CFD Analysis of Clarifier Performance With and Without Energy Dissipating Inlet

Similar documents
Next-generation modeling tool helps you get the most from your clarifier

Full Scale Testing to Demonstrate Anaerobic Selector Effect for Low Strength Wastewater

NEW Water Optimization Case Study Clarifier Field Testing

MWMC Eugene-Springfield WPCF Facility Plan Secondary Clarifier Enhancement Alternatives

Utilization of Dynamic Modeling to Evaluate and Design Secondary Clarifiers for the Muddy Creek WWTP

Optimizing Clarifier Performance Are We Designing the Clarifiers Right?

High Performance. Uniform Distribution

Activated Sludge Process Control:

A NEW METHOD FOR EVALUATING PRIMARY CLARIFIERS Alex Ekster and Cristina Pena San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant City of San Jose

UNOX Wastewater System Evaluation, March 10-13, 2008 Draft for Client Review

Field and CFD Analysis of Jet Aeration and Mixing

Chapter 11. Secondary Clarifiers

LAKESIDE Water Purification Since Bulletin #1218 Revised June Spiravac Clarifier. Peripheral Feed Center Takeoff Suction Sludge Removal

Surface Aeration System Modeling Using COMSOL

Improving Performance of Large Rectangular Secondary Clarifiers

MODELLING THE DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF A SECONDARY CLARIFIER TO A SEA WATER INCURSION AT THE RADFORD STW

MRI Wastewater Inclined Plate Settlers Performance Advantages

Physical water/wastewater treatment processes

Maximizing Secondary Wet Weather Capacity at the Columbia Boulevard Wastewater Treatment Plant

Optimization in Practice: Case Studies from NEW Water s Phosphorus and TSS Optimization Plans

SETTLING REVIEW CHECKLIST

TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL TEST OF A HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE WATER QUALITY UNIT. By James T. Mailloux Dean K. White

rim-flo secondary Clarifier with Tow-Bro unitube sludge removal system

FAYOUM CITY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT, DEVELOPMENT STAGES, CASE STUDY

Optimizing Wastewater Upgrade Projects with Improved Hydraulics

By Kimbal A. Hall, PE. Submitted to: WESTFALL MANUFACTURING COMPANY. May ALDEN RESEARCH LABORATORY, INC. 30 Shrewsbury Street Holden, MA 01520

A Clarification on the Justification for Clarification

Making Clarifiers Do More For Less. Hany Gerges, Ph.D, PE July 31, 2015

A SITE-SPECIFIC TOOL FOR OPTIMIZING FINAL CLARIFIER DESIGN AND OPERATION

CFD ANALYSIS OF CONVECTIVE FLOW IN A SOLAR DOMESTIC HOT WATER STORAGE TANK

Module 19 : Aerobic Secondary Treatment Of Wastewater. Lecture 24 : Aerobic Secondary Treatment Of Wastewater

City of Gardiner, Maine Wastewater Committee Meeting. CSO Storage Tank & Screening Evaluation

- 1 - Retrofitting IFAS Systems In Existing Activated Sludge Plants. by Glenn Thesing

CFD on Small Flow Injection of Advanced Accumulator in APWR

19. AEROBIC SECONDARY TREATMENT OF WASTEWATER

75 th STREET WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADES PROJECT

ATTACHMENT 1 GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION. BOD5 mg/l mg/l TSS mg/l mg/l NH3-N mg/l mg/l

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. Los Angeles

WWTF Capacity Assessment Project

2015 HDR, Inc., all rights reserved.

New Developments in BioWin 5.3

Oxygen Transfer - RBCs

ECO-ANT21 Process ECO-ANT21 Corporation

Appendix B-1. Design Calculations for Sewage Treatment Plant

OPTIMISING OPERATIONS OF YOUR ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT

Modelling of Wastewater Treatment Plants

Education on Common Household Sewage Treatment Systems Found In Allen County, OH

SAFL Baffle Improves Standard Sump as a Stormwater Treatment BMP

Module 1: CHAPTER FOUR PHYSICAL PROCESSES

Capability of the Aqua-Swirl Concentrator to Remove Trash from Stormwater Runoff

Practical Hydraulics on a Large Wastewater Treatment Works

SAFL Baffle Research Summary

Investigating Two Configurations of a Heat Exchanger in an Indirect Heating Integrated Collector Storage Solar Water Heating System

TREATMENT OF COSMETIC WASTEWATER USING BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY

Waste Water treatment

Ballasted Activated Sludge Demonstration Study SEPTEMBER 30, 2016

CEE 371 May 14, 2009 Final Exam

VALIDATION OF A CFD MODEL IN RECTANGULAR SETTLING TANKS

Outline. Introduction Case Studies. Anoxic Zone Mixing Channel Mixing. Theory and Criteria. Mixing Theory Design Criteria.

SECTION 8.0 NEWPCC SECOND PRIORITY CONTROL ALTERNATIVES

Wastewater Tools: Activated Sludge and Energy Use Analysis

Review of WEFTEC 2016 Challenge & Overview of 2017 Event. Malcolm Fabiyi, PhD, MBA Spencer Snowling, PhD. P.Eng

Filaments and Clarifier Bulking. Activated Sludge Plant that experienced high flow washouts due to filamentous bacteria bottleneck.

Silver Lake WTP Clearwell Part 2 The Tracer Study PHOTO OPTIONAL. NEWWA 2009 Spring Joint Regional Conference and Exhibition The Value of Water

The Municipality of North Grenville

Right click on the influent element and select name. Type Influent in the box. This should change the name of your element to influent.

(Original signatures are on file with official student records.)

Appendix T MRWPCA GWR Discharge Dilution Analysis

1 American Water College

CHAPTER 12 TRICKLING FILTER PLANTS

Tidal Dilution of the Stockton Regional Wastewater Control Facility Discharge into the San Joaquin River

Laboratory Testing of Safety Relief Valves

DOWNSTREAM DEFENDER TESTING USING MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PROTOCOL UTILIZING OK-110 FEED SAND

Dissolved Air Flotation For Municipal Clarification and Thickening. WesTech

CORPORATION THE EXPERIENCED LEADER IN SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR TECHNOLOGY

Study of Oxidation Ditch using Cascade Aerator for Dairy Waste

CSR Process Simulations Can Help Municipalities Meet Stringent Nutrient Removal Requirements

Evaluation of Double Perforated Baffles Installed in Rectangular Secondary Clarifiers

Evaluation Of Aeration Control

ISAM SBR with Blower Assisted Jet Aeration Design Calculations For Lyons, CO WWTP Upgrade

Task 1 For Task 1, the outlet was set as a zero-gauge pressure outlet, which is the same outlet condition as the five smaller pipes.

Contents Page. Foreword... xi. 9.8 Pump intake design Introduction Purpose Scope...1

Introducing the Granular Sludge Sequencing Tank

Liquid Stream Fundamentals: Grit Removal

Appendix D JWPCP Background and NDN

Design and Analysis of 3D Blades for Wells Turbine

Proprietary AquaTron technology incorporates three (3) innovative features that increase its efficiency and reduces cost:

Activated Sludge Process Control: Nitrification

Global Leaders in Biological Wastewater Treatment

Process Control Testing Copyright February 1, All rights reserved.

Oak Orchard Wastewater Treatment Plant. Wet Weather Operating Plan

1. Overview 2 2. Definitions 2 3. Laboratory Testing Criteria 2. A. Laboratory Qualifications 2. B. Analysis of TSS Samples 2. C.

Analysis of flow patterns in an activated sludge reactor

CHAPTER 10 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT

CTB3365x Introduction to Water Treatment

Environmental Engineering I Jagadish Torlapati, PhD Fall 2017 MODULE 3 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CONTROL PARAMETERS QS = VX F M

Tank Name: Cornwell 0.5MG Reservoir

The High-Capacity. Inclined Plate. Settler System

CFD SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF FLUID FLOW IN LIQUID DISTRIBUTORS

WASTEWATER TREATMENT (1)

Transcription:

CFD Analysis of Clarifier Performance With and Without Energy Dissipating Inlet Figure 1: Energy Dissipating Inlet (LA-EDI) Introduction To estimate performance enhancements resulting from the use of an energy dissipating inlet (LA-EDI) in a circular clarifier a pair of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) calculations were performed. In the first simulation, the flow through a clarifier equipped with a center inlet pipe and open centerwell was calculated. In the second simulation, the center inlet pipe was replaced with an LA-EDI and the diameter of the centerwell was increased from 24 feet to 30 feet. Details regarding the development the CFD model are given in the next section. The CFD calculations provide estimates of effluent solids concentrations, return activated sludge (RAS) concentrations, sludge blanket depth and flow distributions in the clarifiers. Performance comparisons were made on the basis of these calculated parameters. 1

CFD Modeling 1. Setup The CFD models may be thought of as glass box models of the circular clarifiers. At the model boundaries, where flow enters and exits the clarifiers, conditions describing the influent and effluent properties are set. Within the clarifiers, the CFD models provide estimates of solids concentrations, and flow speeds throughout the modeled region. Using the glass box, engineers can make judgments regarding the ability of internal components (e.g., centerwell baffles) to improve clarifier performance (e.g., to minimize effluent suspended solids over a range of operating conditions). Q T, ρ i Q o, ρ o D coeff, ρ Max Q RAS, ρ RAS Figure 2: Schematic Diagram of Analytical Model Figure 2 shows a schematic diagram of the clarifier model developed for this study. In all of the calculations the total flow enters the clarifiers through and inlet structure. The flow rate (Q T ) and the suspended solids concentration (expressed as an influent density, ρ i, in these calculations) of the influent are set at the beginning of each calculation. The RAS and effluent flow rates (Q RAS and Q o respectively) are specified as well. Solids settling within the main body of the clarifier is controlled by two parameters, D coeff and ρ Max. These parameters control the rate of separation between the liquid and solids that comprise the mixed liquor and place a limit on the maximum density of the sludge blanket. Effluent solids concentrations and the solids concentration of the RAS flow are estimated by the model (these two parameters appear in red boldface in Figure 2). The model requires data that are generally available to engineers working at a wastewater treatment plant. These data include: dimensional drawings of the clarifiers to be modeled, operating flow rates, (c) influent suspended solids concentrations, and (d) settling rates of suspended solids. Information such as: sludge blanket depths, effluent solids concentrations, and (c) RAS solids concentrations can be used for model calibration. The CFD model of the clarifier equipped with a center inlet pipe and open centerwell is shown in Figure 3. To economize the calculation, only a 16 th sector of the clarifier was modeled (as shown in Frame 3 [b]) and the withdrawal mechanism for the RAS was simplified. In these calculations sludge was withdrawn through five openings in the bottom of the clarifier. If the flow in the entire clarifier had been modeled, then the effect of the rotating RAS mechanism could have been included as well. 2

Q T, ρ i Q o, ρ o D coeff, ρ Max Inlet Baffle Q RAS, ρ RAS Symmetry Boundary Conditions Velocity Boundary Condition Figure 3: CFD Model elevation, plan-view 3

2. Tank Geometry and Operating Conditions Tank geometry and operating conditions for both clarifiers were provided by John Esler (CPE Services, Inc.). This information is summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1: Tank Geometry and Operating Conditions without EDI Clarifier Diameter 120 feet Side Water Depth 12 feet Center Depth 13.5 feet Centerwell Diameter 24 feet Centerwell Depth 6 feet Total Flowrate 12 mgd RAS Flowrate 3 mgd Effluent Flowrate 9 mgd MLSS 2500 mg/l SVI 110 SOR 796 Notes: weirs on wall of clarifier, four feed ports in center Inlet pipe top two feet of clarifier Table 2: Tank Geometry and Operating Conditions with EDI Clarifier Diameter 120 feet Side Water Depth 12 feet Center Depth 13.5 feet Centerwell Diameter 30 feet Centerwell Depth 6 feet LA-EDI Diameter 14 feet LA-EDI Depth 3 feet Total Flowrate 12 mgd RAS Flowrate 3 mgd Effluent Flowrate 9 mgd MLSS 2500 mg/l SVI 110 SOR 796 Notes: eight opposing jet nozzles, bottom of nozzles will be approximately 1.5 feet below the bottom of the EDI floor 4

3. Solids Settling Solids settling, in the model domain, is controlled by two parameters D coeff and ρ Max. D coeff controls the rate of separation between the liquid and solids that comprise the mixed liquor, and ρ Max places a limit on the maximum density of the sludge blanket. The parameter value for ρ Max can be determined from field data, whereas the parameter value for D coeff is usually estimated from the results of a simple model calibration using available field data. (c) Figure 4: Model Calibration (Solids Settling, 2500 mg/l contour shown) Initial Condition, after 30 Minutes, (c) after 60 Minutes To determine the value of D coeff, fluid within the clarifier is initially given a uniform density equal to that of the influent mixed liquor (Figure 4[a]). Velocities at the inlet and outlet locations are also set to zero. Solids within the tank are observed to settle in the calculation that proceeds from this initial condition (Figures 4[b] and 4[c]). In this calculation the clarifier works as a giant settling column and the movement of solids, controlled by the D coeff coefficient, are matched with settling data. Once an approximate value for the D coeff coefficient is chosen additional model calibration (of D coeff and ρ Max ) can be carried out with measurements of sludge blanket depth, the results of dye studies and the results of drogue studies. The results of this study were not compared to field data. Instead, the settling properties were chosen to approximate the behavior of a mixed liquor with an SVI equal to 110. 5

Results 1. Circular Clarifier without Energy Dissipating Inlet Distributions and flow speed and solids are shown in Figure 5. The influent enters from the left-hand side of both frames, and exits from the bottom of the clarifier and through the effluent launders located at the top of the outside wall of the clarifier. Boundary conditions for this calculation are provided in Table 1. Figure 5: Model Results Flow Speed [red > 0.1 fps], Solids Distribution [red > 2000 mg/l] Table 2: Model Statistics Effluent Solids Concentration 85 mg/l 6

2. Circular Clarifier with Energy Dissipating Inlet Distributions and flow speed and solids are shown in Figure 6. The influent enters from the left-hand side of both frames, and exits from the bottom of the clarifier and through the effluent launders located at the top of the outside wall of the clarifier. Boundary conditions for this calculation are provided in Table 2. Figure 6: Model Results Flow Speed [red > 0.1 fps], Solids Distribution [red > 2000 mg/l] Table 3: Model Statistics Effluent Solids Concentration 31 mg/l 7

Conclusions & Recommendations The results of this model study show that the use of an energy dissipating baffle (LA- EDI) in a circular clarifier can improve the performance of the clarifier. In these calculations, use of the LA-EDI reduced effluent solids concentrations from 85 mg/l to 31 mg/l. The calculated improvement results from the fact that maximum inflow velocities are reduced with the LA-EDI in place and that the influent flow is not directed towards the outside wall of the clarifier (as seen in Figure 7[a] relatively high speed flow passes from the standpipe and under the centerwell without the LA-EDI, in Figure 7[b] maximum influent velocities are less and the bulk flow is not directed towards the outside wall of the clarifier). Figure 7: Velocity Distribution near Center of Clarifier, fps without LA-EDI, with LA-EDI 8