EPA/600/R-95/041
                                  March  1995
IMPROVEMENTS IN PUMP INTAKE BASIN DESIGN

                      by

                 Robert L. Sanks
          Department of Civil Engineering
             Montana State University
               Bozeman, MT 59717

                 Garr M. Jones
          Brown and Caldwell Consultants
           Pleasant Hill, CA 94523-4342

                      and

               Charles  E. Sweeney
         ENSR Consulting and Engineering
              Redmond, WA 98052
      Cooperative Agreement No. CR 817937
                 Project Officer
               James A. Heidman
          Technology Engineering Section
       Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
              Cincinnati, OH 45268
 RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
  OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            CINCINNATI, OH 45268

-------
                               Disclaimer
The information in this document has been funded in part by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency under Cooperative Agreement No CR 817937
(Category IV)  to  Montana  State  University.  It  has  been subjected  to the
Agency's  peer  and  administrative  review,  and it  has been  approved for
publication as  an  EPA document.  Mention  of trade names  or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                   n

-------
                                        PREFACE

       Typically,  pump intake basins (or wet wells or pump sumps) designed in  accordance
with accepted criteria  are  relatively large structures with flat or nearly flat floors. The water
surface fluctuates cyclically throughout  a range in depth of about a meter. The influent fluid
plunges   to  the  surface  in  a free-falling cascade, and the  cascade often degrades pump
performance  by entraining air and driving the bubbles deep into the pool, where they are often
ingested by  the  pumps. Air entrainment in  pumps  causes unequal vane loadings and flow
abnormalities that create excessive wear and  significantly reduce head, capacity, and efficiency.
Solids-bearing waters,  such as storm water, wastewater, or even fresh raw water, deposit sand
and sludge on the large floor. Scum, if present, spreads over the entire water surface area.
These depositions are  commonly removed only with great difficulty and expense.  In wastewater
systems, decomposing solids produce hydrogen sulfide gas, an odiferous toxic compound that
promotes formation of sulfuric acid and consequent deterioration  of concrete and metal surfaces.
The cost of remedying the damage caused by  acid attack amounts to many millions of dollars
annually  nationwide.

       The high cost of these large basins and the difficulty and expense of cleaning them led to
the development  of the "self-cleaning"  wet  well-a narrow basin with one sloping side that
culminates in a bottom trench containing the pump intakes. By using variable speed pumps, the
pumped flow rate is adjusted to the inflow  rate to  eliminate the need for storage and thus
minimize the size  and cost of the basin. A cascade is avoided by keeping the normal water surface
in the basin level with  that in the upstream sewer. Hydraulic performance is improved because
there is no air entrainment and no stray  floor  currents. Deposition is decreased because  settling
solids slide down the  sloping side to the confining  trench, where pump  intake currents can
capture adjacent material. Furthermore, if the water level is  lowered  (called "pump-down")
into  the trench, all  floating material is confined in the trench,  moved to the last pump by the
current, and sucked into the pump by a  vortex.  At the same time, the currents along the trench
sweep most of the deposits accumulated  between pump intakes to the last intake, where they are
also sucked out by  the last pump. No labor is needed beyond switching automatic level controls
off and on, hosing  grease  off walls (in raw sewage pumping stations), and repriming pumps-
hence the term "self-cleaning." Pumping station designs such as these are not well known but
have operated successfully for nearly three decades.

       Variable speed  drives are expensive and more  difficult to maintain  than  the  almost
universally-used constant speed drives  that  consist  of only an electric motor with an across-
the-line starter.  Furthermore, variable  speed drives  are inappropriate for  pumping  stations
with flat pump and  system  head-capacity curves, because small changes in speed cause large
changes in flow rate. The challenge was to extend the concept of self-cleaning to constant speed
pumps while avoiding the disadvantages of the typical intake basin.

       The uncertainties created by the need  to store water in constant speed pumping stations
and the consequent cyclical rise and fall of the water surface made model studies imperative. As
most pumping  stations are  small  and  pumps are  usually-though  not  always-submersible
types, this  project began as  "Self-cleaning wet  wells for  constant  speed submersible
wastewater pumps." Discoveries during the research are, however, applicable to other types of
                                           11 i

-------
pumps and to pumping storm water and clear water as well as wastewater. Hence, the title for
this final report was changed to reflect the broader range of applications.

       This project was more  successful than  was expected. The  effectiveness  of cleaning
variable speed pumping stations has been greatly enhanced by means of an ogee  ramp which
conserves the energy in the incoming water  at "pump-down." This high energy produces strong
currents along the trench.  Solids are quickly  swept into the last pump intake.

       The same effectiveness applies to constant speed pumping. Cascades in constant speed
pumping station basins are  eliminated by discharging water into the  basin  at or slightly below
normal low water  level (LWL).  The required size of the basin for  constant speed  pumping is
reduced, because, by  sloping the influent pipe at a gradient of 2 percent between  LWL and high
water level  (HWL), the volume of the pipe becomes part of the required  storage  volume.
Entrained air bubbles are eliminated, because  the few bubbles that are formed by the weak
hydraulic jump  in the pipe rise to the free water surface and escape up the pipe. Air is thereby
eliminated from the water  entering  the pump basin.

       The investigations revealed  that arranging pumps in series along the axis of the incoming
water does not affect the efficiency  of intakes nor cause interference between intakes in terms of
their loss coefficients, the pre-rotation of flow entering them, or the  formation  of  vortices for
the ranges of spacing  and  submergence tested.  The long-held belief that this arrangement is not
advisable is not justified for pumps with  impellers at a considerable distance from the  intake
(such as dry  pit  pumps  and  self-priming  pumps) nor for relatively  small  (600 L/s 2000
m3/h, or  10,000  gal/min) and  robust  submersible  or   vertical  column  pumps wherein
impellers are near the intake entrance.

       With a horizontal inflow never above the water surface and the pump intakes well below
the inflow and confined within  the narrow trench  that is characteristic of  this  type of  intake
basin, currents near the floor of the trench are  very low even  when surface currents are high.
Column pumps of large size  have been  used  in this type of  basin  successfully. However,
universal application of this  design without further model tests  to ensure symmetrical approach
velocities at the impeller is not advised due to the sensitivity of  performance of large pumps-
particularly large pumps at high specific speeds-to approach flow conditions.

       The results of  this  research may be  applied to dry pit pumps, and,  in sizes below 600
L/s (10,000  gal/min),  to submersible and vertical pumps, and they apply  as well  to pumping
clear water as  to wastewater and  storm  water.  They can also apply to refurbishing  existing
basins where pump performance is sub-standard.

      This report has been organized to present the design guide lines before  the supporting
research so as  to make it convenient for designers to use the results without delving deeply into
research  details.
                                           IV

-------
                                       ABSTRACT

       The pump intake basins described are improvements over existing conventional  types
because they:

    •  Reduce size  by eliminating storage  requirements  through the  use of variable speed
       pumps or utilize a steeply sloping inlet pipe to supplement the intake basin volume.

    •  Eliminate cascading flow into the intake basin and entrainment of air into the pumps by
       locating the inlet pipe elevation coincident with the low water level in the basin.

    •  Use the intake basin geometry to concentrate settled and floating solids in a limited zone
       near the pump inlets where  they can be regularly removed by pump operation.

       Recommendations  for the design of both rectangular and round basins are given. The
research findings that support those  recommendations are included  along  with  limited  field
observations.

       This  report was  submitted in  fulfillment  of Cooperative Agreement CR 817937  by
Montana State University under  partial  sponsorship of the  U.S. Environmental  Protection
Agency. This  report covers a period from September, 1991 to August, 1994. The research was
completed as of  August 25, 1994.

-------
                                       CONTENTS
                                                                              Page

  Preface	   i i i
  Abstract	    v
  Figures	   viii
  Tables   	   viii
  Abbreviations and Symbols	    ix
  Acknowledgements	    x
  I.  Introduction   •	    1
        A Typical pump intake basins	    1
        B. Trench-type basins  	    1
        C. Objectives	    3
  II.  Conclusions: Design Guidelines	    4
        A. Caveats	    4
        B. Application	    4
        C. Recommended design guidelines	    4
  III. Investigations of Prototypes	   16
        A. Kirkland Pumping Station	  -  • '.	   16
        B. Other Seattle area pumping stations	   17
        C. Black Diamond pumping station	   17
        D. Clyde pumping station   	   18
        E. Pumping stations in Sweden	   20
        F. Fairbanks Morse experimental pump intake basin	   22
  IV. Model Studies at ENSR	   27
        A. Model similitude   •	   27
        B. Model tests of pump sumps	   27
        C. Kirkland  model	  . .  .	   30
        D. Trapezoidal sumps for submersible pumps  	   34
        E. Round sumps for submersible pumps  .	   39
  V.  Model studies at MSU •  • •  -  •	   41
        A. Facilities	   41
        B. Scour of deposits	   43
        C. Other Objectives	   47
  VI. Recommendations	   54
        A. Approach pipe	   54
        B. Siphons vs. pumps	   54
        C. Currents in pump  Intake basins	   55
        D. Froude numbers during cleaning .  -	   55
        E. Calculating Froude numbers	   55
        F. Miscellaneous	•   56
  VII. References	   57
Preceeding Page Blank

                                          vi i

-------
                                         FIGURES

No.                                    Title                                 Page

  1.    Kirkland Pumping Station	     2
  2.    Sludge deposits in Kirkland Pumping Station sump on Sept. 14, 1992
              (a) before pump-down, (b) after first pump-down, and (c)  after
              second pump-down	    3
  3.    Rectangular sump for V/S pumps and clean water	    6
  4.    Rectangular sump for C/S pumps and clean water	    8
  5.    Rectangular sump for V/S pumps and solids-bearing water	 .    1 o
  6.    Vortex classification system	   12
  7.    Rectangular sump for C/S pumps and solids-bearing water	    13
  8.    Rectangular sump for submersible pumps and solids-bearing water	   14
  9.    Duplex submersible pumps in round sump	   15
10.    Sump for duplex, self-priming wastewater pumps	 .   15
11.    Black Diamond  pumping station sump	18
12.    Clyde Pumping Station. Courtesy of G.S. Dodson & Associates	   19
13.    Schematic diagram of Vallby Pumping Station	   21
14.    Experimental pump  intake basin at Fairbanks Morse Pump Corporation
              plant	   23
15.    Straight wing walls in Fairbanks Morse pump intake basin	   24
16.    Tapered wing walls  and relative velocity vectors in Fairbanks Morse  pump
              intake basin	   25
17.    Typical pump sump flow patterns during  tests of Kirkland
              Pumping Station model in V/S (steady state) pumping mode	   31
18.    Self-cleaning pump sump with triangular flow splitters for constant  speed
             submersible pumps	   35
19.    Plate-type flow  splitters  in  submersible pump intake basin	   37
20.    Trench-type sump for submersible pumps	   38
21.    A round self-cleaning pump sump at ENSR	   40
22.    Model of trench of improved Kirkland pump intake basin	   42
23.    Average rate of sand movement as a function of fluid velocity	   44
24.    Flow patterns around Intake 3 in  replica  of the original Kirkland Pumping
             Station at pump-down	   45
25.    Details of Intake 3 of Improved Kirkland Pumping Station	   46
26.    Anti-swirl devices	   50
27.     Vortex suppressor for walls	   52
28.    Recommended manhole detail at junction of sewer and approach pipes	   54

                                         TABLES

No.                                     Title                                  Page

  1.    Maximum recommended flow rates  in approach pipes	  .    7
 2.     Quantitative critical  measurements	   28
 3.     Critical measurements at MSU	   43
 4.    Bell clearance vs. flow rate for an adequate hydraulic jump	   48
 5.     Pump capacity vs. intake floor clearance	   48
 6.     Pump capacity as a  function of proximity	   49
 7.     Effect of vanes and floor currents on swirling	   50
                                        VIII

-------
                ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
HCh
C/S
D
ENSR
FM
ft
gal/min
hp
HWL
ID
in
kW
LWL
M'f'r
Mgal/d
min
MSU
i
m3/h
OD
0
pump-down
rev/min
R2
SI
ss
typ
vpj

V/S
yd
Approximately
Approximately equal
Ball valve
Constant speed (pump)
Outside diameter of the rim  of the suction bell
Hydraulic depth, area/surface width
Pipe diameter (ID)
Eccentric plug valve
ENSR Consulting and Engineering
Force main
Feet
U.S. gallons per minute. Common U.S. usage for pump capacity
Horsepower
High water level (in a basin)
Inside .diameter
Inch
Kilowatts
Low water  level (in a basin)
Manufacturer
Million U.S. gallons per day. Common usage for pumping station capacity
Minimum
Montana State University
More or less
Cubic meters per hour. Common usage in the U.S.
Outside  diameter
Round
Reducing the  water level to its lowest possible depth with the main pumps
Revolutions per minute
An indicator of the goodness of fit of data in a regression analysis
System  International or metric  units
Stainless steel
Typical(ly)
Average superficial fluid velocity at the pump intake based on the area bounded
      by the OD  of the suction bell rim
Variable speed (pump)
Yard
                            IX

-------
                                  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

       Partial  funding  for this project  was supplied by Fairbanks Morse  Pump Corporation,
The Gorman-Rupp  Company,  ITT Flygt  AB,  Montana  State University  Foundation,  the
Department of Civil Engineering, Montana State  University, and R. L.  Sanks. Additionally, the
Department contributed materials and help from the staff, notably W. Keightley, and  Professors
W.  E.  Larsen, Otto  Stein,  and T. T.  Lang. Calgon Carbon Corporation contributed granular
activated  carbon. In addition to funds donated,  Fairbanks Morse Pump Corporation built  and
tested  a full  sized  steel pump  basin for  two  63  L/s (227 m3/h)  pumps. As part  of its
contribution, ITT Flygt AB had three acrylic submersible pump models  constructed and sent to
the ENSR laboratory.

       The city  of  Steilacoom,  Municipality of  Metropolitan  Seattle (now King County,
Washington Department of Metropolitan Services),  the Town  of Black Diamond, WA, G.S. Dodson
& Associates, and ITT Flygt AB arranged visits  to  carry out  investigations at  pumping stations in
Washington, California,  and Sweden respectively.

       William Wheeler, who calculated the data in Table 1, and B. E. Bosserman made valuable
contributions to the manuscript. They and the three authors contributed all their time and effort
pro bono.

-------
                                        SECTION I

                                     INTRODUCTION

A. TYPICAL PUMP INTAKE BASINS

       Typically,  conventional pump  intake basins,  pump sumps, or wet  wells, designed in
accordance with  generally  accepted criteria  [1,  2] have relatively large flat or nearly flat
floors. If the fluid is any but polished  or filtered water,  deposits of sludge and/or silt and  sand
accumulate  on the floor and they are  removed only with difficulty and expense. The problem is
troublesome for storm  water, and it is particularly  severe for wastewater because of the  large
amount of sludge deposited. The sludge putrefies, becomes odiferous, and the hydrogen sulfide gas
generated develops an insulating deposit on electrical contacts and other electric and electronic
surfaces. Sulfuric acid  generated biologically from hydrogen sulfide attacks  concrete and metal.
Wastewater scum and grease balls spread over the entire liquid surface.

       One pump manufacturer (ITT Flygt) does make machinery that mixes the contents of the
basin so that the main pumps can remove the  mixture if the basin is small enough or if there
are enough  mixing units. The disadvantages are the addition of more  mechanical equipment, the
power for operation, and the extra maintenance. Consequently, there is an advantage in coping
with the problem by means of geometry or, perhaps, with piping layout rather than by means of
added machinery.

       In  basins  for constant speed pumps, the influent falls from the inlet pipe to the water
surface below in  a  cascade that varies from a few centimeters to a meter or more in height.
Masses of air bubbles are formed and driven deeply into the pool where, in many designs, there
is  insufficient distance  between the waterfall and the first pump intake to allow all the bubbles
to  escape to the surface. The remaining bubbles, sometimes a large proportion, are drawn into
the pumps  with  devastating effects  on  head, capacity,  and efficiency even when a small
percentage  of air is present [1]. If air entrainment is possible,  the station capacity should be
increased by 10  to 20 percent. Wear on  bearings  and couplings  is greatly increased,   and
excessive noise is present. If the  liquid is raw wastewater, the turbulence caused by the cascade
sweeps out  hydrogen sulfide and other noxious gases that  add to problems of odor control and
protection of electric and electronic equipment.

B. TRENCH-TYPE  INTAKE BASINS

       The  idea for the trench-type intake basin was conceived four decades ago by Caldwell
[G.M. Jones, Brown and Caldwell  Consultants, personal communication, 1984] who reasoned
that variable speed (V/S) pumps could be programmed to eliminate the need for storage by
matching the pumping rate with the inflow rate. With no need for storage the wet  well could be
small and by sloping the floor to a narrow trench, deposited  solids could be so confined that  they
could be washed out by pumping the water level down (pump-down) to within a few centimeters
of  the  intakes. The inflow would wash deposits in the trench to the last pump for  discharge to
the force main. Arranging the pumps in a  series coaxial with the influent pipe is contrary to
generally accepted  criteria [1, 2]. Nevertheless, 27 trench-type pumping stations with pumps
ranging in  size from 150 mm (6 in)  and  66 Us (240 m3/h or 1.5 Mgal/d) to  1.4 m (54 in)

-------
and 4.8  m3/s  (108  Mgal/d)  installed a  quarter  century  ago  for the  Municipality  of
Metropolitan Seattle  (Seattle Metro) have proven  to  be eminently successful.  Many  other
similar pumping stations have also been constructed and operate with equal success.

       Seattle Metro's Kirkland  Pumping Station in central downtown  Kirkland is typical and
its wet well was the one selected for modeling in this research. The plans for the  intake  basin
are shown  in Figure  1.  The three  V/S  pumps  are driven  by electric  motors through eddy-
current couplings. Pump  3 (furthest  from  the  inlet) is rated at 132 Us (475 m3/h ) at 57.6
m (2100 gal/min at 189  ft) as  is Pump 2. At  full  speed,  the vpj  (superficial pump  intake
velocity based on the area of the outside diameter, D, of  the suction  bell)is 1.02 m/s  (3.33
ft/s). Pump 1 is rated at 110  Us  (396 m3/h or  1750 gal/min),  and the vpj  is  0.85 m/s
(2.78 ft/s).  Either of  the larger pumps  is a  standby,  so the total firm capacity is 241  L/s
(868 m3/h or 5.5 Mgal/d). The peak  flow was  estimated by Seattle  Metro to be 215  Us (774
m3/h or 4.9 Mgal/d).  The station has  been in operation for 26  years, but is as clean and
attractive as though built last year. The manually-cleaned bar screens had been removed many
years ago.
                         r(
ft>"S'.feK; v:
?M
LJ^L

fl ft ft
1
J~
V'&s$' ! i ii ii ':°t
»'.. '?f5
O- * 0
p.*
"0 " *JE>
t> . «» w
U I U U
a
                                                              B
                                                           _f
                                                         1.31 ID pipe
                          Section  A-A
                         Bar screen (removed) —-,
                          Section B-B

                      All. dimensions are multiples of D (OD of bell mouth) 406 mm (16 in).
                                                                          Section C-C
                            Figure 1. Kirkland pumping station.

       During  normal operation, the water level in the wet well is kept the same within a few
millimeters as  the water level in the upstream sewer by the variable speed pumps. Thus, there
is no cascade  and no currents faster than the velocity in the upstream sewer. There is minimum

-------
disturbance as wastewater enters the basin, and currents are slow by the time the fluid reaches
the midpoint.

       The basin is cleaned twice weekly to suppress odors. The operators first note the speed
required by the last pump to hold the water level constant and thus match the  inflow, which is
typically  about  66 Us  (227 m3/h or 1.5 Mgal/d). The pump is then  operated  at  full speed
until the submergence of the pump intake is reduced to about 0.7 D,  and the speed is then
reduced to the first value noted (so pumping  rate matches  inflow  rate) for as  long as possible-
between two  and three minutes. This reduction in depth  is called pump-down,  and  during
pump-down,  the pump  is close to losing  prime.  At Kirkland,  the pump  air-binds at any
submergence less than  0.56 D. The reduction in sludge volume  is shown in Figure 2  as  the
difference between curves a and b. A second  pump-down removed very  little sludge and left an
average residual depth  of about 50 mm (2 in) of relatively  hard  material that  was   about 63
percent organic  material and 37  percent  sand  by volume. This hard sludge appeared to be
stabilized because cleaning virtually eliminated  odors.  The existing basin could, however, be
cleaned more thoroughly with the better procedure described in Section ll.C.d.
           Influent'
                                                                           9.8°
                                   Vertical scale exaggerated 4:1
   Figure 2. Sludge deposits in Kirkland Pumping Station sump on Sept. 14, 1992 (a) before
               pump-down, (b) after first pump-down,  and (c) after second pump-down.

C. OBJECTIVES

       The general objectives of this research program  were (a) to modify the proven trench-
type pump  intake basin for constant speed (C/S) pumps of both dry pit and submersible wet pit
types and (b) to provide guidelines for designing both  rectangular and round wet wells. As the
work progressed, it became apparent that the findings were  as applicable to V/S pumps as  to
C/S units and to clean water and storm water as well as to wastewater.

-------
                                       SECTION II

                            CONCLUSIONS: DESIGN GUIDEUNES

A. CAVEATS

       The research was  carried out on models of 132 L/s (475  m^/h or 2100 gal/min) dry
pit pumps, and it would be  unwise to apply the results to  pumps larger than about 600 L/s
(2000  m3/h or 10,000 gal/min) even though larger pumps  have been used with trench-type
basins. It is good  insurance to require  model  tests of  intake basins  for larger pumps. Such
pumping stations are expensive and the cost of model studies is an insignificant percentage of the
total cost.

       When pump intake piping exceeds 500  mm (20 in) in diameter and the pump capacity
exceeds a maximum of  580 Us (2090 m3/h or 9300 gal/min), piping  to  dry  pit pumps
becomes costly and cumbersome. Draft tubes afford  better access to the pumps and may be more
economical. See Chapter 17 of Pumping Station  Design [3].

       High specific speed (axial flow) pumps  are particularly sensitive to small variations of
approach velocity across the plane of the impeller. As no approach velocity measurements were
made during these investigations, the effect  on  such pumps of the current past their intakes is
unknown. Consequently,  axial flow pumps should not be used  in these pump intake basins unless
tests are made to establish satisfactory performance.

B. APPLICATION

       Trench-type pump intake basins are suitable for clean water and, with modifications for
cleaning, for storm water  and  wastewater. These  basins are suitable for both V/S and, with
modified influent piping, for C/S pumps.

C. RECOMMENDED DESIGN GUIDELINES

       Guidelines are numbered for easy  reference. They are  arranged so that Nos. 1 to 6 apply
to all pumping stations. Additionally, Nos. 7 and 8 apply to rectangular basins  for clear water
and V/S pumps, Nos.  9 and  10 for C/S pumps, No, 11 for solids-laden water and V/S pumps,
No. 12 for C/S pumps. Nos.13 and 14 apply to  submersible pumps, and No. 15 applies to round
basins  with self-priming pumps.

a. All Pumping Stations

       These guidelines apply to all pumping  stations  with  trench-type pump intake basins
regardless of service or type.

1.     Select the kind, size, and number of pumps.  Guidelines are given in  pp 265-288  of
       Pumping  Station  Design [3]. For flows less  than 220 L/s  (792  m3/h or  5  Mgal/d),
       consider duplex or  triplex submersible pumps or self-priming pump intakes  in a round

-------
       basin.  For flows above 110  L/s  (400 m3/h  or 2.5 Mgal/d) consider  a  rectangular
       basin. For flows between 110 and  220 Us consider both configurations.

2.     Select suction bells for a maximum vpj (entrance velocity based on the area of a circle of
       diameter D, the OD of the  bell rim) of 1.1 to 1.5  m/s (3.5 to 5 ft/s). For pumps without
       suction  bells such  as most submersible pumps, however, follow the  manufacturer's
       recommendations.

3.     Suction  bells for dry pit or self-priming pumps may be spaced as close as 1.0 D clear or
       even closer if adjacent pumps do not  operate simultaneously.  However, allow 1.1  m  (42
       in) clear between  pumping machinery for  working space. Submersible pumps should
       never have a clear spacing between volutes of less than 100 mm  (4 in). Depending on
       type and size of pumps, more conservative  (greater) spreading  may well  be required.

4      Make the trench close to 2 D wide, and allow for a submergence of the suction intake of at
       least 2 D for a  vpj of 1.5 m/s (5 ft/s) or less. Follow manufacturer's recommendations
       for the submergence of submersible pump intakes or any pump intake with an umbrella
       over it.

       Dicmas  [4] states  that  the above intake velocity can  generate  Type 4 vortices at a
submergence of 1.8 D. (A Type 4 vortex has a pronounced surface  depression and a core
containing bubbles that are sucked into the pump  intake.) But note that the Hydraulic Institute
Standards [1] can be transformed to yield a required submergence of 1.6 D. Dicmas also states
that the surface width  of the  basin  affects vortex formation,  and Type 4 vortices can form at a
submergence of 1.8 D when the width is 2.7 D and  at a submergence of 2.4 D when the width is
reduced  to  2  D. In tests of  intakes in a trench  1.87 D wide at Montana  State  University,
however, a submergence of more  than  1.75  D was sufficient to suppress  Type  4 vortices in a
1/3.63-scale model  although Types 2 and 3 (less severe) occurred. Nevertheless, it is wise to
be conservative here.  Dicmas also claims that the most  efficient floor clearance is 0.4 D. Mild
submerged vortices form at walls beside suction  intakes when trenches are 2.5 D wide or less,
and the intensity increases somewhat as the width decreases. At trench widths of  more than 2 D,
performance during  cleaning  is likely to be  adversely affected, however, so a width of 2 D
appears to be the best compromise.  Vortex  suppressors can be  used to  ameliorate side wall
vortices. See Section V.E.g.

5.     Limit entrance  velocity into the basin to 1.5  m/s (5 ft/s). Design the cross-sectional
       area above the trench (WH in Figure  3) to limit the  average (plug flow) velocity  to 0.3
       m/s  (1  ft/s).

       The current  entering the basin continues with some  abatement to the end wall and is
reversed,  thereby  setting up a recirculation pattern. When the  provisions above  are met,
currents at the bottom  of the  trench are  very low, and good pump intake entrance conditions are
produced.

 6.     Decide whether to use rectangular or round intake basins and V/S or C/S pumps and go to
       the  appropriate subsection  for further guidelines.

b. Rectangular Basins for Clean Water and V/S Pumps

       As cleaning is unnecessary, there is no need for the ogee ramp mentioned in the Preface
and described later. The narrow trench is, however,  beneficial in  preventing rotation and stray
floor currents at suction intakes, but a wider basin above the  trench is usually needed to reduce
the strong currents caused by the  influent  velocity.

-------
                              -Either column or dry pit pump
   •304L ss. Locate accurately
B
L

/


D/4

, ••
F>
^ _J-
1
1
4 -.5+ D
                                                            B
                                                     3-1
                                                                  • "I.'  •° •' II' ' '  • •• • - * • ft
                                                                  '*•-•&&:           ?£?•''
                                                                  ichor bolt—«-j|
                                                                  ! mm+ ss   ti
Anchor
12 mm+ ss
                                                                          Cone
                         Section C-C
r

fl -fl -fi
. HWL"
LWL P
1
Q.E I
CM E_J
yrs Vs. xis.
C\j
Q
•*
Q
1.

—


3 - 2 D
a



i
— — i
                         Section B-B
                                                                          Section A-A
                 Figure 3. Rectangular sump for V/S pumps and clean water.

7.     See  Figure 3 for construction features. Cones with apexes in the plane of the intake are
       desirable  to prevent floor vortices  and  inhibit  pre-rotation. Vortex  suppressors  in
       walls beside the intakes can reduce side wall vortices. See Section V.E.g.

8.     If the influent pipe discharges by gravity (i.e. is  not under pressure), set the controls  to
       give  maximum discharge when the water level coincides with the soffit of the pipe and  to
       give  zero discharge when the water surface is at the  invert. Details of control  are given
       on p. 311  of Pumping Station Design [3]. Limit entrance velocity into  the  basin to no
       more than  1.5 m/s  (5 ft/s) by enlarging the inlet pipe if necessary.

c. Rectangular Basins for Clean  Water and C/S pumps

       The  difference  between C/S and  V/S pumping  stems  from  the need in  the  former  to
 introduce water without a cascade into a basin in which  depth fluctuates over a wide range. One
 way to avoid a cascade is  to slope the approach or inlet pipe from HWL at some upstream point
 downward to LWL at the basin at a gradient of about 2 percent. Water flowing  freely  down this
 pipe quickly reaches  super-critical velocity. As it is desirable  to keep  the super-critical
 velocities as low as possible, a rough pipe is better than a smooth one, a large pipe is better
 than a small one,  and gradients of more than 2 percent  should be avoided. It is also desirable  to
 inhibit turbulence  in the  basin by  preventing  the hydraulic jump from  leaving  the pipe.
 Hence, the  LWL must be somewhat above the pipe invert. Fine  tuning of LWL pump  settings can
 be made at start-up. A horizontal section about 10  pipe diameters long at the basin entrance  is
 also helpful in keeping the jump within the pipe.

-------
      A hydraulic jump occurs when water, flowing down the approach pipe at super-critical
velocity, reaches the impoundment in the lower part of the pipe. Both the allowable flow rate
and the  Froude  number must  be small enough to  allow all of the air that is entrained by the
jump to escape up the pipe, because, as Wisner, Mohsen, and Kouwen [5] show, the velocity in
the full pipe is too low to ensure that  the water can drag bubbles and air pockets to the basin. It
is conceivable that entrained  air could accumulate into air pockets large enough to partially
block the flow and cause surging. Reducing the super-critical velocity by means of a rough
interior  pipe surface, by  using less  slope, or by limiting  the  allowable flow  rate are ways to
avoid problems with air. Until  prototype tests of  large  pipes have been made,  it is well to be
cautious.

      The flow rates in Table 1 are thought to be very conservative. The  Froude numbers, less
than 2.0, indicate a weak  hydraulic  jump and a minimum of entrained  air.  The downstream
depth does not exceed 60 percent of the diameter, so  the free water surface  downstream from
the jump is 20 pipe diameters long.  In such a long section, there is ample opportunity for air
bubbles  to  rise (even from the  invert)  to  reach  the free water  surface, burst, and move
upstream along  the soffit of the pipe. Note, too,  that the sum of depth plus velocity  head
upstream of the jump is limited to about 75 percent of  the diameter.

           TABLE 1. MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED FLOW  RATES  IN APPROACH PIPES
                    Manning's n= 0.01 Oa             Slope  = 2 percent
Diameter
mm
250
300
375
450
525
600
675
750
825
900
of pipe
inches
10
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
Initial
Froude
number
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.9

L/s
20
31
53
81
120
160
210
270
530
650
Flow
m3/hr
71
110
190
290
420
580
770
990
1200
1500
rate
Mqal/d
0.5
0.7
1.2
1.9
2.7
3.7
4.9
6.3
7.8
9.7

ft3/s
1.0
1.1
1.9
2.9
4.1
5.7
7.5
9.7
12
15
      a For n = 0.012 (rougher pipe), flow rate increases (not decreases) by about 15
        percent.

      The  data in  Table 1 were  calculated by Wheeler [6]  using  his  Partfull® program,
equations,  and templates to solve  Equations 3-10, 3-13, and 3-18 in Chow [7] together with
the well-known Manning equation. The equations are, respectively:

                   v2/2g  = Dh/2                                                    (1)

where v is  velocity, g is  acceleration due to gravity and Dh is hydraulic depth (wetted cross-
sectional area divided by surface width).  Equation 1  is the  criterion for  critical flow  wherein
specific  energy is a minimum.

                   F = v/(gDhCos 0/cc)0-5 - V/(gDh)°-5                              (2)

-------
 where  F is  Froude number, 0 is slope of channel, and  a is an energy coefficient usually
 considered to be 1.0.
                     Q2/gA-| + Zi AI = Q2/gA2 + 2-2 A2
                     (3)
 where Q is flow rate,  Z is the distance from the water surface to the centroid of wetted cross-
 sectional area, A, and the subscripts indicate sections on either side of the jump.
                     v = (1/n)R2/3 s"l/2  Manning's equation in SI units

                     v = (1.486/n)R2/3 s1/2   in U.S. customary (English) units
                    (4a)

                    (4b)
where n is  a surface  roughness coefficient,  R is  hydraulic radius or wetted area divided  by
wetted perimeter, and s is slope or hf/L, head loss divided by length.

       Without Partfull®' the combined solution of Equations 1 to 4 is difficult for round pipes
 but much easier for rectangular channels. Calculations based on a rectangular channel equal in
 area and Froude number to a pipe are only about  4  percent or less in error for the depth after
 the jump and only 10 percent or less for flow rate for the pipe sizes in Table  1.

 9.     Follow Guidelines 1  to 7, but see Figure 4 and Table 1 for the design of the approach pipe.
   D/4
                                   HWL
                                   LWL
                                                         Approach pipe
                                               Horizontal 10 Dp
                                                 preferred
Slope 2% to HWL
                               -Cone preferred

                                  See Figure 3 for other details
                     Figure 4. Rectangular sump for C/S pumps and clean water.

       The pipe becomes part of the required storage volume. The volume that can be added to
       the wet well volume is the volume of the pipe when full less the volume required for the
       design flow at  LWL. Calculate the active volume of required storage from
                            V = T Q/4
                     (5)
       where V is active volume (between LWL and HWL) in liters, Q is the flow rate of a single
       pump in L/s, and T is the minimum allowable time between motor starts in seconds.  For
       English customary  units, substitute gallons for V, gal/min for Q, and minutes for T. The
       oddly-shaped volume of water partly filling  a sloping pipe can be  calculated by  the
       inaccurate average end area method or by the accurate prismoidal formula,
                                            8

-------
                            V = (Ai + A2 + 4 Am)L/6                                   (6)

       where  AI and A2 are cross-sectional areas of each end of the prism, Am is the cross-
       sectional area at the middle, and L is the length.

       Manufacturers of pumps, starters, and motors indicate that, depending  on motor size and
speed, cycle times can be increased from the traditional 6 starts and stops per hour to as much
as 15 (long force mains excepted). As a rule, use 10 starts and stops per hour for motors of 37
kW (50 hp) and less operating at 880 rev/min  or more, but always confirm these assumptions
with candidate  manufacturers  and  be certain  that project  specifications  reflect the  duty
requirements for starters, motors, and pumps.

10.    Allocate as much of the required active volume to the pipe as feasible even to increasing
       the diameter, because storage  in pipes  is less expensive than storage in basins. Adjust
       the dimensions of the basin to furnish the remainder of the required storage.

d. Rectangular Basins for Solids-bearing Water and C/S  or V/S Pumps

       These are basins that must be  cleaned periodically. Once per week  is usually sufficient
for  raw wastewater  pumping. If a basin  is to be  cleaned at all, it should  be designed  for
maximum  effectiveness and ease of operation. The following features are needed  to attain  these
objectives:

       •  Enough stored fluid available to complete the cleaning cycle.

       •  Easy  switching   from  automatic  to   manual   pump   control and vice versa (a
          common feature)  or  even  to manual control with a timer to switch "manual"  to
          "automatic".

       •  Water guides (see Figure 5) to confine the influent within a rectangular trench only
          wide  enough to  allow installation  of  the sluice  gate  and proper  trench width for
          suction  bells.

       •  An ogee curve for the trench bottom that matches the longest trajectory  of the fluid
          passing under the sluice gate.

       •  A return curve at the bottom of the ogee of sufficiently long radius.

       •  All but the last  intake  raised well   above the  theoretical  depth  of  the super-
          critical flow along  the floor at  pump-down,  because   shock  waves or  "rooster
          tails"  may impact on the  suction bells and interfere  with flow.

       •  Low floor  clearance  for  the last pump  to  ensure the hydraulic jump  migrates
          rapidly to the  end of the basin.  Less than D/4 can  be  achieved as shown by  the
          construction left of Section  B-B  in Figure  5.

       •  A  baffle  between  the last intake  and  the end wall  to prevent circulation behind
          the inlet at pump-down.

       •  Soffits of  approach and sewer pipes in the upstream manhole at the same elevation.

-------
            D/4
                                                            Smooth, rounded edges
                                                                  Bottom  of intake
                                                                             12 mm min
                                                        'm&m
                                                        '•\-id:7^\\"'f".--:?if   *'; •&•:?: B.:<
                                          Ogee to match
                                  Vanes    free cascade
      -Cone
	 0 . \ \ \
LWL --'X
Q
CM

CJ
5
- •$
E '»
.*-.
•?




(^
i

\O -*
1,9-2 D

/
/
4
—

~o •

                                                                                $\60° pre-
                                                                                    ferred
                                                                                     45°
                                                                                     min
                                                                                 Vane
                                                                                 preferred
                             Section B-B
Section  A-A
            Figure 5. Rectangular sump for V/S pumps and solids-bearing water.

       To achieve a satisfactory hydraulic jump  in the trench  during cleaning,  the  Froude
number (Equation 2) near the last pump inlet should be at least 3.5. However, Froude numbers
greater than 8 are very turbulent  and may introduce excessive air entrainment that could cause
premature air binding of the pump.

       One easy cleaning procedure is:

       •  Turn off all pumps to store enough water to complete the cleaning cycle.

       •  Meanwhile, set the sluice gate to deliver about  85 percent (refined  by  trial) of the
          last pump's capacity.

       •  Turn on every pump  to lower the water level as rapidly  as possible.  A hydraulic
          jump  forms  at  the  bottom  of the  ogee and  progresses downstream  while  its
          turbulence suspends and fluidizes the sand and  sludge. By the time the jump reaches
          the end pump, all  scum, sand, and  sludge have  been  sucked out, and the trench is
          clean.

       •   Optional: turn the pumps off one by one before the jump reaches their intakes.

       •  Reprime the  pumps to  put the station back into service.
                                          10

-------
       By  manipulating the sluice  gate, the jump can be made to travel downstream either
 rapidly or slowly or even be made to go upstream or remain stationary.

       Sometimes, sticky solids  do not  readily slide down a 45° slope, so a slope of 60° is
 preferable if it can be used. Sloping  walls  should be covered with a smooth, durable coating.

       In wastewater  pumping  stations,  it is necessary  to wash  grease off the walls
 periodically, so design unobstructed access for  housekeeping. An 8-mm (5/16-in) nozzle on a
 25-mm  (1-in) hose  delivering   1.6 L/s  (26 gal/min)  at  a pressure of 414  kPa (60  Ib/in2)
 is adequate for  a small basin,  but  a 13-mm  (1/2-in)  nozzle on a 38-mm  (1.5-in) hose
 delivering 3.6 Us (57 gal/min)  at equal  or greater pressure  is better  for  large basins. If the
 supply is potable water, adequate backflow prevention is obviously required.

       The  cleaning process given  in this subsection was proven in  the research  testing to be
 many times more effective than that described in Section I.B for the Kirkland Pumping Station.

 e. Rectangular Basins for V/S Pumps and Solids-bearing Water

       Because no storage volume  is required, pump inlets can be set as close together as in
 Figure 5. Close  intake spacing  is advantageous for reducing  both solids accumulation and the
 impact on the treatment plant when sludge arrives after a  pump-down. But to provide adequate
 access for maintenance, pumps should be separated by at least 1.1  m (42 in) clear. Spacing
 machinery well apart and intakes close together requires intake pipes  to be spread at angles as
 shown in Figure 5. Of course, the  intake spacing can equal  the pump spacing with intake pipes at
 right angles to the trench for somewhat  simpler construction, but the basin would be longer,
 more expensive, and limited in the  advantages above.

       A cone  under the  last  intake  is highly desirable, and the  anti-rotation  baffle is
 mandatory at pump-down to ensure uniform flow and minimum water depth upstream.  But
 cones cannot be used under upstream pump inlets, because they would interfere with  super-
 critical flow at pump-down, so use vanes  instead. Note that the vanes are self-cleaning  because
 the edges  are nearly parallel  with the  flow of water into  the intakes.  Intermittent Type  1
vortices tend to  form at the walls beside the suction bells even in trenches 2.5  D wide. See
 Figure 6  for vortex classification.  In  trenches about 2 D wide, continuous vortices  of Type 2 or
3 occur.  The vortex severity can  be reduced by attaching vortex suppressors to  the  walls as
described in Section V.E.g.

 11.    Follow guidelines 1 to 6  and  8. Additionally, follow the recommendations  shown in  Figure
       5.

f. Rectangular Basins for C/S Pumps and  Solids-bearing Water

       These basins are similar to those for V/S pumps except for the need  for storage and the
design of the approach pipe. Equation 5 can be satisfied by the volume of the basin and the pipe
together. The  LWL for normal operation should be somewhat  above the invert  of the approach
pipe at the basin  to keep the hydraulic jump from migrating into the basin.

 12.    Follow guidelines 1 to 6, 9, and 10 plus the details in  Figure 7. Note that vanes reduce
pre-rotation  and  floor vortices.
                                           11

-------
   Type 1
   No effect
   on pump
   Swirl  only
Type 2
No effect
on pump
Swirl and
dimple
Type 3
Slight  effect
on pump
Type 4
Reduces pump
performance
Type 5
Do not oper-
ate pump
Core well de-
fined with dye


  Surface  vortices
Core with air
bubbles
Solid air core
    Slight  swirl at
    wall or floor
 Diffuse swirl-
 ing core
  Organilzed de-
  fined core
 Vapor bubbles
 in core
 Solid vapor
 core
                                     Subsurface vortices

                            Figure 6. Vortex classification system

g. Submersible Pumps in Rectangular Basins

       Because the trench is so  important to the proper  functioning of the intake  basin, it must
be included as shown  in Figure 8,  and hence the pumps must be fitted with  suction bells. The
upstream intakes should be well (say D/2) above the floor for the reason given in Section ll.C.d,
whereas the last intake should be no more than D/4 above the floor  to ensure that the hydraulic
jump moves quickly  to the last pump at pump-down.  (The floor under the  last intake  can be
depressed if necessary to provide the generally accepted criterion of  a minimum of  75 mm
clearance for passing  large solids.) These  restrictions can be met  by lengthening  the  suction
bell of the last pump.

       Stringy material is  apt to  collect on obstructions,  so it is desirable to keep unnecessary
objects such as guide  rods out of the water. Telescoping guide rods (one tube within another)
that are raised above the water except when needed to  install  a pump are therefore preferred.

1 3,    Follow Guidelines 1. to 6, 9, 10, and the details  in Figure  8.

14.    Ensure that influent currents do not overstress the connection between pump and
       discharge elbow. Consult the pump manufacturer.
                                             12

-------
         D/4
                                                      Motorized sluice gate
                                                                  B
                                                                J
                                                           See Figure 4 for approach pipe profile
                                                           See Figure 3 for cone
                                                           See Figure 5 for vane
                                                    Water guide at pump-down
           -Cone recommended
   -Vane recommended

Section B-B
                                                                           Section A-A
            Figure 7. Rectangular sump for C/S pumps and solids-bearing water.

h. Round Basins for Solids-bearing Water and C/S Pumps

       Round  basins are typically  used for dry  pit,  submersible, and self-priming  pumps in
 small  lift  stations. Although V/S pumps could be used, the advantage of low cost would be
 compromised. The recommendations are similar  to commonly accepted design criteria except
 for the sloping inlet pipe discharging slightly below LWL and a hopper bottom with  walls
 sloping 45° or steeper,  as shown in Figures 9 and 10, to give  the smallest possible flat floor
 size.

       A very  small free water surface at pump-down is required to discharge all scum. Note
 that pumps begin to lose prime when the submergence of the inlet becomes less  than the inlet
 diameter, D. Flatter hopper bottoms or pumps that lose suction when the water level falls to
 the top of the  volute of submersible pumps may not be fully effective in sucking out scum.

       The  smallest free water surface area  at pump-down (and consequently, better and
 quicker cleaning)  can be achieved by equipping  submersible pumps with suction bells  (a
 standard feature on some submersible pumps) set within a vertical-sided trench as shown in
 Alternate  Section B-B in Figure 9.
                                           13

-------
                r
             A   --Fabricate discharge elbow    Motorized S|uice gate
                 /  and weld to plate
                                           Water guide at pump-down

                                            HWL
                                                               See Figures 3 and 5 for cones and vanes
                                                                          Telescoping guide tubes
                                                                          preferred. See Figure 13.
            Lengthened bell
       ^Cone recommended
                       Section B-B
                                                                          ' Section  A-A
15.
  Figure 8. Rectangular sump for submersible pumps and solids-bearing water.

Follow Guidelines 1  to 6, 9, and 10. Additionally, follow the recommendations  shown in
Figure 9 for  submersible pumps or Figure 10  for self-priming pumps.
       For duplex and especially for triplex pump installations, good cleaning  can be obtained
without pump-down (or with only partial pump-down) by operating the pump(s) while mixing
the contents. Either  a mechanical  mixer or the  piping system described  in Section  III.D is
effective. By avoiding pump-down, pumps do not  have to be reprimed. Basins can also be kept
continuously clean with a mechanical mixer by  programming the mixer to operate for a  few
minutes in  every pump start-stop cycle.  However, if intakes  are set as close together as shown
in  Figures 9 and  10, settleable  solids cannot accumulate to a significant amount.
                                            14

-------
Plate
Weld to
fabricated
elbow
                            Hopper
                            bottom
Corners preferably
rounded
               A-

             Section  C-C
                        3 E
                               Alternate Section B-B
              —Telescoping guide tubes preferred

                                 /\ 60° preferred
                                         45° min
                                 T
                                Consult M'f'r
         Anchors
                           Min 100 mm clear
                                             one preferred
              Section B-B
                                                                  Section  A-A
                 Figure 9.  Duplex submersible  pumps in  round  sump.
                           <_ /—*>
                            rr
                            <•—See Figure 4
                               for pipe design
                                                                      HWL
                                                                  -Bent pipe preferred
                                                                   See Figure 11
                                                    60° preferred
                                                         45° min
               Plan
                                                                  Section A-A
                  Figure 10.  Sump for duplex, self-priming pumps
                                            15

-------
                                       SECTION III

                             INVESTIGATIONS OF PROTOTYPES

       Inspection visits were made April 6 and 7,  1992 to four rectangular,  trench-type  pump
sumps and to two traditional pump sumps in the Seattle area. Kirkland pumping station was
revisited May 24, 1993.

       Small pumping stations with round pump intake basins were visited  May 25, 1993, at
Black Diamond, WA and at Clyde, CA on May 27, 1993. On August 28, 1993,  a pumping station
at Vallby, Sweden and two similar ones not far away were inspected.

       Tests were made December 1 to 3,  1993 on the full-sized  pump inlet  basin constructed
by Fairbanks Morse Pump Corporation at their plant in Kansas City, KA.

A. KIRKLAND PUMPING STATION

       Twenty seven Seattle Metro pumping stations have pump inlet basins  somewhat similar
to Kirkland pumping  station  (Figure 1). Because the Kirkland station is typical,  it was chosen
for modeling.

       The station and its operation are described in Section I.B. The phenomenon that limits the
velocity along the trench during pump-down is the formation of  a Type 5 vortex  beside  the
suction bell at 7 o'clock  (where  12 o'clock points upstream). A Type 5 vortex pulls a solid air
core into the pump intake. See Figure 6. The air sucked into the  vortex prevents reducing  the
submergence of the suction  bell  mouth to less than about 0.7 D. A strong counterclockwise  (as
viewed from above) circulation  of water around the last pump  intake causes an upstream
movement  of water along one wall,  and it terminates in an unstable stagnation  area where
movement of deposits is extremely  slow.

       1. Critique of procedure-Trie  cleaning  procedure described in Section I.B results in a
minimum pump-down   water depth of 1.06  D. At the estimated  flow rate of 66  Us (227  m3/h
or 1.5 Mgal/d), the fluid velocity  along the  trench is  only  0.20 m/s (0.66  ft/s) which is
insufficient to move grit, sand, or even heavy sludge although turbulence from  the cascade does
move some sludge. After cleaning,  however, an average depth of about 50 to  75  mm (2 to 3 in)
of sludge remains, and  this depth increases the average velocity by  about 10 percent.

       Without  altering the design, more effective cleaning could be accomplished by following
the procedure of Section  ll.C.d, namely, by setting the sluice gate to pass only about 85 percent
of the last pump's capacity, shutting off the pumps for about  15 minutes (or for enough time to
store  sufficient fluid in  the upstream pipe), turning on all pumps until the submergence of  the
pump intakes is reduced to about 1.0 D, then operating only the last pump at top speed until  the
stored fluid is pumped out.  Both the velocity along the trench and the energy  in  the influent
cascade would increase by about 70 percent, so cleaning would be improved although the average
fluid velocity along the trench would still be too low to move sand.

       2. Critique of design-As  a  result of  the  research described in the following sections, it
would be possible to improve  the design by a quantum leap.
                                          16

-------
       Lowering the last suction bell to a floor clearance of D/4 would increase the velocity in
the trench at pump-down by 25 percent. Adding a baffle between the last suction bell and the end
wall to eliminate the circulation behind the bell  would produce a uniform upstream velocity,
reduce the  water depth  to about 0.5 D, and  thus increase the velocity  to  about 1 m/s  (3.2
ft/s)--nearly  five times that attained by the existing procedure described in Section  I.E. Such a
velocity is  enough  to move sand at nearly 15 mm/s (3 ft/min).

       These improvements would be dwarfed when compared to the improvement achievable by
converting  the  potential energy of the influent  stream into kinetic energy at pump-down by
means of a smooth ogee entrance as shown in  Figures 5, 7, and 8. Velocities of 3 to 4 m/s (10 to
13  ft/s) can be  developed, and  it  is apparent from both model and prototype studies that all
sand, sludge, and scum could be ejected from  such pumping stations in less than half a minute
after the water is pumped down to a depth of 1.0 D.

B. OTHER SEATTLE AREA PUMPING STATIONS

       The Wilburton and North  Mercer Island  pump intake  basins were similar in design  to the
Kirkland pump basin, and, as the stations were operated in the same manner, the  responses and
results were similar. This similarity demonstrated that  the  response  was a function of design
and not differences in sewage due to different origins.

       At Steilacoom the trench was  very wide  (2.29 D), and, due to a  construction mistake,
the suction  bells were  set too  far (0.9  D)  from the floor. The sump could  not be cleaned
adequately, and odors during cleaning were very strong.  This response demonstrates the value of
narrow trenches and bells mounted  close to  the floor. However, a survey of the sludge deposits
was of value to the project, because it furnished different conditions for testing model sludge. To
guard  against construction errors, designers should  specify that floor clearance of bells is  a
controlling dimension.

       The 53rd and 63rd Street pumping stations are entirely different sumps with large flat
floors that collect great  quantities of grit in piles  that reach three feet in depth.  Both produce
suffocating odors, and both can be cleaned only with difficulty and at considerable expense. They
amply demonstrate the need for designs that make frequent cleaning quick, easy, and economical.

C. BLACK DIAMOND PUMPING STATION

       This  station was  designed to meet most of the concepts developed during this research
project for C/S  duplex pumps in  a round, self-cleaning  pump inlet basin. The  plans are shown
in Figure 11.  The  400-mm  (16-in) influent pipe slopes at  a 2 percent gradient for  61  m
(200 ft) but   is  horizontal for 10 pipe  diameters  before entering the  wet well. There are  two
self-priming  pumps  of 63 L/s (230  m^/h or 1000 gal/min)  each housed  in a nearby building
with only the 250-mm (10-in) suction  pipes  in the wet well. The diameter of  each  bell  is 400
mm (16  in), so  the  entrance velocity is only 0.49 m/s  (1.6 ft/s).

a. Critique

       The  behavior of the steeply  sloping (2  percent  gradient)  approach  pipeline was
satisfactory. In  the  sump, the smooth sides sloping at 60°  kept  solids from sticking  during
pump-down.  The pumps  broke suction when the submergence of the  bells was about 1 D. At this
water depth, the area of  the water surface was too large for sufficient confinement of scum  and a
second pump-down was  needed.  It appeared that operating the  two pumps simultaneously  would
remove the scum in a single pump-down. The LWL shown on the plans  is too low to prevent the
hydraulic jump in the approach pipe from reaching the sump.


                                          17

-------
                Plan
                                        D = 400 mm (16")
                                                    Section  A-A
                      Figure 11. Black Diamond Pumping Station sump.

       The pump entrance velocity is very low and might not suck out sand and gravel quickly.
Nevertheless, cleaning is accomplished with  reasonable dispatch. However, the designer stated
he would follow the more  restrictive dimensions of Figure 10 next time.

       The success of the Black Diamond Pumping Station demonstrates the practicality and
usefulness of the concepts developed for this  research.

D. CLYDE PUMPING STATION

       The pumping station at Clyde in  Contra Costa County, California is shown in Figure 12.
The 3" piping system is used to mix the contents of the sump for discharging scum and sludge to
the force main. Smaller pipes might  plug. The four eccentric plug valves allow either pump to
be the wash-water pump while the other one pumps the "homogenized" mixture  into the force
main. Alternatively,  either  or both pumps can discharge to  the force main, and the force main
itself can be tapped for about 15 percent of its flow to be  recirculated as wash water. The 3"
pipe discharges just above LWL. At the time  of inspection, the sump was remarkably clean with
no material floating on the surface.

a. Critique

       The 30°  bottom slopes allow more active storage volume than 45°  or steeper slopes
would, but the penalty  is that mixing is required to eject scum and sludge. The 3" piping system
allows  maximum versatility in mixing. If a less expensive system is wanted, the system could
be reduced to one valve at the 4" F  M.  Flexibility would suffer, but there would be little loss of
effectiveness.  Discharging the  3" piping at  or  above the  LWL drives bubbles into  the pool,
whereas discharge at a lower elevation would  be just as effective and would avoid the bubbles.

       A disadvantage of the  system is the necessity for the operator to enter the valve vault to
operate the valves. Steeper hopper bottoms (as  in Figure 9) avoid the need for mixing but may
require a wider range between  HWL and LWL to achieve an adequate active storage volume.
                                           18

-------
PIPE SUPPORT
(TYP OF 2)
PIPE HANGER
(TYP OF 2)
PROTECTIVE LINING
8x4 INCREASES
(TYP)


LADDER RUNG
                                             Plan
                                                     GUIDE BRACKET
                                                            EL TO HATCH
                                                          EXIST 8" FM
                                                          PENETRATION
                                         ^ • ' • ; •   ' J-7	PROTECTIVE LINING
                             Section  A-A
             Figure 12. Clyde Pumping Staton. Courtesy of G.S. Dodson & Associates.
                                                  19

-------
       The only modifications  required to make the Clyde wet well comply with the concepts in
this research are a sloping approach  pipe discharging  at low water level and  steeper slopes
designed to hug the pumps more closely on all sides.

E. PUMPING STATIONS IN SWEDEN

       Three small pumping stations in Vasteras were  inspected. The Vallby pumping station
was the  first  one built, and because of its success, the other two are similar.  Other pumping
facilities continue to be constructed along the same lines.

a. Vallby Pumping  Station

        The  Vallby pumping  station, shown in  Figure  13,  was designed by an experienced
operator (not an engineer) who  wanted a facility that  would require  minimum attention and
maintenance. The  hopper  bottom is made of 18-8 stainless steel plate  12  mm (1/2 in) thick
bent so that its top fits the  round, vertical concrete pipe  and its  bottom  conforms to a rectangle
of minimum size with  rounded corners. The sides are inclined at about 60°.  Special  discharge
elbows were made  and welded  to a heavy plate for bolting to the hopper side. The space between
the  hopper bottom  and the  side of the round  pipe is filled with concrete.  The sump was perfectly
clean at the time of inspection, and a demonstration of pump-down to the  lowest achievable
water level demonstrated that clean-out would be very effective indeed.  The station has several
unique features worthy of description.

       • Guide  rails  are  stainless steel telescoping tubes  that are raised  out of  the water
         except when a pump is to be  reinstalled.

       • Instead of using floats to monitor water level and control the  pumps, a piezo-electric
         pressure cell is placed  within an open 100-mm (4-in) PVC pipe near the  bottom  of
         the sump.  These cells  are reliable, long-lived, and  are  excellent for sophisticated
         systems  because they  can, unlike floats, provide  input throughout the liquid level
         range to  a  programmable  logic controller for activating the pumps for both normal
         operation  and  pump-down. In the   long run, they  are  probably less  expensive than
         floats.  (Some floats must be replaced yearly, although  there  are some  that  contain
         micro-switches  instead of  mercury and  are  supplied  with more resistant electrical
         cables that can last for many years).

       •  A   fresh water supply  for washing is equipped with  a quick-connect and  valve and
         is protected  by a large pipe  with a padlocked cover.

       •  Inside the wet well, there is a wash-down water lance that slides in  a collar  supported
         by  a  universal  joint  that permits freedom of direction. The water lance is equipped
         with a quick-connect  at the top and  a nozzle  at the bottom. A short hose with mating
         quick connects on each end is carried in the operator's  truck. The system makes wash-
         down  not  only  quick and  easy, but the jet strikes the pump  or hopper bottom so far
         away that the operator is not splashed.

       •  Two grates  consisting  of  heavy  rods spaced at about 150-mm each  way covers the
         opening  and give workers a feeling of safety.  They are  hinged under the cover of the
         curb. Only one  must  be lifted to remove a pump. The  curb is a support for the 150-
         mm pipe that carries the power cable from the  control  box to the sump.  It takes only
         seconds to disconnect the power cable.
                                          20

-------
                             •100-mm  PVC pipe for pressure  cell
   150-mm ss pipe
   for power  cable
                                                 iccess hatch.
                                                2 hinged gratings
                                                under
                                                    12-mm ss  plate—,
                                                                               /—Water surface
                                                                                  at pump-down


                                                                            Section C-C
                              Plan
                                                                      Hinged, locking cover
                                         •Outer, sliding guide
                                         tube. Lift with rope
                                                   -Rock fill
         c
               &'&f- . '  "'"'   "   '•*'"" "  '"':
-------
       The stainless steel hopper-bottom insert is excessively thick and expensive.  It need only
 be stiff enough to allow concrete to be placed between  it and the concrete pipe wall. A molded
 plastic shell would  be much cheaper (particularly  if standardized and  made  in quantity) and
 just as satisfactory.

       The hopper bottom is so small  that significant amounts of sludge cannot accumulate. But
 if  scum is a problem, the  controls could be programmed for  automatic pump-down  at some
 suitable interval, say,  once  per day.

 b. Other Swedish Pumping Stations

       The other Swedish pumping stations are similar to the Vallby not only in design but also
 operationally.  One,  designed for a future development, was connected to only a few houses, so
 the detention time was very long and produced overwhelming odors. The steep-walled  sump is
 advantageous, because detention time and odors can be  reduced by setting the HWL close to the
 LWL to increase the frequency of pump starts and keep the wastewater at least a little fresher.
 Adding a small flow of fresh water would also help  as would feeding iron chloride to sequester
 the sulfide ion. A small, obviously inexpensive hydro-pneumatic  tank was  installed in  this
 station for controlling water  hammer. Many such tanks have been in use for many years and are
 said to be quite satisfactory and devoid  of excessive maintenance problems.

 F. FAIRBANKS MORSE EXPERIMENTAL PUMP INTAKE BASIN

       A full-sized,  steel, rectangular  pump  intake  basin was constructed at Fairbanks Morse
 Pump Corporation in Kansas City,  Kansas. Pump 3 was  an end  suction pump always throttled to
 63 Us (230 m3/h  or  1000 gal/min),  67 percent of its capacity. It  was mounted beside the
 sump as  shown in Figure 14. Pump 2 was a self-priming pump mounted 3.3 m above the trench
 floor. To  have a basin of proper proportions, space was left for Pump 1 (never installed).

 a. General Procedure

       Water was pumped from a test pit under the floor to  the pump intake basin  by  a supply
 pump (not shown) until the desired depth was reached. Then Pump 3 (sometimes augmented by
 Pump 2)  was operated to recirculate water to the  standpipe.  A bypass pipeline allowed  water to
 be returned directly  to the test pit. Before pump-down, water was recirculated to the standpipe
 at 63 L/s (230 m3/h  or 1000 gal/min),  and it  entered the sump  at a velocity of 0.94 m/s
 (3.1  ft/s)-roughly the same as the drowned pipe velocity for two  pumps  operating. During
 pump-down, water was  bypassed (except as noted) at 12.6 L/s  (45  m3/h or  200 gal/min)  so
 that  influent to  the sump was only 50.4  L/s (181  m3/h or 800 gal/min).

 b.  Short Radius Toe

       In the first pump-down tests, influent  to the  basin spread laterally over  the  ogee apron
and some flowed over the  45° sloping  wall only to drop  into the side of the  trench,  interfere
with the hydraulic jump and create a shock wave  or "rooster tail" nearly as high as the vertical
trench wall. The velocity along the centerline of the  trench moved at about 1.8  m/s (5.8 ft/s), a
 speed that, if uniform,  would move sand at about  2  m/min  and thus clean the trench in about a
minute and a half. But the velocity was decidedly non-uniform and when a test with sand was
made the hydraulic jump stayed at the  toe of the ogee. The pump lost prime  in  1.5  minutes,  so
much of the sand was not removed.
                                          22

-------
          Head tank
Future   Pump   Pump
pump     2      3
  i       !       I
[
^"\ 1 1 rh
,1.
i — V
^^ \
i— 	
8.7 D
<^> %
!/
3D' 3 D /|
A
D = 279 mm = 11
Plan /
                                                      •Anti-
                                                      rotation
                                                      baffle
                              Section A-A
                                                                   Section B-B
   Figure 14. Experimental pump intake basin at Fairbanks Morse Pump Corporation plant.

c. Long Radius Toe

       The short-radius (4.3  D) toe was replaced with a long-radius  (9 D) toe and 50 mm (2
in) of sand was placed over  the entire bottom of the trench. The hydraulic jump was better, it
moved downstream about 3 D, and the rooster tail was much smaller. Although the pump lost
prime one  minute after the  jump formed, nearly all  (probably 90 percent)  of the sand was
removed. A second pump-down removed the remaining  10 percent during a 45 second run. The
Froude number at the toe was estimated to be 7.6 based on rather crude measurements of the
depth. On the assumption that Manning's n-value was 0.010, calculations gave a Froude number
of  6.5  at the toe  and a value of 1.99 (a very weak jump)  at the  end of the basin. Ignoring
friction produces very large errors in calculated Froude numbers.  (See Section VI.E.)

d.  Straight Wing Walls

       After adding the wing walls shown in Figure 15, the hydraulic jump improved markedly
and moved almost to Pump 3. The rooster tail was subdued to a height of about D/2. The Froude
number at the toe of the ogee was calculated, ignoring  friction, to  be 10.1-a value friction
would reduce. Crude water depth measurements resulted in an experimental value of  7.6. A
Froude number above 9 indicates a very strong jump, perhaps too strong. Operators do have a
limited control of the jump by regulating the amount of water released by a sluice gate.

       By operating  Pump  2 at 50  L/s (180  m3/h or 800 gal/min) and Pump 3  at 63  L/s
(230  m3/h or  1000 gal/min)  and  bypassing  31   L/s (110  m3/h  or 500  gal/min), the
hydraulic jump behavior was improved still more.  The jump went  under Pump 2 (which had
stopped pumping  a moment before)  and  migrated  all  the  way  to Pump 3 in 23 seconds. This
                                          23

-------
performance was excellent, so the system was tested with about 0.037 m^ (1.3 ft3) of sand
placed at the upstream end of the floor. All of the sand was ejected in 21 seconds following the
formation of the jump at the toe of the ogee. Losing prime was expected, because the volume of
water was  being continually reduced  at 12 Us (44 m3/h or 200 gal/min).  The sand washout
rate was excellent. In subsequent model tests at Montana  State University, sand was removed in
the same length of time. See Section V.B.c.
                                  Approximate water
                                      surface
                                                                Type 5 vortex
                                      Section  A-A
            Figure15. Straight wing walls in  Fairbanks Morse pump intake basin.
e. Fillets
       Fillets  placed  in  the  corners of the  trench  at Pump  3 as  shown  in  Figure 15,
considerably reduced the size and vigor of the vortices that enter the intake, reduced the amount
of air ingested, apparently lowered the upstream water surface slightly, and helped to move the
hydraulic jump downstream somewhat quicker.

f.  Tapered Wind Walls

       Tapered wing  walls,  shown  in Figure 16, were substituted for the straight ones. Tests
with water levels  ranging from the  center of the influent pipe to halfway down  the ogee gave
excellent  results  with  stable,  uniform currents.  At pump-down,  however, water flowed over
the sloping walls, spilled into the trench from  the sides,  and interfered with the hydraulic
                                           24

-------
jump. The rooster tail was nearly as high as the trench and impinged on Pump 2 intake  where it
substantially interfered with the water passing under the  intake.
                                      Section A-A


  Figure  16. Tapered wing walls and relative velocity vectors in Fairbanks Morse pump sump.

g. Currents

       At a circulation  rate of 63  Us (230 m3/h or 1000 gal/min) and a water level at the
midpoint of the  influent pipe,  the entrance velocity  was 0.84 m/s (2.75  ft/s). Currents traced
with dye  are shown in Figure 16.  Equal and opposite vectors indicate stagnation.  As dye quickly
disappeared due to the turbulence, velocities were difficult to obtain, and their values are only
approximate. In  all tests, however, it was  noticeable that at more than  I D from an operating
pump intake, currents were very low, and at more  than  2 or  3 D from an operating pump
intake, water--if it  moved  at  ail-generally migrated upstream. The velocity past the pump
intakes was insignificant, and it certainly could  not be defined by  assuming plug flow.

h. Conclusions

       •   The  effectiveness of  the  trench-type pump  intake  basin was  confirmed  for both
          normal operation and for expelling sand and scum.

       •   Relatively large quantities of   sand were expelled   within  about a  half minute at
          pump-down.
                                           25

-------
•  The  last   pump intake  must be  D/4  or less above  the  trench floor. A  lower
   placement (with a shallow pit to ensure  the passage   of a large (75-mm diameter)
   solid would hasten sludge removal and keep the pump primed longer.

•  Upstream pump intakes must be at least D/3 above the trench floor. Because of shock
   waves at pump-down, a clearance of 0.4 or 0.5 D is safer.

•  Fillets  at the corners  by  the  last  pump are helpful  and the anti-rotation baffle is
   necessary to move the jump  to the end of the basin.

•  The movement of the jump can be regulated by throttling the inflow.

•  Currents at intakes  are insignificant even when surface currents are substantial.
                                   26

-------
                                         SECTION IV

                                   MODEL STUDIES AT ENSR

       Models of the entire pump intake basins and the inclined approach pipeline were studied
by  ENSR  Consulting  and  Engineering  (ENSR) in  their hydraulic  laboratory in  Redmond,
Washington. Laboratory personnel were supervised by Sweeney, who has tested more than 70
models of pump sumps. The  research that could be adequately accomplished in a small flume was
done by Sanks in the hydraulic laboratory of the Department of Civil Engineering, Montana State
University, Bozeman, Montana.

A. MODEL SIMILITUDE

       True similitude  requires that  both  Froude number  (Equation  2),  a dimensionless
function of gravitational  and inertial  forces, and  Reynolds number, a dimensionless  function of
viscous and inertial forces, be the same for both model and prototype. Reynolds number is

                    R  = vD/v                                                        (7)

where v is velocity, D  is depth, and  v is kinematic viscosity. Both numbers cannot be  satisfied
simultaneously unless the model/prototype scale ratio is unity,  so a  choice must be made. When
a free surface exists such as in a pump intake basin, flow patterns are influenced primarily by
gravitational forces, and therefore, similitude must be based on Froude number, F. Despite the
incompatibility  of  Froude and Reynolds scaling,  the  model linear scale must still  allow flow to
be  turbulent.  Reynolds numbers greater than  104to 105 during model operation  assures
adequate  turbulence.  To allow the use of commercial pipe sizes, the model/prototype linear
scale ratio, L, was chosen to be 1/3.63. For equal model and  prototype values of F,   other
model/prototypes  scale ratios are:

       Velocity,      v  = (1/L)°-5  =  (1/3.63)0-5 =  1/1.91

       Time,        t =  (1/L)°-5                 = 1/1.91

       Volume,      V  = (1/L)3  =  1/3.63)3       = 1/47.8

       Flow rate     Q  = V/t = (3.63)°-5/(3.63)3  =  1/25.1

       Flow in pipes is a function of  Reynolds number.

B. MODEL TESTS OF PUMP SUMPS

       Model tests of  wet wells or pump sumps  are always made with clear water. Gathering
data consists of visual observations of current patterns by tracing them with dye and  measuring
quantifiable sump performance  parameters. Swirling in pump intakes  (promoting  cavitation)
is indicated by a  neutrally-pitched rotor in the suction pipe or within the casing  representing
the  pump. Flow into each pump  intake is induced by  a central suction system  and  controlled by
 alves and measured by individual elbow flow meters. Flow patterns are assessed visually.


                                          27

-------
a.  Critical Measurements with  Clear Water

       The pump intake basin performance parameters that were measured are as follows:
              1.  Individual pumps
                     Pre-rotation in pump suction intakes was  measured by a neutrally
                            pitched  rotor  (that  revolves  only  if the water is  swirling).
                     Vortex formation was visually observed with the aid of dye.
                     Bubbles entering pump were visually observed.
              2.  Pump intake basin
                     Stable hydraulic conditions were confirmed by  watching  dye patterns.
                     Velocity past pump intakes was measured by using the Nixon meter or
                            estimated by using dye tracers.
              3. Approach pipe
                     Dissipation  of high entrance velocities in the basin pool was recorded
                            using a Nixon meter.
                     Eddy generation was visually observed by using dye.
                     Bubble formation within the pipe was visually observed.
                     Persistence of bubbles in  the basin was visually observed.

       Criteria for allowable errors and the precision and accuracy of the instruments used are
given in Table 2. There is no single measurement that can be said to be the most critical one. All
are important for assessing the adequacy of the  basin. Flow rates were determined  by measuring
pressure differences across the flow meters with an  air/water  manometer.

                     TABLE 2. QUANTITATIVE CRITICAL MEASUREMENTS
Observation
Total model
flow
Individual
pump flow
Swirling in
pump intakes

Currents in
pipe and near
inlets
Instrument
Orifice meter

Elbow meter

Rotor meters
(Time average
basis)
Nixon meter
(Time average
basis)
Allowable
error
5%

6%

±10


5%


Precision
1-2%

3%

±0.1°


1%


Accuracy
1-2%

4%

±0.5°


3%


Detection
limit
2.5 mm differential
or 0.3 L/s
2.5 mm differential
or 0.3 L/s
0.1° (visual)


0.03 m/s


Vortices
Visual using dye and classifying into Type. See Figure 6.
       Visual  observations are particularly revealing. The use  of  dye (usually  potassium
permanganate) ejected from a  wand (long,  small tube) at  any desirable point in the wet well
allows easy detection of dead spots, unusual currents, eddying, or vortex formation all of which
indicate potential design problems.

       The standard orifice meter  is an aluminum plate machined  to ASME specifications and
calibrated volumetrically. The meter discs are so chosen that the Reynolds number at minimum
model flow is greater than 104.
                                           28

-------
       The elbow meters are calibrated as follows:

       •   Use the orifice meter as the calibration standard.

       •   For at  least five flow rates within the expected range for each elbow,  measure the
           head  differential, H,  across  the  elbow  and  note the flow rate indicated by the
           orifice  flow meter.

       •   Perform a log-log regression on the set of data pairs to get a calibration equation of
           the  form:
                            Q = aHb                                                   (8)

       •   Check  R2, and if less than 0.98,  repeat the calibration procedure.

       Swirling  in the pump intakes is determined  by  rotors made  of brass  with  neutrally-
pitched vanes. They are mounted on  a freely turning axis coincident with the pump  axis.  The
angle of deviation of the approach flow is computed as

                            6 = arctan (U|/Ua)                                        (9)

where 6  = angle of approach, U| = average  tangential speed of the blade tips, and Ua = average
axial  velocity.

       Flow velocities are  measured with a velocity probe manufactured by  Nixon Instruments
of Great Britain. The probe has a 1 cm diameter plastic rotor, the blades of which pass between
an  electrode  and  the probe  housing or ground,  thus  changing the underwater  electrical
resistance. This provides a current impulse  which can be  counted  over a specific time interval.
The resulting frequency  is compared to a calibration curve of frequency versus velocity. The
original calibration curve was developed in the ENSR  calibration tank. The probe  can be rotated
and positioned to  take readings at any point.  A digital counter and timer is used  to determine
average values of the current impulses from the velocity probe. Any time-averaged velocity, U,
is computed as
                                    i=n
                            U=  IUj/n                                               (10)
       Temporal fluctuations of velocities (turbulence)  can be  measured using the  Nixon
velocity probe  connected to a  strip  chart recorder.  The current impulse from the miniature
rotor velocity probe is  recorded on  the strip chart recorder for a  thirty second period. The
maximum temporal fluctuation (AlUj) for each thirty second period is measured and compared
to the time-averaged velocity.

       Vortices are classified in accordance with  Figure 6. When severe enough, they can  cause
cavitation and vibration which can quickly destroy a pump,  so they are indeed a  critical measure
of wet well performance.

b. Allowable Levels of Performance

      Allowable levels usually adopted for sump performance are:

       •   No   organized vortices  (greater than  or  equal  to Type  2) should  enter the  pump
          intakes from either a free water surface or a submerged boundary.


                                           29

-------
       •   Pre-rotation of the flow entering a pump intake should  be less than 3° to 5° from
           axial.

       •   There  should be no excessive turbulence  or instability of flow entering  the pump
           intakes.

       •   Velocities of  flow at the impeller entrance should be symmetrical with respect to  the
           impeller axis.

           Velocity measurements were not made at the model impeller entrance locations for
these studies because of the small  size of the model and prototype pumps.


c. Non-Critical Measurements and Independent Test Variables

       The geometry and dimensions of. the basin,  placement of pumps or pump intakes,
orientation  of pumps, and  water level (a variable measured with a staff gauge) are examples of
independent variables. The accuracy needed in a staff gauge is about 8 mm (about 25  mm in  the
prototype) whereas the accuracy obtainable with ease is 3 mm.

C. KIRKLAND MODEL

       The purpose  of  the tests  on Kirkland pump intake basin was  to establish  a relation
between model and prototype performance and to  have a basis for comparing other basins and
procedures.

a. Construction

       The model pump sump was constructed in  a basin with one acrylic wall to permit visual
inspection of currents and  sediment deposits. Details of the sump corresponded exactly with  the
plans in  Figure 1.

b. Normal Operation. V/S mode

       The slope  of the  influent sewer in the model was set at 2.0 percent to simulate  the actual
Kirkland  condition for  V/S pumps.

       Normal operation with a water  level between the invert and soffit of the influent pipe
occurs about 99.7 percent of the time.  Performance is excellent at Kirkland,  where the original
pumps are still  in service  after nearly 30 years of operation.

       Typical current patterns for full pumping  capacity  are shown  in Figure 17  for  two
different  duty pumps and  for a simulated prototype influent velocity  of about 1.5  m/s  (5 ft/s)
The arrows show  only directions and not velocity. This velocity produced a small amount of air
entrainment, but nearly all  of it escaped  to the surface by the time flow reached Pump  3.

       1. Test  of Pump 3--Pre-rotation  was  14.5°  clockwise,  a  value  that considerably
exceeded the  desirable  maximum of 5°. There were no organized surface vortices entering the
                                          30

-------
                                                                 ri3o us
                 South wall
   130 Us
   468 m3/h
   3.0 Mgal/d
                                                                     r-Swirl
Oy£
                                                              /
                 North wall
                                         Plan
                                                               -Type 5 vortex
                                                              —Type 3 vortex
                                        Profile

                                    a. Duty pump 3
                                                 130 Us
   130 Us
   468 m3/h
   3.0 Mgal/d
                   North  wall
                                                  -Type 2-3 vortex
                                         Plan
                                                         ,,—Type 2-4 vortex
                                                     vx—
                                                              -fir
                                Type 5 vortex—/


                                       'Profile

                                    b. Duty pump 2
                                       -Type 2-3 vortex
Figure 17. Typical  pump sump flow patterns during tests of Kirkland Pumping Station
           model in V/S (steady state) pumping mode.
                                        31

-------
pump, although swirling was observed at the water surface in the Northwest corner of the basin.
There was some submerged  swirling of flow from the West wall (opposite from the inlet) of the
basin. Well organized Type  3  submerged vortices intermittently formed and entered Pump 3
intake from the floor directly  beneath  the intake and from the North wall (which slopes at 45°)
directly opposite the intake.

       2.  Test of Pump 2-Flow followed a pattern similar to Test 1,  but when it encountered
the West wall, it curved toward  the North wall as well as down toward the floor and approached
Pump 2 from both directions.  Air entrained at the sump entrance was mostly eliminated  by
midway between Pumps 1 and  2. Eddies in the flow past the  intake occasionally accelerated to
vortex strength and pulled air into the intake. A constant vapor core Type 5 vortex was pulled
from  the sump floor and entered the intake.  Intermittent submerged  vortices  of Type 2 to 3
formed from the North wall opposite the intake and entered it, and a similar vortex occasionally
formed from mid-flow to the West and entered the intake.
       3. Test of Pumps 1 and 2--The flow pattern  was erratic and undefined. Air entrained at
the entrance entered Pump 1 but exhausted from the water surface prior to entering Pump 2. No
organized vortices  were observed at Pump  1  with  the exception of  some intermittent  air-
entraining surface vortices. A constant vapor core vortex formed from the floor under Pump 2
intake and entered  it. Intermittent submerged Type  2  to  3 vortices also  formed from the North
and South walls and in mid-flow from the West and entered the pump.

       4.  Test of Pumps 2 and 3-The flow pattern was similar to that for the test of Pump 2.
No surface vortices  were observed to form. Surface turbulence seemed to dissipate  them.  No  air
was entrained into the intakes from the water surface.  Vortices formed from the sump floor and
entered both of the  operating intakes. The strength of these varied from Type 1 to  2 at Pump 2
and 2 to 5 at Pump 3. An intermittent mid-flow vortex formed between Pumps 2 and 3.


       5. Conclusions-The currents in the model in variable speed mode were quite similar to
those that could  be seen and recorded by a video camera in the Kirkland pumping station both
during normal operation and during pump-down. In  the model tests, air-entraining and vapor-
core vortices would  lead to the conclusion that the design is only fair.  However, the frequency
and strength  of  air  entraining vortices may be  too  low  to  degrade  pump  performance
significantly.  At the water levels  and pumping  rates seen in  the  prototype during normal
operation, no vortex occurred, and only a small and slow circular motion of surface trash was
seen. Factors  that would significantly mitigate adverse  effects are length of suction piping and
the size of pumps.  Long suction piping reduces pre-rotation and dissipates  vortices. Pumps
with impellers closer  to the  intakes might not fare as  well.  One could speculate that the
performance would  be improved if the approach (inlet) pipe were in the same  vertical plane  as
the pump intakes and if there were a cone under Pump 3 intake and a vane under Pump 2 intake.
A  symmetrical cross-section  with both side walls sloping would  also seem beneficial.  Some
means of dissipating the high (~1  m/s = 3 ft/s) entrance velocity  might also reduce deleterious
currents. Air entrainment can be prevented by raising  the water level slightly.

c. Normal Operation. C/S mode

       Performance was evaluated  with clear water  simulating the fill and draw mode  of
operation that characterizes  C/S pump operation.  Acquisition of data  on currents and pre-
rotation was impractical during these "dynamic" experiments.
                                          32

-------
       1. Test of approach pipe-The slope of the influent pipe was set at 6 percent to give the
 same scaled model velocity that would correspond to the velocity in  the prototype pipe  partly
 full at 2  percent slope. The lower end of the pipe was transparent to allow the hydraulic jump
 and any  air  entrainment to be observed. The pipe was operated at maximum prototype flow, 232
 Us  (868 m3/h or  5.5  Mgal/d)  and at other,  lesser  flow rates in  a vain effort to  discover
 whether  problems would develop. None did.

       Water  at super-critical velocity  impacting the  impounded water in the partly-drowned
 pipe formed a rather weak jump at about 2 m (6 ft)  from the basin.  The Froude number was
 estimated to be 2.8-an oscillating jump according to Chow [7]. The jump  entrained a modest
 amount  of air bubbles that  rose to the soffit of the  pipe to form a series  of air  pockets. The
 largest air pocket  was about Dp/4 deep by 2  Dp long (where Dp is the inside diameter of the
 pipe), but it  persisted only a few seconds. Most  air pockets were less than Dp/8 deep and Dp long
 and they migrated downstream.  At the entrance of the basin, the air quickly rose to the surface.

       Model tests with air are  not directly applicable to prototypes  unless Froude, Reynolds,
 and Weber  numbers are  equal for model and  prototype. To achieve the proper model  fluid
 velocities, the approach pipe was inclined at 6 percent, whereas the  prototype gradient was 2
 percent.  Consequently, bubbles that would escape to a free water surface in the prototype were
 trapped due to the short length of free water surface in the model. The low model fluid velocities
 were able to drag  small air pockets downstream, but in the prototype, the velocities required to
 do so are very high. Nevertheless, the model results were encouraging, because it was apparent
 that size of  air pockets was self-limiting. Large air pockets tended to  move upstream, but they
 quickly broke up into small ones that were dragged into the basin.

     Approach pipes will collect solids while partially drowned, so it will be necessary to flush
 the pipes frequently. As it is possible  that impounded water may persist in the lower part of the
 pipe for  long intervals,  it.might be necessary  to program the  controller to pump the basin to
 LWL often to  allow the super-critical  velocities  to wash solids to the basin. An  alternative or
 supplementary scheme is to install a sluice gate in the upstream manhole for flushing the pipe.

     2.   Test of  Pump 2--Air bubbles created  by the hydraulic jump in  the approach pipe
 entered the basin in a steady stream. The jump moved downstream and entered the basin when the
 water depth  in the  pipe reached 0.06 Dp. When the water level dropped below the  invert by only
 0.23 Dp, air entrained by the free fall began entering  Pump 3. When the level dropped below the
 invert by 0.51 Dp,  air entrainment into Pump 2 became too great. These results prove that even
 small free falls (less than  0.3  m or 1  ft) cause air entrainment in pumps and should  not be
 allowed.  No  organized vortex activity was observed throughout the range of water levels.

     3.   Test of Pump 1-Little  air was entrained by the hydraulic jump when  the jump  was in
 the sewer. There was no "burping" of air slugs  into the wet well. A smooth transition occurred as
 the hydraulic jump came down the sewer and entered the wet well as the water level was lowered
 to about 0.2 Dp below the  invert.  Air entrained by  the free fall from the sewer to the water
 surface was  carried to Pump 1  and began to enter it when the water level reached about 0.5 Dp
 below the invert. No organized vortex activity was observed throughout the range of water levels.

d. Simulated Clean-Out

       Horizontal flow experiments at sub-critical velocities  at Montana State University (see
Section V.B.b) had  established  close similarity between the transport rates  of a bed of sand at
prototype velocity and a bed of carbon  at model velocity. The  carbon was Calgon GRC-20  6x16
                                           33

-------
granular activated carbon wet screened to pass the No. 6 sieve and be retained on the No. 16
sieve. So the model was loaded with carbon to the profile of the sludge measured at Kirkland.  See
Figure 2. Pump 3 was adjusted to represent full speed, and the inflow was adjusted to model a
flow rate of 66 L/s (240 m3/h or  1.5  Mgal/d),  the estimated  observed flow rate  at Kirkland.

       In the  upstream  half of the  model,  carbon  did  not  behave  like prototype sludge.
Turbulence  due to the waterfall  from the inlet suspended the carbon in a roiling motion  that
swept the upstream half of the wet well clean before the water depth fell to 1.27 D. Where no
turbulence existed, as in the downstream half of the wet well, carbon did behave like sludge.

       Near the end of the test, the water began to turn opaque due to the abrasion of the carbon
in the recirculation pump located  at the downstream end of the manifold into which the suction
intakes  discharged. Only about half of the carbon passing through the pump was reusable. To
counteract  this  problem  would require  separation of  the   carbon  before  pumping the
recirculating water. Any  separator would have to be both large and capable of sustaining a
vacuum--an expensive and somewhat impractical  vessel.

       Difficulty was experienced in  this first carbon  test in properly controlling the wet well
water level. In  the prototype, the water level falls from the pipe invert elevation  to the lowest
attainable level in about  1.5  minutes. In the model test, however, it took 5 times as long  to fall
a  comparable  height  because the  pump and siphons were  partially  blocked with carbon.
Ordinarily, a second test would have been made with modifications of the apparatus to prevent the
blockages. But  as carbon did  not model sludge  in turbulent regions and enough had been learned
about the behavior of both sludge  and  carbon in these and other  studies, water velocity alone was
sufficient for evaluating clean-out potential.

       The  carbon, however, had served its purpose. It focused attention on the  movement  of
sludge to a  downstream pump intake,  it emphasized the requirement for producing unobstructed
flow at  high (greater than 1.2 m/s or 4 ft/s)  velocity  along the bottom of the  trench during
cleaning (a  conclusion corroborated by  surveys  of prototype pumping stations  and hydraulic
tests of sand in the  laboratory), and  it produced the information needed for designing  the self-
cleaning aspects of pump  intake basins. To achieve velocities higher than 1.2 m/s would require
an ogee entrance to convert potential  head to energy head. All subsequent models incorporated
this feature.

D. TRAPEZOIDAL SUMPS FOR SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS

       Tests on the Kirkland model made it evident that: (a)  to reach high velocities along the
floor during  clean-out, the potential energy of the influent must  be preserved as kinetic energy
by flowing down an ogee entrance, and (b) symmetry would contribute stability to the currents.
Furthermore, submersible pumps  are usually C/S  units  (although V/S can be used), so the wet
well must have sufficient volume.  To prevent a cascade during  normal operation, the approach
pipe must discharge at LWL and it may slope upward at a severe  gradient to HWL. Storage in the
pipe augments storage in the basin.

       The addition of these features to the design resulted in greatly improved performance.

a.  First Model

      The  first model  tested  is shown in  Figure 18 wherein dimensions are converted to
prototype units  in both  SI (metric) and U.S. customary (feet and inches). The pumping  capacity
chosen for the  prototype was 75  L/s (270 m^/h or 1190 gal/min). As the model was built on a
linear scale ratio  of 1/4.0,  the corresponding model  flow  rate  was 2.34 L/s (0.083 ft3/s).
                                           34

-------
The large  triangular  flow splitters  (horizontal  fillets) between pumps  were added to  induce
uniform flow down both sides of the trench. The top of the ogee was a wide gently-curved
surface. At pump-down, the  influent spread laterally over the entire  surface, thereby causing
concern that solids would be deposited and remain there because of low currents in that region at
all water levels.
          B
                                                                              A-A
                                                             Note: Prototype dimensions shown
                                                                 Model/prototype scale ratio = 1/4
                            Section B-B
     Figure 18. Self-cleaning pump sump with triangular flow splitters for C/S submersible
              pumps.

       1. Single pump tests-ln general, operation of single pumps at the calculated station low
water level (LWL) demonstrated good approach flow conditions to the pumps with little adverse
phenomena other than anticipated floor vortices. All tests were performed at a prototype intake
to floor clearance of 100 mm (4 in) or D/2. Note  that all following dimensions are converted to
prototype values. Floor vortices would intermittently coalesce into well defined  dye cores but
free from vapor or  debris entrainment.

       During operation of  Pump 1,  the hydraulic jump characteristics of the  influent sewer
jet were  observed. At a water level of 125 mm (5 in) above the invert, the  velocities measured
were:  2.5 m/s (8.2 ft/s)  at the  exit of the influent pipe,  1.6 m/s (5.2 ft/s) at  the surface
immediately upstream  from  Pump 1, 0.7 m/s (2.2  ft/s)  near  mid depth upstream from Pump
1, and 0.1 m/s (0.4 ft/s)  near  the upstream base of Pump 1. Very little surface  current was
evident between Pumps  2  and  3. At  a water  level of 29 mm (1.15 in) above the invert,
however, the current descended the ogee and the velocity  immediately  upstream from Pump 1
                                           35

-------
was 0.15 m/s (0.5 ft/s) at the surface, 0.5 m/s (1.5 ft/s) at mid depth, and 1.2 m/s (4 ft/s)
near the floor.  Clearly,  the  hydraulic jump should be confined within  the  influent pipe  by
drowning the exit. At water levels less than the minimum recommended level of 125 mm (5  in)
above the influent sewer invert,  a hydraulic jump  was present immediately  upstream of the
Pump 1  casing which resulted in upwelling against  the motor and impact velocities of 1.5 m/s
(5.2 ft/s). Such velocities might be too great and if so, baffles may be required. A simple beam
spanning the width of the wet well would probably suffice. At water levels higher than 125 mm
(5  in) above  the invert, the jump moved upstream into the  sewer and the  upwelling was
eliminated. Consequently, LWL for normal operation was established at 150 mm (6 in) above
the sewer invert.

       Testing of Pump No. 2 revealed a potential weakness in the existing  horizontal flow
splitter design, which  was probably  responsible for the occasional  high (7.2°)  pre-rotation
measured during  this  test.  The  breaks  in  the flow splitters between pumps  permitted flow
expansion to exist immediately below the pump intake-an  unstable condition.  This condition
occasionally produced  an unwanted  circulation, encouraged by the guide rails  and discharge
piping situated along one side of the wet well. As Pump 2 was positioned at the  center of the wet
well, the approach flows consisted of a combination of floor level currents from  the Pump 3 side
and surface currents from the sewer. These currents sheer at the body of Pump 2 and cause
some  significant  eddies,  although they  were not  observed to enter the pump. Performance
otherwise was acceptable for this  condition.

       Operation of Pump No. 3 produced good surface and subsurface currents approaching the
pump. Eddies shed from the bodies of Pumps 1 and  2 and particularly  from the  pump guide rails
were subdued and did not  produce vortices entering  the  pump.  Pre-rotation at the pump
impeller was low  and attributable  to the symmetrical approach currents entering the pump. The
end wall fillet was particularly beneficial for good approach  flow, since  it redirected flow into
the intake and thus prevented the development of a  broad circulation current. At  normal LWL, a
surface  recirculation occurred between  Pump 1 and  the influent  sewer exit, but all  other
surface flow approached Pump 3  uniformly.

       2. Multiple pump tests-During tests of two duty pumps, the water level was held  at
500 mm (20 in) above the sewer invert. All three combination tests demonstrated similar flow
patterns  and were typically characterized by good performance. The floor vortices previously
mentioned were still present  and the eddies from guide rails and discharge piping  persisted.
Movement past the pump casings was uniform and did not demonstrate any potential problems.
Pre-rotation was low and surging of flow entering the pumps  was minimal.

       The most  prevalent concern identified during combination tests was due  to  low velocity
zones in the  upstream corners of  the wet wells where  grit and solids  would probably
accumulate. Velocities  in these areas were typically lower than 60 mm/s (0.2 ft/s) which  also
presents an opportunity for vortices to form  due to shear from the adjacent influent jet.

       3. Clean-out operation--Clean-out  operation was performed with   Pumps 2 and 3
operating because Pump 1 was not anticipated to contribute to  the removal of grit due  to air-
binding. When water levels approached scour depths, the flow splitter between Pumps 1  and 2
and the pump  discharge nozzle and piping presented significant disruptions in the  flow. These
obstacles caused hydraulic jumps and energy dissipation which slowed the flow significantly.
The channel velocities downstream of Pump 1  along the discharge piping side of the flow splitter
were  typically  lower than 0.6 m/s (2 ft/s) and reverse currents  were observed.

       4. Critique-Tests of this  configuration revealed  a few  weak  points. The flow splitters
positioned between pumps should be removed or modified. The presence of discharge  piping
                                          36

-------
elements in  the channel continued  to  block  the  flow  partially  and  cause upwelling. It was
thought  that  tapered wing walls would eliminate the  upstream  corners where grit  could
accumulate and vortices could form, and that these wing walls could improve clean-out  by
removing areas  of the sump which cannot be scoured by the influent jet.

       Some device,  such as a horizontal beam across the width of the sump, should be added to
break up the  influent jet at lower water levels. Otherwise,  excessive  loads may occur on the
motor casing of Pump 1. The beam should be positioned such that the lower edge is coincident
with the  sewer invert  with the upper edge reaching almost to the midpoint of the sewer.

b. Second Model

       Tapered wing  walls were installed to confine the flow and prevent deposition  and eddies. A
horizontal beam (velocity breaker) was  added to break up  the jet from the influent pipe. The
beam was  reasonably effective, but it would undoubtedly collect stringy material and be difficult
to clean. The massive triangular flow splitters  of Figure 18 were replaced by a full-length  steel
plate that,  as  shown  in Figure 19, fit closely around the pump volutes.  Unfortunately, this flow
splitter would, no doubt,  also collect stringy material.
                           Flygt 3201. 75 Us (270 m3/h = 1193 gal/min)
                            teel plate 150 mm (6") high

                             1/.52 m -I    1.95 m
                                                                     2.44 m •.
                                                   -Velocity  breaker
                                                   100 X 200 mm
                                                                   Section  A-A
                                                           Note: Prototype dimensions shown
                                                               Model/prototype scale ratio = 1/3.5
                          Section B-B
            Figure  19.  Plate-type flow splitters in submersible pump intake basin.

       This design distinctly improved normal operation,  but  clean-out was still poor.   Clean-
out tests  were performed for  this configuration  using fine sand  in the model instead of the
                                            37

-------
 granular  carbon previously  used. The  sand provided a  more realistic  representation of the
 movement of grit under the turbulent scouring action of the hydraulic  jump. The sand also
 provided  a more conservative estimate  of the potential for clean-out in  the prototype. After a
 stable water level was reached during pump-down and the hydraulic jump formed at the base of
 the  ogee, it took from  a half-minute to  1-1/2 minutes to remove sand between the ogee and
 Pump 2. But to scour sand from the middle of the floor between Pumps 2 and 3 required another
 3-1/2 minutes, and to remove all  but a thin  strip of sand along the edges of the floor required
 still  another 2 minutes. During  the next 2-1/2 minutes, Pump 3  continued  to operate without
 air binding,  although considerable air  entered  the "pump." The flow down both  sides was
 uniform, so the thin  flow splitter was effective and did not cause  unstable flow as the triangular
 flow splitter did.

 c. Third Model

        The third  model was similar to the second except that the floor was "excavated" to form a
 narrow trench as shown in Figure 20. Suction bells projecting  into the trench were added to the
 pumps. (For some prototype pumps, the suction bell could  be a standard flanged  flare.) The
 velocity breaker was fabricated  from pipe.
       B
-Flygt 3201. 75 Us (270 m3/h = 1193 gal/min)


               -Velocity breaker

                                B
                                                       J
i

J'-O'

..500 rr
1
-8"
                                                Velocity breaker
                                                200 mm 0-
                                                   500-mm (20")
                                                          pipe
                                                              Note: Prototype- dimensions shown

                                                              Model/prototype scale ratio = 1/4
                           Section B-B
                   Figure 20. Trench-type sump for submersible pumps.

       1.  Normal operation and clean-out-At normal operation, this model performed as well
as the second model  and was greatly  superior to either of the other  models for clean-out
operations. After pump-down was reached, the sand between the ogee and Pump 2 was scoured
                                           38

-------
out in  3/4 minutes. Only another 1/4 minute was required to clean the floor to Pump 3. From
start to finish, all sand was removed in 68 seconds, a great improvement over the performance
of the second model. Some of the  improvement  may  have been due to  better operational
procedure, but the  trench was obviously the main source.

       2. Mixers-One way to  clean a sump is to mix  the  contents thoroughly for a minute
before starting a pump and to continue mixing for two to five minutes depending on the size and
configuration of the basin. The basin  can thus be kept continuously cleaned. The concept of a
submersible motor driving a propeller was invented by  ITT Flygt  Corporation  and mixers are
now made by  several  manufacturers.

       A typical mixer for a pump  sump containing three pumps with a firm pumping capacity
of 150 Us (540 m3/h or 3.4 Mgal/d) would consist of a shroud about 0.7 m  long by 0.35 m
(28 in  x  14  in) in diameter enclosing a 1  to 2.2 kW (1.3 to 3 hp)  submersible motor driving a
225  mm (9-in) propeller. The entire device would weigh  about 50 kg (110 Ib) and can  easily
be placed and oriented in any position.

       A demonstration mixer 300 prototype mm (12 in) long with a 3-bladed propeller 200
mm  (8 in) in  diameter driven by an  encapsulated  d.c. motor was supplied by ITT Flygt and
installed at mid depth between Pumps 1 and 2, oriented at 45° downward toward Pump 2 intake.
The  current generated upwelled between Pump 3 and  the end wall. When the pumps were
started,  the sump was  cleaned while the water level  was kept at 500  mm  (20 in)  above the
invert. The cleaning was complete.

       Mixers have much to recommend  them.  They are effective, small, easily placed and
oriented as desired,  and  use  little  power. On the  other  hand, they add  machinery and
maintenance. It seems preferable to provide for cleaning by geometry where possible (as in new
pump intake basins) and to use mixers for retrofitting existing sumps.

       3.   Critique--Althouah it may be  possible to have  all intakes  at  the same critical
elevation at some  particular installation,  there is no  margin for error and  no assurance that
"rooster tails"  or standing waves cannot  interfere with the super-critical flow.  Therefore, it is
better to have all upstream pump intakes  well above the  critical depth or even  above the jump
and to have the last intake close  to the floor. A good way to meet this recommendation is to set all
pumps at the same elevation but lengthen the suction bell  for the last pump.

       The anti-rotation  baffle at the end  pump  might better be attached to the suction nozzle
and  designed for  minimum clearance  (say, 25  mm  or  less) at floor and  end wall. Stringy
material caught in this space would not interfere with the  pump.

       Floor vanes under upstream pump intakes and a  90° cone under the last pump intake
would reduce the pre-rotation. Floor vanes and cones must be installed with accuracy.

E. ROUND SUMPS FOR SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS

       Limited tests were made  on the round sump shown in Figure 21. Observations with dye
showed excellent flow patterns both for clean-out and for normal operation. The sharp nose of
the flow splitter downstream of the end of the influent pipe  was considered unacceptable because
it would quickly be fouled with stringy material.

       The design  was abandoned  because the  investigators thought that consulting engineers
would not accept a design so difficult to  form. The success of the Vallby and Clyde stations
rendered model tests of small, round, duplex pump sumps  unnecessary.
                                          39

-------
Flygt 3152.  30 L/s  (108 m3/h  = 477 gal/min>
                                                                      1.83:m
                                                         Note: Prototype dimensions shown
                                                             Model/prototype  scale  ratio = 1/2
                     Plan
                                                                  Section  A-A
                Figure 21. A round self-cleaning pump sump at ENSR.
                                           40

-------
                                        SECTION V

                                 MODEL STUDIES AT MSU

       Models of rectangular pump sump  trenches  and pump intakes were  studied in the
 Department of Civil Engineering  hydraulic laboratory at Montana  State  University by  Sanks,
 usually working alone  but sometimes assisted  by other university  personnel. Of the research
 completed, enough is  presented  herein  to  support the conclusions and recommendations of
 Section II.

 A. FACILITIES

       Although the small size of the facilities  would not  permit the use of a complete pump
 sump model,  they were adequate for studies of the trench, pump-down, and cleaning.  Flexibility
 was a distinct advantage denied in the  large ENSR or Fairbanks Morse models except at great
 expense.

 a. Flume

       The basic container was the flume depicted in Figure 22. The addition  of plywood sides at
 the headworks allowed  a model of the Kirkland sump (minus the sloping side  and widened upper
 section) to be built at  a linear scale ratio of 1/3.63. The  supply pipe valve was fitted with a
 large quadrant to enable quick adjustment of inflow.  Baffles for regulating  fluid depth or  a plate
 containing a vee-notch  weir could be inserted into slots at the downstream  end. The slope of the
 flume could be set anywhere between zero and three percent. Fluid  depth  was measured with a
 movable point gauge.

       Inserts to represent end walls, influent pipes, ogee ramps, and the like could  easily be
 clamped in place. The  sand trap underneath could entrap all  the solids removed at pump-down
 for reuse. The water supplied in  these  experiments  ranged  from 40 to 780 Us (144 to 2800
 m3/h or 0.9 to 17.8 Mgal/d) converted  to prototype  values.

 b. "Pumps" or Siphons

       Prototype pumps were represented by siphons. The principal siphon  is shown  in Figure
22. The suction bell,  made  by  ENSR,  is transparent  acrylic and fitted with  a  rotor for
 measuring pre-rotation  or swirl. A long pointer and a  large quadrant allowed the ball valve to
be set to deliver any prototype flow rate between 35 and  200 Us (130 to 720 m3/h or 560 to
3200 gal/min)  ±5 L/s. A somewhat more accurate setting could be  obtained with patience and
the use of the vee-notch weir and venturi meter. Near the end of the  project, a pilot tube was set
into the siphon and connected to  an air-water manometer  that was  inclined at 45° for greater
sensitivity  and convenience.

       The siphons were set in saddles that could be positioned anywhere along the flume, and
they were held in place by bungee cords. Exact  location was obtainable by  rotating the  siphon
about  its vertical axis  so that the  horizontal leg (made extra long) swept over  an arc that
permitted the  bell to be centered or even to touch either side of the flume. Floor clearances were
accurately set by means of wooden "feeler" blocks.


                                          41

-------
^
                iphon
                                -Head tank
B
                  Inlet
             itot tube


            Quadrant

            75-mm ball  valve

            Sand trap
                   Plywood	-f->

                   g Acrylic
                    sides
s
\
)
~r










\

. 672 mm %
2'-27/iK"


	

, 503
1 '-71




mm
3/1K"


— ~~C"

503 mm
r 1'-713/1R"


>




>
'

84
1

<
M

mm
/<"
                                                       Plan

f










•—Sluice gate
' , — Watertight
9^ S >

X)v /
^^c^


oint
E
m




CJ
-r- -







112 mm

,





«c:









-«-


>


D


E
E
CO
I CJ
^


       Section B-B
                                                    Section  A-A
             Figure 22. Model of trench of improved Kirkland pump intake basin.

c.  Critical Measurements

       Critical  measurements  are similar in most respects to those for  research at ENSR
described in Section III.B.a, namely:

              1.  Pump performance.
                     Pre-rotation.  Measured by a neutrally-pitched rotor  in  the  suction bell
                            over a time interval of 5 minutes or more.
                     Output flow rate. Measured by the difference between the venturi meter
                            and the vee-notch weir flows for  a single pump or  by  the  pilot
                            tube for multiple pumps and sometimes for a single pump.
                     Vortex formation. Visual observation of dye.
                     Bubbles entering  pump. Visual.
              2.  Movement of solid deposits.
                     Elapsed time for front face to move a measured distance or  for all but a
                            few particles to  be ejected.
              3.  Pump sump performance.
                     Vortices.
                     Stable hydraulic conditions as delineated by dye.
                     Velocity past pump intakes. Dye and calculations.
                     Scouring  time to eject deposits.
                     Hydraulic jump. Visual  observation and speed of transit.

       Criteria for accuracy and precision are given in Table 3.
                                           42

-------
                           TABLE 3. CRITICAL MEASUREMENTS AT MSU
Observation

Total flow
Overflow
Pump
Pump
Pre-rotation
Currents
Vortices
Currents
Scour
Device

Venturi
Vee-notch & point gauge
Venturi & vee-notch
Pitot
Rotor
Dye & stopwatch
Visual
v = Q/A
Stopwatch
Allowable
error
5%
3%a'b
6%
6%
10
20%
Classification:
10%
20%
Precision
error
0.2 - 1%
0.1 - 1%a
0.5 - 2%
1/2 - 1%
0.1°
15%
see Figure 6
2 - 3%
1%
Accuracy
error
1 - 2%
0.5 - 2%
1- 4%
5 - 6%
0.5°
20%

5 - 10%
5 - 20%
       aError is expressed as percentage of normal pump flow, not weir flow.
       bExcept for intake proximity, floor clearance, and current past  intakes. (See text.)

       A regression analysis of the gravimetric calibration of the venturi  meter  yielded an R2
of 0.99991, and  R2 was 0.99998 for a later volumetric calibration.  For the vee-notch weir,
R2 was 0.9988. Flow rate for a single pump in  steady-state  flow was obtained by setting the
inflow from 2 to 10 percent higher than the pump rate and measuring  the excess with the vee-
notch weir. So the error in weir discharge is best expressed as  a percentage of pump flow.

       High accuracy is not needed for observing currents, cleaning capability, and other facets
of performance. But to determine the effects of proximity  of intakes, floor clearance, cones
versus  flat floors,  only  tiny  differences in flow rates  are  expected,  and  very  precise
measurements  are desirable. As  the  most  appropriate instrumentation was unavailable, great
pains were taken to get the best from the facilities on  hand  and to plot curves of trends as the
variables were manipulated over a wide range.

B. SCOUR OF DEPOSITS

       At the beginning of the project, it was thought  necessary to use a fluid mix comparable
(in  physical characteristics)  at model velocities to raw wastewater (which contains scum,
stringy material, organics, and grit) at  prototype  velocities.  Each individual  component was
indeed successfully modeled with a paniculate substance that could be screened out to avoid
contaminating  the laboratory sump. Short strings were  adequate for  stringy material, floating
plastic beads  represented scum, saturated sawdust  was scoured and transported at model
velocities just  as organics at prototype velocities, and granular activated carbon was a good
substitute for grit. But when  the components were mixed, the behavior was abnormal. Mixed
deposits  were washed away too  quickly, so wastewater could not be modeled with  a mix of
different  kinds of particles.

       During the visits to the pumping stations described in Section III, scum  was found to be
easily removed when the area occupied by the scum was sufficiently confined near  a pump
intake. The narrow trench confined the width, and the  currents pushed floating material toward
the back wall, so during  pump-down the area occupied  by  scum was  small indeed. When the
submergence of the intake fell  to about 0.8 D, the Type 5  vortices formed quickly sucked the
scum into the pump. So  scum was no problem and neither was stringy material (rags and
paper). The real problem  was moving bottom deposits of sludge (organic material and grit) to
the pump inlets for discharge  into the force main.  Sludge could not be entirely removed from the
                                          43

-------
 Kirkland or Steilacoom pumping stations even with three successive "cleanings". So what was
 really  needed  was a  material that  would,  in successive pump-downs, result in deposits like
 those  in Figure 2. Thus, while there was no need for a model sewage, there was a need for a
 model  sludge.

        From model tests both at ENSR and MSU, granular activated carbon was suspended too
 easily  by turbulent currents to represent sludge.  Sand, however, was excellent and in model
 tests with sand, the profiles of deposits after a cleaning cycle were  satisfyingly similar to those
 shown for  the  Kirkland station in Figure 2. Consequently, a single-component substance, sand,
 was successfully used to  represent sludge. Absolute similarity between model and prototype
 cleansing was  not important. It was only necessary to compare the original  Kirkland model with
 improved successors to choose the best design.  The final  design was  more than  an order of
 magnitude better than  the Kirkland model.

 a. Grit Movement at Prototype Fluid  Velocities

       The plywood wall in the flume (Figure 22) was moved to make a channel 100 mm (4 in)
 wide. Tests with sand  at two depths, 50 and 100 mm (1  and 2 in), were made for deposits 1 to
 2.4 m  (3 to  8  ft) long at prototype fluid velocities ranging  from 0.6  to 1.4 m/s (2  to 4.6 ft/s).
 When  a flow of water was deflected into the channel, the sand front became thinner, then began
 to move slowly at first, then faster. The average rates of movement are shown in Figure 23. The
 size of particles  had  little effect on results.  Large (4.75 mm) particles moved  as readily as
 small (0.59 mm) ones.
                           Nominal (clean bed) water velocity,  m/s
                             12345
                           Nominal (clean bed) water velocity, ft/s
           Figure 23. Average rate of sand movement as a function of fluid velocity.

b. Scour in the Kirkland model

       To furnish a standard for  comparison,  the Kirkland  pump intake basin was modeled as
faithfully as possible. The unique shape at the entrance (see Figure 1) could not be modeled, but
the influent pipe was set to discharge water in a free cascade to splash off center on the flat floor
just as it does at  Kirkland.
                                           44

-------
       A uniform layer of sand  50 mm (2 in) deep  in prototype units completely covered the
flat floor. The basin was filled with water carefully so as not to disturb the sand. The influent
flow was set at 66 Us (237 m3/h or 1.5 Mgal/d), and Pump 3 was set at twice that amount, so
of course,  the water level was  rapidly  lowered  to its minimum depth--0.7 D. Because of the
formation of a Type 5 vortex beside the  pump intake, the pump  became self-regulating to match
the influent and the water level could not be lowered further.

       Although the trench was cleaned in the  vicinity of the cascade and directly under the
suction bell, only  8  percent of the sand was ejected. The nominal velocity of the water over the
sand bed was approximately 0.37 m/s  (1.2 ft/s). Such  a low velocity is, according  to  Figure
23, below the threshold for transporting sand.

       A second  test was made with the influent flow rate increased to 132 L/s (474 m^/h or 3
Mgal/d) to see how thoroughly the basin could be cleaned under the best operating conditions.
(See Section ll.C.d). Under these conditions, most of the sand was ejected in 2 minutes, but some
was left,  notably a bank of sand  in a stagnant area upstream from Pump 3. As shown in Figure
24, counterclockwise  currents between Pump 3  and  the end wall caused the stagnation. After
another 22 minutes, all but a few grains of sand were ejected.
                                -Stagnant area
Figure 24. Flow patterns around Intake 3 in replica of the original Kirkland  Pumping Station at
           pump-down.

       During normal operation, at a pump intake submergence of 2  D, vortices of Types 3 to 4
formed near the end wall. But if the wall was tilted to the vertical,  vortexing was less severe
and the severity continued to  decrease as the wall was moved closer to the suction bell.

c. Scour in the improved Kirkland  model

       It was  clear that,  by allowing the influent  to flow down  an  ogee ramp to convert the
potential energy of the water  to kinetic energy and  thereby  obtain  high  velocity,  the
effectiveness  of cleaning could be greatly improved. The ramp is  shown in Figure 22. Note that
the   vertical end wall is only D/4 from the  edge of the  suction bell, and the pump intake is
lowered to  D/4.

       At pump-down,  a hydraulic jump formed at the  toe  of the ogee, but  it progressed only
halfway to the end of the channel before becoming asymmetrical due to circulation behind the
pump intake  as shown in Figure  24.  Large, triangular flow  splitters like those in  Figure  18
were  installed  between  pump  intakes. They  were not effective,  nor was the  effectiveness
                                          45

-------
improved by installing  the triangular flow splitters up  the  ramp. Substituting high (0.7 D)
thin  plate flow splitters was no improvement either. The anti-rotation baffle shown in  Figure
25 between  the  pump intake  and the rear wall was completely effective, however,  so all
subsequent tests  were made with the  baffle and with the cone and vane under the bell in place.
Some swirling occurred without the vane but virtually  none with it. Neither cone nor vane was
installed in the Fairbanks  Morse pump sump where the anti-rotation baffle was sufficient by
itself to produce symmetrical approach flow. Swirling in the Fairbanks  Morse pump sump could
not,  however, be observed because no rotor meter was installed.
              Anti-rotation baffle
              required
                   Section B-B
            Figure 25. Details of Intake 3 of improved Kirkland Pumping Station.
       Pump-down with the same sand bed described in Section V.B.b (50 prototype mm deep)
and with an influent flow rate of 85 percent (112 Us, 403 m3/h, or 1800  gal/min) of Pump
3's capacity was superb. Within 25 seconds from the formation of  the hydraulic jump at the toe
of the ogee, the jump had progressed downstream to just in front  of Pump 3 and all sand was
ejected. Note that in tests of the Fairbanks Morse prototype, sand was ejected in 23 seconds. The
surface of  the  water at super-critical  velocity  was  well below the upstream intakes, so, of
course, upstream siphons lost prime. The downstream siphon did  not.  If removal of the last bit
of sand is  the criterion, the  improved model was nearly 60 times as effective as the  Kirkland
model!

       If the siphon valve setting was unchanged, the maximum capacity at pump-down was no
more than 85 percent of capacity at normal depth because of the reduced capacity due to  ingested
air. The effect of air on prototype pumps might be less or greater. But  the reserve of  scouring
capability with  this design is so great that the reduction in flow rate is not significant.

       Note that  there is no  difference in either cleaning procedure or  effectiveness  between
basins for V/S and C/S pumps.
                                          46

-------
C. OTHER OBJECTIVES

       With so much effectiveness having been developed for cleaning, the rest of the research
was devoted to various factors affecting hydraulic performance  during normal operation, such
as: allowable currents past pump intakes, proximity of other pump intakes,  optimum floor and
end wall clearances, fillets at end wall, effectiveness of straightening vanes in floor, bell, and
walls as well as the  general performance of currents.

a.  Floor Currents

       The effect of currents past a pump intake is an important factor in design and, indeed, in
choosing  whether to use pumps in tandem at all.  A number of experiments were  made  at
prototype  pump intake velocities of 1 and 1.5 m/s (3 and 5 ft/s) with currents of 0 to  2.7 m/s
(0 to 9 ft/s) past the intakes.  Performance  was evaluated on the basis of pump (siphon)
discharge aided by observation of dye patterns. But neither discharge nor dye is adequate  to
measure performance for column pumps with  impellers adjacent to the mouth of the suction
bells. Velocity distribution and fluctuations in the throat of the bell are required for an adequate
assessment of the effect of approach velocities on column pumps. Pump discharge is, however,
adequate for assessing the performance of a dry pit or self-priming pump because impellers are
far from intakes and are therefore  more affected  by piping configuration  than by moderate
irregularities in  the  intake.

       Currents past the pump were based on inflow  to the flume minus the pump discharge
divided  by the wetted cross-section  of the flume.  Plug flow (true velocity everywhere equals
average velocity) was obtained by  installing  a fine screen upstream from the pump so as  to
create a slight  head  loss and  produce uniform velocity. Visual observation  of dye proved
currents were indeed uniform. Pump discharge was  measured with the pilot tube. Water level
was controlled with baffles at the downstream end of the flume. Three successive measurements
per determination with a maximum reading deviation of 1 mm were required.

       A straight line fit of all results showed discharge decreased only 3.1 ± 1.5 percent per
m/s of current (0.95 ±. 0.45 percent per ft/s of current). As  currents  at pump  intakes  in
trenches are very low (see Sections III.F.g  and  IV.C.b), their  effect on pump discharge  is
negligible.

b. Floor Clearance for Pump Intakes

       Appropriate floor clearance is controversial. The cylindrical area of the waterway under
the bell  rim is  nDZ, where Z is the  floor  clearance. The area enclosed by the rim is  7tD2/4, so
the two  areas are equal when the floor clearance is D/4. Of course, the nominal velocity under
the rim  equals that across  the bell mouth, so  D/4 is the minimum that can  prevent turbulence
due  to expanding flow. Dicmas [4], acknowledging  that  D/2 is  a generally accepted standard
value, shows that relative to standard pump performance, the head loss at D/4 is 0.5 percent,
zero at D/3, a gain of 0.4 percent at 0.4 D or 0.5 D, and zero again at  1.0 D.

       Pump-down  tests with  Pump 3 intake  D/4, D/3, and D/2  from the floor were made  to
find the effect of floor clearance on  the hydraulic jump.  From the results in Table 4, the intake
must be no more than D/4 above the floor. If D/4 is less than  75 mm (3 in) a pit under the
intake is required to pass large solids.
                                           47

-------
       TABLE 4. BELL CLEARANCE VS. FLOW RATE FOR AN ADEQUATE HYDRAULIC JUMP

       Floor clearance             Required flow rate,         Notes
        of intake	% of pump capacity
D/4
D/3
D/2
50
73
98
Safe
Low safety factor
Unsafe
       As a check on the work reported by Dicmas, the effect of floor clearance on the discharge
capacity of pumps was tested. Again, differences were expected to be small, so the work was done
as carefully as described for the previous subsection. The pump was first tested  for a floor
clearance of D/2, then (without stopping, touching any valve,  or otherwise affecting the pump
discharge rate), the  pump was lowered to D/3, tested, then  lowered to D/4.  The results are
given in Table 5

              TABLE 5. PUMP CAPACITY VS. INTAKE FLOOR CLEARANCE
Floor
clearance

D/2
D/3
D/4
D/4 with cone
Pump intake velocity
1 m/s 1.5 m/s 2.1 m/s
3.3 ft/s 5 ft/s 7 ft/s
100% 100% 100%
98.4% 100.4% 100%
98.4% 100.7% 99.4%
100%
       The apparently anomalous results were rerun with the  same  findings. Note that the
precision of manometer readings could result in an error of 0.7 percent.

       At the same time, average  and maximum  angles of swirl or  rotation were obtained
without vanes either in the bell or on the floor. The average angle of  swirl  (using  number of
revolutions per  3 minute interval)  varied  from 0.4° to 2.0°.  The maximum  angle  (using
number of revolutions during the period while rotation  occurred) varied from 2.5° to 3.9°
except at 2.1  m/s intake velocity where it varied from 3.6° to 5.3°.

       In conclusion, there is no significant  disadvantage  in setting bells at D/4 from the floor,
especially if a cone is installed. On  the  other hand, a floor clearance  near to  D/4 for the last
pump is prerequisite for cleaning.

c.   Proximity  of Intakes

       A series  of  experiments was made to resolve the  uncertainty about the required or
optimum spacing of  pump intakes.  Again, the only measured parameter of performance was flow
rate, an insensitive indication  of performance for column pumps as described in Section V.C.a.
Flow from a middle  pump  in a group of  three was monitored as the outer pumps were  moved
closer. With no other siphons yet placed in the basin, the main siphon was set to discharge  131
L/s (472 m3/h or 2100 gal/min)  in prototype units as  a base of 100 percent. Thereafter,
nothing about that siphon was changed. The other two outside pumps  were  then added, each
operated with  its valve wide open and discharging 153 L/s (551  m^/h or 2430 gal/min).  Once
                                          48

-------
more, variations in flow rate were expected to be small and the work was done as carefully as
that for Section V.C.a.

       The downstream siphon created a current past the main pump that reduced the capacity
of the middle siphon to 98.6 percent.  From Table 6, there is  no  penalty due to proximity until
the clearance between suction bells is less than D/2.

              TABLE 6. PUMP CAPACITY AS A FUNCTION OF PROXIMITY

Description
Capacity, % of an isolated pump.
Capacity, % due only to velocity past intake.
Net effect of proximity, %.

4.5 D
98.6
98.6
0
Pump spacing.
3D 2D
98.9 98.4
98.6 98.6
0 0
c. - c.
1 .5 D 1 .0 D
Bells touch
98.4 97.4
98.6 98.6
0 1.2
       When the two outside pumps were turned off, they had no effect whatever on the middle
pump even when the bells were touching.

d. Pre-rotation

       Pre-rotation or swirling changes  the angle of attack on the leading edge of the  impeller
and  thereby  reduces efficiency. Swirling  is measured in terms of the angular deviation from
axial flow  at the boundary of the pipe by  Equation  9. The maximum permissible  angle  is
considered to be 5°. Swirling is not affected by vortices, because they can pass between the
blades of a stationary rotor. Swirling is diminished  by well-defined, uniform currents  past an
intake. It can be  increased by moving the suction bell off the center line of the trench,  and the
direction of rotation can  be reversed by moving the bell from side  to side. Swirling increases
with  intake velocity and becomes  severe at velocities  exceeding  1.5 m/s (5  ft/s). When
swirling does occur,   the rotor (Section IV.B.a)  stops, starts, and  spins slowly  or  rapidly,
sometimes too rapidly for counting  revolutions except by observing  a video at slow speed.
Because water  levels change, pumps go on and off,  suction bells might be slightly off-center,
and  floor currents can be low and unstable, the variety of conditions at  intakes is endless and
predictions of swirling and its intensity are chancy. Consequently, several means to reduce or
eliminate  pre-rotation were investigated.

ft Cones and Vanes

       Cones under suction bells are  unexcelled for eliminating  floor vortices. They create
smooth, stable streamlines, and decrease head loss. Two types were tested: one a 90° cone with a
sharp apex in the plane  of the suction  bell rim whereas the  other included the attached vane
shown in Figure 26  a. Although cones are highly recommended, particularly for floor clearances
of D/2 or  less,  they can  not be used under upstream  intakes in sumps designed for  cleaning
because of interference  with water flow at super-critical velocities.

       In  one test,  a simple cone reduced swirl from 10°  (with no other anti-rotation  device)
to about 1°-a  90 percent  reduction. Adding a small vane  (Figure 26  a) coaxially  with the
trench was nearly as effective as adding a much  larger vane (not shown) and reduced the
occurrence of swirling in another test  from  41  percent of the  time for the cone only to  14
percent of the  time  for  the cone  with  the small  vane. The large  vane shown in Figure  25
essentially eliminated all swirling  at the last intake.  The  vane of Figure 26 a would  be


                                           49

-------
unsuitable for wastewater because stringy material would collect on the leading edge.  Stringy
material  would not collect on the leading  edge of the vane in Figure 25, because the edge  is
almost parallel with the streamlines.
                               Cone
                                  -Vane coaxial with trench
                                                                       •Vane, 12 mm min ss
                                                            Section B-B
                  Section B-B
                                                                    ^ 100 mm
                                          Flare
                                          (bell)
                                  -Vane optional
                                                                            -Vane, 4 @ 90°
                              •12 mm min ss
                     •1? •>'
                  Section A-A
                                                                       12 mm min ss
Section A-A
        a. Cone and floor vane for clean water           b. Floor and bell vanes for raw sewage

                               Figure 26. Anti-swirl devices.

       Thin (e.g.,  12 mm  or 1/2 in)  floor vanes (Figure 26  b)  oriented  coaxially  with the
trench do not interfere  with flow at super-critical velocity,  are  effective,  and are therefore
recommended at  upstream  suction intakes.  For example, the swirling in a  suction bell D/4
above the  floor and  with an intake prototype velocity of 1  m/s (3.3 ft/s)  is shown in Table 7.
From these results, vanes reduce swirling by about 60 percent with or without floor currents.

              TABLE 7. EFFECT OF VANES AND FLOOR CURRENTS ON SWIRLING
Conditions
Angle
Swirl
Swirl
Swirl
of swirl
reduction
reduction
reduction
due
due
due
vane
current
vane &
No
No vane
90

current
floor current
Vane present
3.3°
63%


Floor current
No vane
1.7°
81%

- 0.48 m/s M.6
Vane present
0.7°
59%
79%
92%
fl/8)




                                            50

-------
       Vanes also reduce floor vortices although they do not eliminate them as do cones. Vanes
 must be designed to pass rags and  other stringy materials. Edges sloping at 45° are almost
 parallel with  flow when the pump is operating, and  if the edges are smooth and rounded, the
 intake current will wash stringy material  away.

       Because floor vanes do not entirely  eliminate swirling,  the  bell vanes of Figure 26  b
 were tried.  The combination of  floor vanes and bell vanes virtually eliminated pre-rotation,
 both  in frequency and angle of swirl during the rare  times when the  rotor was turning. Of
 course, the bell vanes must allow rags and other solids to pass without hindrance, so edges must
 be smooth and rounded and the passageway must allow a solid 75 mm (3 in) in diameter to pass.
 Bells with vanes might be costly because of the limited numbers needed and special set-ups
 required for welding  or special patterns for casting, but they are  very effective and may well be
 worth the added expense.

       Both vanes and cones must be anchored  in place  by some  means that leaves no other
 protrusions   above  the  floor  to  interfere with super-critical  currents. For  example, two
 stainless steel bolts 12 mm (1/2 in) or larger should be more than adequate to anchor a vane or
 cone in place. The tops of the bolts should be below floor level.

 f. End Wall Clearance and Fillets

       Vortices tend to form downstream from obstructions such as column  pumps or vertical
 suction pipes. Currents past the obstructions wash  the vortices away while they are  still just
 swirls and before they can  become organized. If there is no current  past the pump as occurs at
 the last pump, the vortices increase in intensity. Reducing the area  downstream from the pump
 inhibits vortices. For example, severe vortices occurred  in the Kirkland model between  the end
 wall and the  last pump. The vortices were reduced by making the end wall vertical and moving
 it closer to the pump. The  best distance is the  least distance,  but D/4 is, perhaps, the best
 practical clearance. Vortices can also be reduced or eliminated by increasing the submergence of
 the intake.

       Another method for reducing the area downstream  from an intake is to add fillets in the
 corners. There seems to be no way to quantify the benefit, but the  fillets are indeed somewhat
 beneficial.

 g. Optimum Trench Width and Side Wall Vortex Suppression

       Tests for optimum trench width were made  by  using (as a worst case) an upstream
 intake  set D/2 above the floor. There was no downstream pumping,  so water downstream of the
 intake  was practically stagnant. Intermittent Type  2 vortices tended  to form at walls beside the
 pump intakes when the trench width was 2.5 D. The severity of the vortices  increased with a
 reduction of trench width. At a width of 2 D, steady vortices of Type 2 or 3 were seen,  and the
 severity was, perhaps, somewhat less than  half that of the  strong Type 3 vortex at the flat floor.
 But even at a trench width  of 1.13 D, the wall vortex did not become as severe as the floor
vortex. The  test was not definitive for establishing  limits on  trench  width, but from  practical
considerations,  little  is gained by using a width much less than  2 D, whereas more than 2 D
would tend to interfere with cleaning. Widths of 1.875 to 2 D have been used with satisfaction in
Seattle Metro pumping stations, and a width of 2 D is  often illustrated in the literature [1, 2,
8].

       Trials of several types of vortex suppressors  were  made  in  a trench 2 D wide with the
suction bell  0.5 D above a  flat floor.  The types included  cones, long vortex suppressors with
triangular  cross-sections, and triangular vanes. All were of some benefit,  but the best was the
                                           51

-------
 long, horizontal vortex suppressor shown in  Figure 27. Judging on the basis of dye injection,
 this device reduced the severity of the vortices by at least 50 percent.
             'ortex suppressor-
           1/2-in 304L ss plate
                                                                                     0-
                                                                                     0'
                                                                                     •d.
                                                                                     '
                    Plan
                                                            Section A-A
                          Figure  27. Vortex suppressor for walls.

       A Type 3 vortex has only a little effect on a pump and can be safely ignored. But even a
vortex of Type 2 in a small model  can become a vapor-entraining Type 4 or 5 vortex in a large
model or prototype, so it  would  be wise to  install vortex suppressors in  walls adjacent to
suction  bells of 400-mm (16-in) diameter or more.

h. Model Tests of the Fairbanks Morse Pump Intake Basin

       The  improved  Kirkland  model was rebuilt to represent (at a  linear  scale  ratio of
1/4.33) the experimental pump basin at the Fairbanks Morse Corporation plant  in Kansas City
(Section III.F.d) so that the  shock wave or "rooster tail" could be investigated. A shock wave did
occur but it was insignificant and would hardly have been  noticed before  tests of the prototype
were  made. It seems evident that the shock wave was caused by the lower velocity along the side
of the trench as compared to the  middle. If the sides of the trench were very smooth compared to
the  bottom,  the shock wave might not form at all. Until there is a reliable means for designing
such a  unique construction and  predicting its performance, it seems prudent to set upstream
intakes at a substantial floor clearance (no less  than D/2) so as to guard against interference
from shock waves.

       Flow down  the ogee ramp was smooth and the water surface downstream was flat. The
flow rate converted to prototype units was 49.7 Us  (179  m^/h or 1.13 Mgal/d). The  average
depth of flow at the foot of the  ogee was, in prototype  units,  30  mm (0.10 ft),  so the  Froude
number was 5.7-less  than that found in the  Fairbanks Morse sump because  of the greater
friction of a model surface as compared to a prototype surface.
                                           52

-------
i.  General Current Patterns

       Many studies of current patterns were recorded, but because only the trench and not the
portion above the trench  was modeled, the current patterns in Figure 16 is more representative
of prototypes. In general, however, the strong  surface currents emerging from the influent pipe
diminished all along the basin to the end wall, dived,  and the resulting weaker currents moved
upstream  just above the  trench. So if surface currents are less than  1 m/s (3 ft/s) at the first
pump, currents  at pump intakes are sure to be very much less and probably insignificant.

j. Conclusions

       The research results prove that a wet well with pumps in tandem and with  intakes in a
narrow trench has significant advantages and  no significant disadvantages. The wet  wells are
small and  therefore less expensive than many common types. Cascades and air entrainment are
eliminated and  in sewage pumping, odors are less apt to be swept into the atmosphere. The
hydraulic  environment for  the  intakes  is excellent. Suppositions of interference caused  by
adjacent intakes for dry pit pumps are found to  be without  substance.
                                          53

-------
                                       SECTION VI

                                   RECOMMENDATIONS
A. APPROACH PIPE
       The  125-mm (5-in) sloping approach (influent) pipe  was tested at only two gradients,
2  and 6 percent and at limited  flow rates. The hydraulic jump was never  strong enough  to
entrain large volumes of  air.  Instead, the jump was relatively weak and some air could escape
up the pipe. It is imperative  to ensure that air pockets can never block the  pipe under any
conditions. Until full-scale test are made, designers should  not exceed the  conservative flow
rates given in Table 1.

       If the approach pipe is larger than the upstream  pipe, the construction of Figure 28 is
recommended.
                     Max WS at start of cycle
       Figure 28. Recommended manhole detail at junction of sewer and approach pipes.

B. SIPHONS VS. PUMPS

       The effect of velocity and stray currents has been studied only with siphons--not with
real pumps, and real  pumps  might be affected more than  model studies reveal. Pumps are
characterized by type number or specific speed by the equation
                           ns =
(11)
where  customarily in  Europe, ns is type number,  n  is rotation  in rev/min, Q is discharge in
m3/s, and H  is head in m. Customarily  in the U. S., ns is specific speed, n is rev/min, Q is
                                          54

-------
 gal/min, and  H is  ft.  Type numbers greater than 135 (specific  speeds greater than 7000)
 indicate impellers  that are very sensitive  to  irregularities in approach velocities. Also,  as
 pumps  of any type get larger, their sensitivity to abnormal fluid approach velocities increases.
 Furthermore,  large pumps are generally less robust  than  smaller ones, and a  condition that
 might not harm a small pump might destroy a large one in a few years.

        Research aimed at analyzing intake  throat velocities for pumps in different locations in
 the trench,  at different spacings,  at a  wide range of water levels and influent flow rates is
 needed to establish suitable design  parameters for column pumps, particularly those of large
 size.

 C. CURRENTS IN PUMP INTAKE BASINS

       Although currents near  pump intakes  were  found  to  be  very  low,  only a few
 measurements were made and only a few conditions were  studied. A fruitful subject for further
 research is  to determine  the magnitude of  such currents  with respect to inflow, water level,
 floor clearance, pumps operating, distribution of velocities in  the  throats of the  intakes, and
 dimensions  of the  basin-especially  length  and cross-sectional  area  of the basin  above the
 trench and the effect of width and depth of the trench. For example,  small changes in water level
 resulted in quite different current patterns. Unless currents are very low under a wide range of
 dimensions and  water levels or unless the currents and their effects can be forecast, pumps for
 trench-type  sumps may have  to be limited to those  relatively insensitive to currents past
 intakes. Otherwise, model tests for specific  basins and  pumps will be  needed to ensure good
 performance.

 D. FROUDE NUMBERS DURING CLEANING

       The limits of acceptable Froude numbers at the base of the ogee and at the last pump
 should be delineated. The Froude number at the  last pump should probably be  between about 3.5
 and  8.  Froude numbers much less  than  3.5 signify  a weak  jump insufficiently effective for
 moving  sand,  whereas 8 indicates a strong  jump that may entrain too much air. As hydraulic
jumps get stronger, more air is entrained, and the Froude number that  results in  enough air to
cause a pump  to air bind is unknown as yet.

 E. CALCULATING FROUDE NUMBERS

       Froude numbers obtained by ignoring head loss due to friction have unacceptable errors
because friction  is very high when velocities exceed  3  m/s (10 ft/s). To include friction head
loss involves dividing the length of pipe or channel into segments and analyzing each in turn by
solving  Bernoulli's equation.
v-|
                                2/2g = Z2 + h2 + hf + V22/2g                        (12)
in  conjunction with, for  example, Manning's equation (Equation  4) and the equation for  form
resistance (such as the transition from a round pipe to a rectangular channel)

                    hf = cv2/2g                                                    (13)

wherein z is elevation from a datum plane, h is depth of water, v is velocity, g  is acceleration
due to gravity,  Subscripts 1  and 2 refer to the beginning and end respectively of a short length,
L,  of  pipe or channel,  hf  is friction head  loss,  and c is a coefficient of head loss. Accuracy
increases with the number of segments, but five or six should be  sufficient.
                                          55

-------
       The equations are  implicit which means values of "v" or "h" must be  estimated for the
beginning and end of successive segments and the equations checked for  equality, then  re-
calculated if the error is  significant. It  is a simple--but an  excruciatingly tedious-procedure
if done by hand. The computer, however, can eliminate the tedium. For example, MathCAD is one
of several computer  programs that allow the use of a template to solve a  particular kind of
problem. Templates can be constructed in about half a day or less by an expert, but even this
amount of time may  repel designers, so templates for the various popular computer programs
should be made universally available.

F. MISCELLANEOUS

       A number of questions remain to be fully resolved, such as:

       •   What   parameters  of  entrance  velocity, length  of basin,  wetted cross-sectional
          dimensions,  and  depth below   the  invert of the influent conduit are required to
          suppress undesirable floor  currents?

          What  are  the velocity  patterns in  the throats  of the suction bells for all  intakes?
          What are the  largest pumps of each type that can be used with confidence and without
          model tests?

          Can any reasonable construction feature reduce  or control shock  waves (rooster
          tails) downstream from the ogee  ramp at pump-down?

          How will a trench-type pump intake  basin perform if the entrance is normal to the
          trench? And  what  are the  critical  parameters such as trench width, depth below
          influent conduit invert,  approach  velocity, and  (perhaps) baffles?

          Can conventional pump intake basins be improved by setting the pump intakes in
          trenches (or depressions of other shapes)?

       •   Will full scale tests  alter the hydraulic  limitations imposed by  Table  1  on the
          approach pipeline for preventing  surging or any other undesirable  flow conditions?

       •   Can the vane (attached to  the bell) at the last pump intake (Figure 26 a) be safely
          omitted  for all  types of pumps? For what kinds  and sizes of  pumps can vortex
          suppressors be  safely omitted?

       •   Are there  combinations  of geometry,  size, and flow   rate  that will guarantee
          successful   performance  in  generic  trench-type  pumping stations  for dry pit,
          submersible, and column pumps of any reasonable size?
                                          56

-------
                                     SECTION VII

                                     REFERENCES

1.     Hydraulic Institute. Hydraulic Institute Standards for Centrifugal, Rotary &
       Reciprocating Pumps,  14th Ed., Parsippany,  NJ, 1983.

2.     Prosser,  M.J.  "The  hydraulic  design  of pump  sumps  and  intakes,"  British
       Hydromechanics Research Association, Cranfield, Bedford, United Kingdom MK43 OAJ,
       July,  1977.

3.     Sanks, R.L. et al. Pumping Station Design, Butterworth Heinemann,  Newton, MA, 1989.

4.     Dicmas, J.L.  Vertical Turbine, Mixed Flow, & Propeller Pumps. McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
       New York, NY,  1987.

5.     Wisner,  P.E., F.H. Mohsen,  and N. Kouwen. "Removal of  air from water lines by
       hydraulic means,"  Journal  of  the  Hydraulics  Division, American  Society of  Civil
       Engineers, HY2:243-257, New Yoork, NY, February 1975.

6.     Wheeler,  W.  Partfull®.  For a  free  copy of this computer program  with instructions,
       send a formatted 1.4 MB, 3-1/2-in diskette and a stamped self-addressed mailer to 683
       Limekiln  Road, Doylestown, PA  18906-2335.

7.     Chow, V.T.  Open  Channel  Hydraulics,  Classic Textbook Reissue,  Mc-Graw-Hill
       Publishing Company, New York, NY, c. 1959.

8.     Knauss, Y. Swirling Flow Problems at Intakes, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 1987.
                                         57

-------