Don Esping, Denny Parker, Jose Jimenez, Fenghua Yang, Tim ... · Comparison of Three Wet Weather...

Comparison of Three Wet Weather Flow Treatment Alternatives to Increase Plant Capacity Don Esping, Denny Parker, Jose Jimenez, Fenghua Yang, Tim Bate, Steve Arant

OWEA 2013

June 19| 2013

• Background/Goals

• Bench Scale Testing

• Demonstration Facilities

• Testing

• Round 1 – Simulated Wet Weather

• Round 2 – Wet Weather

• Summary/Further Testing

Outline

Milwaukee MSD South Shore Water Reclamation Facility

16 Primary Settling Tanks

28 Aeration Basins

24 Final Settling Tanks

Aerated Grit

1” screens

2020 Facilities Plan

Increase capacity

• SSO - 5 year protection

• 300 to 450 mgd

Pilot Tested Ballasted Sedimentation

150 mgd CEPT

300 mgd

secondary

treatment Study Objectives

• Demonstrate other auxiliary treatment technologies

Auxiliary Treatment Options Considered

DRAFT 8/24/2010

Process Testing Comments

Chemical

Chemically Enhanced Primary

Treatment (CEPT)

Yes Full-Scale Testing

Ballasted flocculation – (Actiflo… No Previously tested

CoMag Ballasted flocculation No

Biological

Biological Contact Treatment Yes Pilot-Scale Testing

Bio-Actiflo No Insufficient project budget

Filtration

Deep Bed Filters No

Cloth media No

Compressible Media Yes Pilot-Scale Testing

Treatment Flow Routing

Plant Influent

(450 mgd)

Primary Settling Tanks

(150/300/300 mgd)

Existing Activated Sludge

Process

(300/300/300 mgd)

Compressible Media

Filtration

(150 mgd)

Biological

Contact Treatment

(150 mgd)

Disinfection

(450 mgd)

Flow routing and flow rates

Compressible Media Filtration/Biological Contact /

Chemically Enhanced Sedimentation

Demonstration Study Effluent Goals

Item

Units

NPDES

Permit

Operations

Contract

Demonstration

Study Daily

Goals

cBOD5 mg/L 30a /45b 15a 35

TSS mg/L 30a /45b 15a 35

Total Phosphorus mg P/L 1.0a 1.0a 1

Ammonia-Nitrogen mg N/L Seasonal 5a 5

Fecal Coliformc (no./100 mL) 200 100 --

a. Monthly average b. Weekly average c. Geometric mean

CEPT

Cocktail for wet weather and chemical system sizing

Biological Contact Treatment

Bio-flocculation potential and kinetics ( MLSS and contact time)

Bench-Scale Testing

Simulation of coagulation and/or flocculation processes

CEPT Bench-Scale Testing

170

40

100

27.5 2530

24

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Control 40 mg/L FeCl3 12.6 mg/L PAX

40 mg/L FeCl3 & 0.46 mg/L

A210P

12.6 mg/L PAX & 0.46 mg/L A210P

40 mg/L FeCl3 & 0.4 mg/L

CE9307

12.6 mg/L PAX &0.4

mg/L CE9307

Su

per

na

tan

t T

SS

, m

g/L

Coagulant Only Coagulant and Flocculant

342

215

182168 166

176 174160

8770 78 87

76 84 84 84

37 34 40 48 4262

4559

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Diluted raw

influent

Control 40 mg/L

FeCl3

12.6 mg/L

PAX

40 mg/L

FeCl3 & 0.46

mg/L A210P

12.6 mg/L

PAX & 0.46

mg/L A210P

40 mg/L

FeCl3 & 0.4

mg/L CE9307

12.6 mg/L

PAX &0.4

mg/L CE9307

Su

per

na

tan

t C

OD

, m

g/L

COD SCOD FFCOD

CEPT Bench-Scale Testing

Coagulant Only Coagulant and Flocculant

Demonstration Target 40 mg/L ferric chloride 0.5 mg/L anionic polymer


• High rate biological process which relies on biological flocculation

for colloidal & particulate removal

• No chemical addition required

• Effluent meets secondary treatment requirements

RAS WAS


• High rate biological process which relies on biological flocculation

for colloidal & particulate removal

• No chemical addition required

• Effluent meets secondary treatment requirements

Combined or

Dedicated Clarifiers

RAS WASRAS WAS

Contact Tank

PE or Raw

Short HRT Contact

Tank

MLSS or RAS

Biological Contact Process Sizing

• Competing Interests • Low MLSS » Low SLR » Less clarifiers

• Low MLSS » Reduced kinetics » Larger contact tank

• Site specific testing required

DRAFT 8/24/2010

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Contact Time (min)

% A

pp

roa

ch t

o T

SS

Res

idu

al

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

Plant A Plant B

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Su

pern

ata

nt T

SS

, mg

/L

Flocculation Time, minutes

410

820

1025

1230

1540

1740

Biological Contact Bench –Scale Testing

Biological Contact Bench –Scale Testing

Demonstration Target MLSS 1500 - 2000 mg/L HRT 15 -20 minutes

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

% A

ppro

ach

to R

esid

ual

Par

ticu

late

CO

D

Contact Time (min)

500 mg/L 1,000 mg/L 1,250 mg/L 1,500 mg/L 2,000 mg/L

Particulate COD = TCOD - SCOD(0.45 um filter)

• ¼ existing primary settling tanks

• Wet weather SOR: 1500 gal/sf-d

• 40 mg/L ferric chloride and 0.5 mg/L anionic polymer

CEPT Demonstration – Full Scale

Polymer Feed/ Mixer

Location

CES Primary

Clarifiers 9-12

Influent sampler and

ferric chloride feed

location

Primary effluent sampler

Biological Contact Treatment Demonstration

Tank 4 Primary Influent Head Tank

Return Sludge

Tank 2 Tank 1

• 4000 gallon aerated plug flow reactor

• Bench Scale Settling Tests • MLSS: 1500 - 2000 mg/L

• HRT: 15 -20 minutes

• Bench testing for clarification

• WWETCO Rental

• Filtration rate 5-7.5 gpm/sf

• 2011 - Primary effluent and secondary effluent

• 2012/13 - Primary influent

Compressible Media Filter Demonstration

Simulated Wet Weather – Biological Contact

Item Units 10/12/2011 10/17/2011 10/17/2011

Influent stream Blend of primary influent and secondary effluent

MLSS mg/L 1653 1882 2069

Influent

COD mg/L 190 160 130

TSS mg/L 95 79 66

BOD5 mg/L 68 64 51

TP mg/L 1.8 1.8 1.3

Reactor 3

Contract time minutes 15 22 15

Effluent TSS mg/L 34 15 7

Reactor 4

Contact time minutes 20 29 20

Effluent COD mg/L 110 51 59

Effluent TSS mg/L 25 19 6

Effluent TP mg/L 1.0 0.53 0.36

Demonstration Target MLSS 1500 - 2000 mg/L HRT 15 -20 minutes

60

19

34

22

58

100

26 26 26

15 15 15

3127

138

11

5 710

23

12 10 12

58

0

20

40

60

80

100

1205

.5

5.5

7.5

7.5

80

RA

S 5

.5

13

5 R

AS

7.5

11

Fe

@ 5

.5

21

Fe

@ 5

.5

31

Fe

@ 5

.5

8 F

e @

7.5

8 F

e @

7.5

8 F

e @

7.5

10

Fe

@ 5

7 F

e @

7.5

To

tal

Su

spen

ded

So

lid

s, m

g/L

Diluted Primary Effluent Filtered Effluent

Simulated Wet Weather – Compressible Media

190

51

160

79

71

86

71 71 7165 65 65

77

95

130

50

150

59

68

82

53

70

57 55 5259

71

30

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

5.5

5.5

7.5

7.5

80

RA

S 5

.5

13

5 R

AS

7.5

11

Fe

@ 5

.5

21

Fe

@ 5

.5

31

Fe

@ 5

.5

8 F

e @

7.5

8 F

e @

7.5

8 F

e @

7.5

10

Fe

@ 5

7 F

e @

7.5

So

lub

le C

OD

, mg

/L

Diluted Primary Effluent sCOD Filtered sCOD

Simulated Wet Weather – Compressible Media

• RAS addition did not improve soluble COD removal

• Ferric addition not required • Test filtration rates of 5-10 gpm/sf

Wet Weather Testing - May 7, 2012

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

3255

/6/1

2 0

:00

5/6

/12

3:0

0

5/6

/12

6:0

0

5/6

/12

9:0

0

5/6

/12

12

:00

5/6

/12

15

:00

5/6

/12

18

:00

5/6

/12

21

:00

5/7

/12

0:0

0

5/7

/12

3:0

0

5/7

/12

6:0

0

5/7

/12

9:0

0

5/7

/12

12

:00

5/7

/12

15

:00

5/7

/12

18

:00

5/7

/12

21

:00

5/8

/12

0:0

0

Flo

w, m

gd

CES and

BC

CMF Operation

CEPT (CES)

• SOR ≈ 2750 gal/sf-d

• Polymer mixer malfunction

Biological Contact

• MLSS ≈ 1600 mg/L

• HRT = 16 and 22 minutes

CMF

• Filtration rate of 7.5 gpm/sf

May 7, 2012 Test

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

2406

:00

7:3

0

9:0

0

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

19:3

0

21:0

0

22:3

0

0:0

0

To

tal

Su

spen

ded

So

lid

s, m

g/L

Time

BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min)

CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing - TSS

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

706

:00

7:3

0

9:0

0

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

19:3

0

21:0

0

22:3

0

0:0

0

BO

D5(i

nfl

uen

t) o

r C

BO

D5

(eff

luen

t),

mg

/L

Time

BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing – BOD

May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing - Ammonia

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

6:0

0

7:3

0

9:0

0

10

:30

12

:00

13

:30

15

:00

16

:30

18

:00

19

:30

21

:00

22

:30

0:0

0

Am

mo

nia

Nit

rog

en, m

g N

/L

Time



May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing – TP

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.06

:00

7:3

0

9:0

0

10

:30

12

:00

13

:30

15

:00

16

:30

18

:00

19

:30

21

:00

22

:30

0:0

0

To

tal P

ho

sph

oru

s, m

g P

/L

Time

BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min)CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing – COD

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2006

:00

7:3

0

9:0

0

10

:30

12

:00

13

:30

15

:00

16

:30

18

:00

19

:30

21

:00

22

:30

0:0

0

Ch

em

ica

l Ox

yg

en

Dem

an

d, m

g/L

Time

BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min)CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing – Soluble COD

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

1206

:00

7:3

0

9:0

0

10

:30

12

:00

13

:30

15

:00

16

:30

18

:00

19

:30

21

:00

22

:30

0:0

0

So

lub

le C

hem

ica

l Ox

yg

en D

ema

nd

, mg

/L

Time



May 7, 2012 Wet Weather Testing – Soluble P

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.86

:00

7:3

0

9:0

0

10

:30

12

:00

13

:30

15

:00

16

:30

18

:00

19

:30

21

:00

22

:30

0:0

0

So

lub

le P

ho

sph

oru

s, m

g P

/L

Time



Temperature = 10.5 C

CEPT • SOR ≈ 1900 gal/sf-d

• Ferric chloride – 50 mg/L as FeCl3

• Polymer – 2 mg/L

Biological Contact • MLSS ≈ 1700 mg/L

• HRT = 17 and 23 minutes

CMF • Equipment Malfunction

May 7, 2013 Test

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1409

:00

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

To

tal

Su

spen

ded

So

lid

s, m

g/L

Time

BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=17 min ) BC (HRT=23 min) CES Effluent

May 23, 2013 Wet Weather Testing - TSS

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

909

:00

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

BO

D5

(in

flu

ent)

or

CB

OD

5 (

effl

uen

t),

mg

/L

Time


< 10 mg/L

Estimated from TSS

May 23, 2013 Wet Weather Testing - BOD

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

99

:00

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

Am

mo

nia

Nit

rog

en,

mg

N/L

Time


May 23, 2013 Wet Weather Testing - Ammonia

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.09

:00

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

To

tal

Ph

osp

ho

rus,

mg

P/L

Time


May 23, 2013 Wet Weather Testing - TP

Biological Contact Treatment Sludge Quality

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

12:00 14:00 16:00

SV

I, m

L/g

May 23, 2013 Wet Weather Flow SVI Measurements

Biological Contact Tank 4 (23 min) Aeration Basin 4

Biological Contact Treatment Sludge Quality

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

So

lid

s L

oa

din

g R

ate

, lb

/sf-

d

MLSS, g/L

Activated Sludge Biological Contact

April 23, 2013 SVI

Activated Sludge = 68 mL/g

Biological Contact = xx mL/g

Wet Weather Testing to Date

Item Chemically Enhanced

Primary Treatment

Biological Contact

Treatment

Compressible

Media Filtration

Events 1 3 1

Effluent Quality

CBOD5 <20 ≈ 10 <20

ESS ≈ 20 <10 <20

NH3-N In = Out 1-2 mg/L reduction In = Out

TP <1 < 1 <1

Comments 50 mg/L FeCl3

Polymer = 2 mg/L

15-20 min HRT

MLSS 1600-1700 mg/L

SVI same as mainstream

7.5 gpm/sf

• Additional auxiliary treatment testing

• June 13, 2013 completed

• 3 additional wet weather events

• Biological contact settling characteristics testing

Disinfection testing

Future Testing

Thank you

Don Esping, Denny Parker, Jose Jimenez, Fenghua Yang, Tim ... · Comparison of Three Wet Weather...

Documents

Transcript of Don Esping, Denny Parker, Jose Jimenez, Fenghua Yang, Tim ... · Comparison of Three Wet Weather...