Managing Water Quality in Potable Water Tanks - ca-nv-awwa

Managing Water Quality in Potable Water Tanks - ca-nv-awwa
Managing Water Quality
Potable Water Tanks / Reservoirs
Management / Hydraulic / Design Considerations
pertaining to:
Mixing Potable Water Tanks
THM Removal Systems
Water Quality Challenges in Potable Tanks
AWWA estimates 65% of all potable tanks have water quality problems:
- Inlet / outlet design
- Short-circuiting
- Water age issues
- Temperature stratification
- Stagnation / dead zones
- Biofilm build up
- Loss of residual
- Nitrification events
- Risk of ice damage
- DBP Formation (TTHM’s)
•  Chlorine Systems, main problems: –  Loss of residual, warm weather, rapid bacteria growth –  THM’s and HAA’s if source water was surface water •  Chloramine Systems, main problems: –  Loss of residual, can occur very rapidly, 1-­‐2 days, caused by chemistry, best to keep chlorine to ammonia raBos 4:5 to 1 –  Free Ammonia can nitrify, formaBon of Nitrite and Nitrate –  Also can have THM’s if source water was surface water, if chlorine used to achieve CT at the plant Thermal StraBficaBon Inhibits Mixing The Boundary Layer is the Most Important Part Warmer, lighter water Boundary layers Colder, heavier water Thermal StraBficaBon Can Be Caused by Inlet Temperature Differences Posi5ve Buoyancy Nega5ve Buoyancy CharloQe Smith Water Layering in a Potable Water Tank
Water in reservoirs forms thin horizontal layers due to density differences of temperature and pressure.
Inflow water, with its higher chlorine concentrations, usually plummets to the bottom of the tank.
Temperature Stratification Example
5 MG
Not Mixed
Temperature and Tank Level Examples Mixer Off Tan Columns highlight temperature differences during daily draw and fill cycles Determine whether the problem may be lack of mixing 3 ways to gauge potential water age problems.
Usually all 3 use temperature as a surrogate predicting
chlorine residual and other problems, and range from:
a) CFD Modeling, highest cost
b) Hobo loggers, mid range cst
c) Manual temperature indicators, lowest cost
Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling for Tank Mixing
Commonly used, but there many variables and assumptions made
5 MG Tank, No MIxer 5 MG Tank, with Mixer • 
Strong direct flow leaving the broad side of the mixer • 
Model shows tank completely mixed Consider Deploying a Data Logger (“Hobo”) String Temperature Stratification Tools
Temperature probes, HOBO brand
Or. . . use these tools to manually get a profile AquaCal ClineFinder from Cabela’s to 50’ depth Fish Hawk to 200’ depth Biofilm Build-­‐up at Diffused Boundary Layer Montana State University, Center for Biofilm Engineering Plan to prevent major problems –  Periodic cleaning of reservoir –  Reduce water age by cycling the tank as much as possible without causing problems for other departments, such as fire department or Factory Mutual insurance underwriters –  Install a mixer for constant mixing to boundary layers –  Do more-­‐frequent tes5ng in warm weather (>55F water): •  Test temperature straBficaBon, and chlorine residual •  With chloramines, test free ammonia and nitrite •  The problems are worse in the summer, but can occur year-­‐round in warm states Plan to solve water quality problems –  Have a mixing system in place. –  Have chlorine boos5ng system in place. –  Try Fast Response Early Boost (FREB) first. •  1-­‐10 gallons of boost, early, may be all that is needed –  These steps can avoid the need for crisis management meeBngs, dramaBc drawdowns, fire protecBon problems, wasBng of water, taking tank offline –  As a last resort, be prepared to breakpoint chlorinate the tank If power is available, consider installing an
energy efficient, electric-powered mixer certified ANSI/NSF 61-G
Electric Submersible Mixer Submersible Electric Mixer Package Contents If boosting, it is best to inject into or near the mixer
Chlorine boost
If power is Not available,
consider installing a NSF 61-G certified solar-powered mixer
Different mixer sizes, intake designs, and solar panel designs dependent on customer needs
If boosting,
it is best to inject into a solar-powered mixer
Potable Water Mixers
Passive Mixer
Impeller Mixer
Solar-powered Mixer
(Small / Medium Tanks)
Nozzle Mixer
Solar-powered Mixer (Large Tanks,
one mixer in 30MG tank)
Submersible (floor)
Sheet-flow Mixer
Mixer Modeling / Data Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Flow Modeling
Slide A, prior to mixer being turned on 5 MG Tank, 30 ` tall, 170 ` diameter, above ground steel tank Slide B mixer on for 28 minutes 5 MG Tank, 30 ` tall, 170 ` diameter, above ground steel tank Slide C mixer on for about 1 hour 5 MG Tank, 30 ` tall, 170 ` diameter, above ground steel tank Slide D mixer on for ~ 1.3 hours 5 MG Tank, 30 ` tall, 170 ` diameter, above ground steel tank Test Data Model GS-­‐12 Test Data Model GS-­‐12 Test Data Model GS-12 Test Data
Sunset South In-­‐Ground Concrete Reservoir (1) SB10000 SolarBee 90 million gallon reservoir 11 surface acres 1000 ` by 500 ` 30 ` deep, 4C straBficaBon 720 roof support columns Report Published August 2004 Seismic Retrofit of SFPUC’s Reservoirs Tank with Ice -­‐ No Mixer Mixer installed -­‐ Tank with minimal ice THM Removal Systems
EPA Disinfectants and DisinfecBon Byproducts Rule (DBPR) Stage 1 DBPR, 2002: •  Four locaBons designated and sampled for TTHM and HAA5 for each groundwater source or treatment plant. One must represent the maximum residence Bme in the distribuBon system. •  TTHM and HAA5 samples collected and analyzed quarterly for the running annual average. •  System-­‐wide running annual average must be below 80 μg/L for TTHM and 60 μg/L for HAA5. •  All regulated uBliBes were required to comply by January 2004. Stage 2 DBPR, 2006: •  Number of sampling locaBons based on populaBon, likely an increase for most uBliBes. •  LocaBons based on highest TTHM and/or HAA5 values in the distribuBon system. •  Each loca5on’s running annual average will be reported (no longer system-­‐wide average) – 
For example, a water uBlity serving 1,000,000 to 4,999,999 people is required to have 16 monitoring locaBons for a water treatment plant source. If any of these 16 monitoring locaBons exceed 80 μg/L for TTHM or 60 μg/L for HAA5, the uBlity will be out of compliance with the Stage 2 DBPR. Phased compliance implementaBon (by populaBon size) as early as April 15, 2012. Regulated THMs Henry’s Law Constant -­‐  The ability to remove a liquid chemical from water by air stripping is based on the chemical’s volaBlity and its solubility in water, a property referred to as "Henry's law constant" for that chemical. Four regulated THMs:* -­‐  Chloroform (trichloromethane) -­‐ easiest to strip out -­‐  Bromodichloromethane -­‐ harder to strip out -­‐  Dibromochloromethane -­‐ harder to strip out -­‐  Bromoform (tribromomethane) -­‐ hardest to strip out Chlorine – why is it not affected / stripped out?* -­‐  Chlorine gas is easy to strip out. But chlorine gas in water quickly forms hypochlorous acid; and is very hard to strip out. * Note: Henry’s Law Constant rela>onships are taken from the Na>onal Ins>tute of Standards and Technology (NIST, 2011). Several opportuni5es for reducing THMs •  At the treatment plant – 
Change treatment process / Switch disinfectants. – 
Install a mixer in the CT basin. Intense mixing of the CT basin can improve T10 Bme to possibly allow for significant reducBon of chlorine, which will result in less THMs. – 
Do air stripping of THMs at the clearwell. •  In the distribu5on storage tanks –  Install a mixer in some or all tanks. Mixing alone will o`en reduce THM by a measurable amount. And mixing may allow for less system boosBng to be needed, leading to less THMs. –  Do air stripping of THMs at one or more tanks. Reducing THMs at the plant > Improve "T" in the CT basin with mixing •  Mixing a CT basin with a mixer •  It improves the plug flow, making it "verBcal plug flow" by taking advantage of the layering of water into horizontal layers. We believe 0.7 or higher baffle factor can be achieved, vs . 0.3 for a baffle. •  A simple tracer study will verify increased "T” •  With more deten5on 5me "T", less chlorine can be used, resul5ng in less THM Bend, Oregon: Clear Well Contact Time Case Study on Outback Reservoir #2 FuncBon: Clear Well Capacity: 2.23 MG tank above ground steel tank Flow Rate: 7,000 gallons per minute at peak Inlet Outlet Structure: Separate 180 Degrees Apart Before SolarBee: 30 minutes "T" deten5on 5me, baffle factor 0.1 With SB10000: 80 minutes "T" deten5on 5me, baffle factor 0.25 This was achieved with (1) SB10000v12, with 3,000 gpm direct flow. Customer had expected to need 2 or 3 units to achieve goal. Reducing THMs in the distribu5on storage tanks > using tank mixing alone, 3 mechanisms at work 1. "Solu5on by dilu5on". If a mixer is picking up the untreated inflow water (a) as fast as it is coming in, and (b) all the way to the boQom of the tank, like the GS-­‐12 does, then high THM water is mixed into low THM water before it can go back into system. 3. Less stagna5on in the tank will cause beQer residual, both in the tank and downstream. So less downstream boos5ng will be needed, resulBng in less system THM problems. BUT, not all distribu>on water goes into a tank before it gets to the customer, so the effec>veness will vary based on exact flow path. Inflow 2. Vola5za5on at the surface. Constant surface renewal exposes THM to the air in the headspace Reducing THMs at the Plant > Air stripping THMs at the clearwell •  The benefit: –  The intense mixing that accompanies stripping can more-­‐
fully react chlorine and NOM, and form more THM at clearwell, for higher THM levels here and more stripping there –  The forced formaBon of THMs here, and stripping them as soon as formed, benefits THM levels in whole city •  The disadvantage: –  Incoming THM level may be low (But intense mixing can offset this and form more so that stripping is feasible) –  SomeBmes much more chlorine is added later on in system anyway, defeaBng some of the benefits TradiBonal Air-­‐Stripping Technology • 
Air strippers remove volaBle contaminants from water by contacBng air and water to opBmize transfer kineBcs. Common types of air strippers include packed towers, mulB-­‐staged bubble systems, venturi eductors, and spray nozzles. Removal effecBveness is related to the air:water raBo. THM Removal Systems 1.  Spray Nozzle Systems with forced venBlaBon –system used for many years for various types of VOC’s. Most cost effecBve system for most types of tank / reservoirs and clear-­‐wells. 2.  Shallow Set Diffuser System with high flow efficient mixer(s) and forced venBlaBon – very effecBve and reduces HP of boQom diffuser systems by approx. 80%. 3.  BoQom Diffuser System – large network of air diffusers plumbed in grid across the tank boQom, with PVC pipe. High HP, expensive, complex, and maintenance-­‐intensive. 4.  Deep Bubble system – tradiBonal air stripping system, could be installed as a side-­‐stream to potable tank. Has mostly focused on contaminants other than THMs – radon, carbon dioxide, methane, hydrogen sulfide. 5.  Surface Aerator – a wastewater aeraBon system with guide rails converted for use in potable tanks, with forced venBlaBon. Hatch size and other InstallaBon issues due to size / design, effecBveness issues due to not pulling new water from floor of tank. Surface aerator system
Deep Bubble System
Fixed Spray Nozzles, fan for ven5la5ng headspace FloaBng Spray Nozzle Design Energy benefit of Floa5ng Nozzle vs. Fixed Nozzle No pump discharge head loss from lig or fric5on. Result: more flow rate (gpm) and performance per hp of pump Lig Fric5on loss in pipe Fixed Spray Nozzle System Floa5ng Spray Nozzle System THM Removal – FloaBng Spray Nozzle Design FSN-15 floating spray nozzle in operation
2hp turbine blower on skid, on top of tank Blower on skid at base of tank THM Removal Proven Results Systems can be designed for virtually all reservoirs, and any desired reducBon in TTHM. Actual results shown are for systems designed for 40-­‐50% TTHM removal. The removal rate shown is based on actual TTHM entering and leaving the reservoir. AddiBonal reducBon also occurred in downstream TTHM formaBon potenBal. 50
% 37% 68% 68% 58% 40% 62% 66% 77% GridBee THM Removal
In-tank Floating Spray Nozzle and Skid-mount Systems
Drinking Water
Treatment Plant
Typical Placement Map
Spray Nozzle
Pipe #1
Pipe #2
Pipe #3
Pipe #5
Pipe #4
THM Skid
Ground Storage Tank
common inlet / outlet
Elevated Storage Tank
common inlet / outlet
Ground Storage Tank
common inlet / outlet
THM Skid
Spray Nozzle
THM Skid
THM Skid
Ground Storage Tank
separate inlet / outlet
THM Skid
Remote Area
Remote Area
Items 1 and 2: In-tank Floating Spray Nozzle THM Removal Systems are available to provide treatment of the entire plant output at the clear-well, or in
storage tanks. They are particularly effective in storage tanks with a separate inlet and outlet, where all of the flow goes through the tank.
Items 3, 4, and 5: An In-tank Floating Spray Nozzle System will work well, but it only treats the water that comes into the tank.
Items 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10: In-line Skid-mounted THM Removal Systems will allow a city to remove THMs in a specific neighborhood or remote end-of-line
region. The city’s engineer can design the pad, piping retrofit and building to house the skid system. An in-line skid system may be the best solution when
the distribution flow can bypass the tank in the system and go directly on to the user.
Both systems utilize Medora Corporation's patented long-life spray nozzle technology to treat all the water, minimizing THM formation downstream.
Receiving Town or
Water Company
In-Tank / In-Clearwell Design
Skid-Mounted Design
Thank You ! – Ques>ons ? Harvey Hibl, US West Manager 303-­‐469-­‐4001 -­‐ Visit: 800-­‐437-­‐8076 Literature, videos, case studies and more informaBon at our Website or at our Conference Booth 
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF