabo and Oscar Engle - Svenskt Vatten

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Average effluent values The average weighted effluent from 5-6 November, 9-10 January and average values from Zahari & Zain, (1999) give the total average values seen in table 8.1. The values from the report by Zahari & Zain, (1999) may represent “better” sludge conditions in the pond, hence lowering the average level of pollutants (data is available in Appendix A). Table 8.1: Effluent average values.   BOD 5 (mg/l) COD (mg/l) TSS (mg/l) 5-6 November 39 64 37 9-10 January 29 58 22 Zairi & Zain (1999) 16 40 13 Average 28 54 24 Algae in effluent Algae are present in the effluent and are known to contribute to the effluent COD and BOD. The water showed clear signs of microalgae in every effluent sample analyzed. In order to understand the contribution of particles to the effluent COD, one test was carried out with filtered and unfiltered composite effluent water from 9-10 January 2010 (see Figure 8.5). Figure 8.5: Unfiltered and filtered composite effluent water (from all 12 samples 9-10 Jan 2010).   The unfiltered effluent had a COD level of 57 mg/l and the same filtered effluent 27 mg/l. The difference between unfiltered and filtered (suspended COD) made therefore up 30 mg/l COD. Since it has been observed that the quantity of algae in the effluent is prominent, algae are assumed to contribute to a major part of the 30 mg/l COD difference. Reduction in pond system In Tables 8.2 and 8.3 below the reduction of average COD and average TSS from the samplings made on the 5-6 November, 2009 and on the 9-10 January, 2010 is shown.   40 
Table 8.2: Influent (weighted COD average against the influent water flow, see chapter 10.2) and effluent COD values. Date Influent COD (mg/l) Effluent COD (mg/l) Reduction 5-6 Nov, 2009 122 64 48% 9-10 Jan, 2010 113 58 49% Table 8.3: Influent (weighted TSS average, see chapter 10.2) and Effluent TSS values. Date Influent TSS (mg/l) Effluent TSS (mg/l) Reduction 5-6 Nov, 2009 63 37 41% 9-10 Jan, 2010 47 22 53% Survey of waste water producers at UTM campus Construction drawings over the area were used to identify the sewage pipes connected to the WSP. The chief engineer at UTM helped to identify the outer borders of the catchment. The amounts of students and staff living and studying/working within the catchment were identified by consulting housing and university offices. Some assumptions have been made where no information could be found about the number of people living and working in buildings connected to the treatment pond (for more information of the estimation of P.E., see Appendix B). The number of students and staff working within the faculties at UTM were given a P.E. of 0.2 instead of 1 (Sewerage Services Department, 1998) as they do not consume as much water at the faculties as they would have done at home, thus lowering the P.E. value. Outside UTM campus there are private family houses where the sewerpipes are connected to the studied treatment pond. The number of people living in each household is not exactly known so it was estimated that each household consists of 5 family members. Other buildings connected to the treatment pond where no information of the number of residents could be given were the UTM Main Office and the Mosque. The number of staff in the UTM Main Office was assumed to be 500 and the number of people visiting the Mosque could be up to 3000 people. The P.E. for the people working and visiting the buildings was set to 0.2 in both cases (Sewerage Services Department, 1998). The water consumption for UTM’s students is based on a value collected from a report by Katimon and Demun (2004). The report concludes that the average water consumption for UTM is 260 litres/(person*day). This value is higher than the average value of 208 liter/(person*day) for the rest of Malaysia (Ithnin, 2007). The reason for the higher consumption according to our proposition could be: 1. Students and staff at UTM have a more water consuming behavior, such as more showering and more use of laundry facilities. 2. Leakage of fresh water from delivery pipes. A third proposition by Katimon and Demun (2004) for the higher water consumption at UTM is:   41 
Page 1 and 2: ___________________________________
Page 3 and 4: ___________________________________
Page 5 and 6: List of abbreviations BOD - Biochem
Page 7 and 8: Summary Malaysia is developing fast
Page 9 and 10: Acknowledgements This report is a r
Page 11 and 12: Contents  List of abbreviations..
Page 13 and 14: Waste water production in t
Page 15 and 16: XI   
Page 17 and 18: treatment facilities simple, treatm
Page 19 and 20: 1.3 Objective The objective of this
Page 21 and 22: 2.2 Pretreatment   Screening The
Page 23 and 24: the case of waste water treatment p
Page 25 and 26: 3. Pond Hydraulics 3.1 Retention ti
Page 27 and 28: 5. Previous studies on WSP systems
Page 29 and 30: value of 4:1 in length/width ratio.
Page 31 and 32: 6. Study Area   6.1 Climate Johor
Page 33 and 34: Figure 6.3: The receiving river. Up
Page 35 and 36: accuracy (the accuracy of a single
Page 37 and 38: BOD analyzes were carried out using
Page 39 and 40:   35 
Page 41 and 42: 8. Water flow and quality Sampling
Page 43: stirred up. The algae population ma
Page 47 and 48: Figure 8.8: Above: The water veloci
Page 49 and 50: Figure 8.10: The water velocity in
Page 51 and 52: Method 1: Estimation of domestic wa
Page 53 and 54: atio between BOD 5 and COD for the
Page 55 and 56: Figure 8.14: Above: TSS concentrati
Page 57 and 58: Table 8.11: Measured BOD 5 on 5-6 N
Page 59 and 60:   55 
Page 61:   Screening device  The task

Alexander Szabo and Oscar Engle - Svenskt Vatten

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?