EPA-670/2-73-024
                                                  July  1973
     INSTREAM AERATION TO CONTROL
 DISSOLVED SULFIDES IN SANITARY  SEWERS
   OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MONITORING
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

-------
                                            EPA-670/2-73-024
                                                  July 1973
                                                     f  ' /
                                                     ''  -
     INSTREAM AERATION TO CONTROL
 DISSOLVED SULFIDES IN SANITARY SEWERS
                   by

             R. L. Condon, Jr.
             R. A. Cooper, Jr.
            A. J. Englande, Jr.
       Grant No. WPRD 121-01-68
           Project 11010 ELP
       Program Element 1-B2033
            Project Officer

            John N. English
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Environmental  Research Center
        Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
             Prepared for

   OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MONITORING
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

-------
                       ABSTRACT
Field  studies were conducted  employing full scale  proto-
types  of  four aeration devices  installed  in a  sanitary
sewage  col lection system.   The  devices used included an
in-I ine Venturi  aspirator,  an i n-I i nc Vortex-Shear aspira-
tor, an air-I ift pump, and  Venturi  aspirated U-tubes.   Only
the  Venturi  aspirated U-tubes proved to be; satisfactory
under  the  conditions of this  study.   The U-tube  installed
on the  end of a sewage force  main  reduced dissolved su I -
fides,  at  a  samp I ing station  1500  ft downstream,  from
.30 mg/l to . 02 m9/l (equivalent  to  a  12 min detention)'
Additionally,  the U-tube v i rt ua I I y  e I i m i nated  the  st.r i pp -
ing  of  HnS in the discharge manhole  where a severe odor
problem and  corrosive attack  had  existed.  Oxygen  demand
in the  force  main immediately upstream of the  U-tube aver-
aged 2.5  mg/l .   Oxygen transfer in  the U-tube  averaged
5.1  mg/l  with residual dissolved  oxygen  in the  efHuent
averaging  2.6 mg/l.

As  instal led,  and with oxygen transfer averaging  5.1  nig/ I,
no modification of existing pumps  was required.   Higher
transfer  concentrations approaching  7 mg/l were obtained
with Venturi  aspiration, but  resulted in  increased pump
head requirements.  Transfer  concentrations up  to  8 my/'!
were obtained with forced air injection,  but did  not
appear  to  justify the added cost  of  blowers and greatly
increased  pump head requirements.

No maintenance was required on  either of the two  Venturi
aspirated  U-tubes during two  years  of continuous  operation
in this d em on s t r at ion.

This report  was submitted  in  fuIfiIIment of Project Number
I 1010  ELP,  Grant Number WPRD  121-01-68,  under  the  sponsor-
ship of the  Environmental Protection Agency by  the Depart-
ment of Sanitation,  Jefferson Parish,  Louisiana,  600 He Iois
Street, Metairie,  Louisiana 70005.   The Project Director
was  Ray L.  Condon,  Jr.
                           i i

-------
                      CONTENTS


Sect i on                                               Page

I       Cone I us i ons                                    I

II      Recommendations                                3

III     Introduction                                   5

IV      Description of the Project                     9

          Selection of Test Stations                   9
          Initial Background Data                      14
          Aerator Design and Installation              15
          Test Procedures                              30

V       Results                                        35

          Test Stations                                35
          Rainfall and Temperature Background          35
          Analytical Testing                           37
          Airl ift Aerator                              39
          U-tube Evaluation                            44
          Venturi and Ashbrook Aerators                66

VI      Summary of Results                             72

VII     References                                     79

VIII    Appendices                                     80
                          i i

-------
                        FIGURES

F i gure No.                                             Page

  I      Plan of  Demonstration System                   10

 2      Demonstration  System Schematic                 II

 3      Details  of  Venturi  Aspirators                  17

 4      Plan of  ll-tube at  Station 5                    18

 5      Elevation of U-tube at  Station 5               19

 6      Plan of  U-Tube at  Station 7                    20

 7      Elevation of ll-tube at  Station 7               2!

 8      Original U-tube Entrance  Elbow and
        Interim  Modification                            23

 9      Final Modification to U-tube
        Entrance Elbow                                 24

10      Plan of  Station 31                              26

I  I      Deta i Is  of  A i rI i ft Aerator                     27

12      Log Fractions  of Dissolved Sulfides            32

13      I nstream and Air Temperatures                  3*:

14      Rainfall and Resulting  Flows                   35

15      Dissolved Oxygen at Station I                   40

16      Dissolved Sulfides at Station I                 A  |

17      Dissolved Sulfides at Station I                 42

18      BOD5 and COD at  Station I                       43

19      Dissolved Oxygen at Station 13                 45

20      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station 13               45
                           i v

-------
F i gure No.                                             Page




2l       Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  13                47




22      BOD5 and COD at Station  13                      48




23      Dissolved Oxygen at Station  6                   50




24      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  6                 51




25      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  6                 52




26      BOD5 and COD at Station  6                       53




27      Dissolved Oxygen at Station  40                 60




28      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  40                51




29      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  40                62




30      BOD5 and COD at Station  40                      63




31       Dissolved Oxygen at Station  7A                 55




32      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  7A                67




33      Dissolved Sulfides  at Station  7A                68




34      BOD5 and COD at Station  7A                      69

-------
                        TABLES


Table No.                                              Page

I        D.O. and  I.O.D.  at  Stations  5A and 5B          55

2       Aspiration 02  Transfer  and Headless
        at Stat ion 5                                    5^

3       D.O. and Dissolved  Sulfides  at
        Stations 5A and  5B                              5g

4       D.O. and  I.O.D.  at  Stations  7A and 7B          70

5       Average D.O. and  Sulfides  before and
        after Aeration  for  a I I  Stations                73

6       Average BODr and  COD before  and after
        Aeration for al I  Stations                       7A

-------
                  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The  invaluable contributions  of Mr.  C.  L,  Swanson,  E.P.A.,
Project Officer, over the period  when  this project  was
initiated and through the major portion  of the  field work
is grateful ly acknowledged.   The  continuing excel lent co-
operation and assistance rendered by succeeding Project
Officers, Mr. Gerald Stern and Mr.  John  N. Engl ish,  is
also sincerely appreciated.

de Laureal  Engineers,  Inc. supervisory  personnel  involved
in this demonstration were:

          Mr. R. A. Cooper, Jr.,  Project Director
          Mr. A. J. Englande, Test  Supervisor
          Mr. D. P. Boudreaux, Computer  Programmer
          Mr. H. A. Schomaker, Construction Supervisor
          Mr. J. Gordon Hebert, Mechanical  Engineer

The fuI I  cooperation of al I personnel  of the Jefferson
Parish Department of Sanitation  is  gratefully  acknowledged
with special thanks to:

          Mr. Ray L. Condon,  Jr.,  Director
          Mr. Walter Frey
          Mr. Rene Schexnayder
          Mrs. Mazetta Diedrich
          Mr . Rene Chop i n

Finally,  the cooperation of Dr. Rex  C.  Mitchell  and  Mr.
Joe Quag I ino of Rocketdyne, who worked  concurrently  in
the initial design characterization  and  subsequent  re-
evaluation of the U-tubes after modification under  a
separate contract with the Environmental  Protection  Agency
is most  sincerely appreciated.
                          v i

-------
                       SECTION  I

                      CONCLUSIONS
Dissolved suI fides  above  O.I  PPM caused serious odor prob-
lems and costly  corrosive attack to sewers and manhole
structures.   Turbulence  from  force main discharges and
high gravity  drops  of  sewage  containing dissolved su I fides
in concentrations of a few hundredths of a milligram per
I  iter resulted  in totally unacceptable levels of H^S in the
sewer atmosphere.

The Venturi  aspirated  U-tube,  as designed and installed on
the discharge end of two  force mains, has demonstrated the
ability to eliminate the  turbulence characteristic of  con-
ventional force  main discharges and to transfer sufficient
oxygen to effectively  oxidize the dissolved sulfides in the
sewage stream.   For dissolved sulfide concentrations up to
2 PPM the U-tube was effective without modification of pumps
in existing  I ift stations.  Experience indicated that  if dis-
solved sulfides  significantly above 2 PPM are encountered
or if physical constraints are imposed on the U-tube design
which I imit the  depth  of  the  U-tube to less than 40 ft or
the dimension from  the center! ine of the Venturi  to the U-
tube discharge to  less than 6 ft, an increase in pumping
head of  IQ% to 5®%  would  be necessary.  Of extreme signifi-
cance to municipal ities  is the fact that the U-tubes in
this demonstration  required no maintenance in two years and
did not burden the  sewer  system with additional  mechanical
or electrical devices  that usually require considerable
ma i ntenance.

The air-lift  aerator  in this  demonstration, while quite
efficient in transferring oxygen to effect the oxidation, of
sulfides downstream, proved unacceptable because of excess-
ive turbulence and  consequent stripping of h^S at the  in-
stallation.  The in-line  Venturi  aspirator and Vortex-Shear
aerator  installed  in a force  main did not achieve the same
amount of oxygen transfer as  obtained with the U-tube, and
did not el iminate the  turbulence at the force main dis-
charge.   The stripping of HoS at the force main discharge
makes the in-I ine configurations unacceptable.

-------
In summary, the Venturi aspirated ll-tubes  in  this  demon-
stration proved highly effective and  extremely  economical
in the control of dissolved sulfides  at  and downstream of
force main discharges and merits serious consideration
whenever odor and corrosive attack constitute a problem in
sanitary sewage systems.

-------
                      SECTION  II

                    RECOMMENDATIONS
 It  is recommended  that,  in  existing systems,  the app I ica-
tion of a Venturi  aspirated ll-tube be considered at the
discharge of  any force  main that has a flow of 300 GPM or
more and which causes or  contributes to odor  and corrosion
problems.   It  is further  recommended that,  in the cases of
new systems,  the application of Venturi aspirated U-tubes
to force main discharges  be evaluated against the injec-
tion of air  into force  mains that have to be  specifically
designed for  this  appI i cat ion.

 If a fairly constant  flow,  upwards of 500 GPM, and a dif-
ferential head  in  the range of  6 to 8 ft are  available the
Venturi aspirated  ll-tube  can be app I i ed in gravity sewers,
at points other than  at force main discharges.  However,
variable flow and  head  requirements impose serious design
constra i nts.

From observations  in  this demonstration involving U-tubes
designed by Rocketdyne  on the basis of techniques deve-
loped and reported under  the title "U-tube Aeration" (3)
 it  is recommended  that  actual system losses and flows be
accurately determined  in  all  existing systems and that the
substitution  of  larger  diameter pump impel!ers and in-
creased motor HP be weighed against design constraints that
might otherwise be imposed.   Consideration should be given
to  increasing wet  well  volume to extend actual pumping time
In ex i st i ng systems this  shouId i ncIude the poss i b i I i ty of
installing dual wet wells.   The pumping time  should be of
maximum duration (at  least  ten  minutes) consistant with an
acceptable detention time of one or two hours in the wet
we I I at minimum flow.

Finally, since the Venturi  aspirated U-tube may not adapt
to installation  in gravity  sewers other' than  at force main
discharges, particularly  in the case of existing systems,
because of variation  in flow and/or the differential  head
required,  it  is recommended that further study be conducted
on the air I ift aerator.  This  device accommodated a wide
variation in  flow  and proved highly efficient.  As

-------
configured in this demonstration there was excessive tur-
bulence and stripping of hydrogen sulfide, which despite
the 20 ft high vent provided resulted  in a discernible
odor within a radius of several hundred feet during per-
iods of high humidity and still air.   It should be possible
to reconfigure this device, minimize  I i f t air, and pro-
vide a smooth discharge into the receiving stream similar
to that achieved by the U-tubes.  If this can be accompI ish-
ed the air I ift aerator would constitute a highly practical
and efficient aerator readily adaptable to any new or ex-
isting gravity sewer and to any required spacing of aera-
tion dev i ces,

-------
                     SECTION  III

                     INTRODUCTION
 In August of  1961  de  Laureal  Engineers, Inc., completed  a
master sewerage plan  for  the  East Bank of Jefferson Parish,
an area of 32,000  acres  abutting and contiguous with the
City of New Orleans,   This  plan embodied both future sew-
erage and  immediate rehabilitation of exist ing facilities.

 In the investigation  incidental to the development of this
plan the sewage col lection  system and He! ios Treatment
Plant serving the  section known as "Old M e t a i r i e " were
found to contain classic  examples of corrosive attack and
related deterioration caused  by hydrogen suIfide generated
 in the sewage.  This  sewerage system and these conditions
constitute the subject and  basis for this study.

The collection system and Helios pi ant (activated sludge)
had been completed in 1939.   Soils in this area are gen-
erally soft to medium clays  with silt and humus pockets
and sand lenses.   Running sands are sometimes encountered
usually at depths  below  I 2  ft.   The terrain  is flat.  These
conditions combine to dictate the use of minimal slopes
just adequate to maintain a  velocity of 2 FPS and  I imit
the practical depth to which  a  sewer can be;  instal led to
about I 2 ft.  The  result  is  a  large number of i  i ft sta-
tions and force mains.  The  force mains constitute a
source of hydrogen suIfide  and  the gravity  flow velocity
 is generally  inadequate  to  control sulfide buildup.  The
He I ios Col  lection  System  had  a  number of gravity  I ines
carried to depths  of  16  ft.   These deeper sewers were  in
extremely unstable soils  and  over the years  developed
grossly uneven settlement and entrapment of  sewage.  Some
larger sewers, of  unl ined concrete pipe, had col lapsed
or were found on the  point  of  imminent collapse due to
corrosive attack of the  crowns.  S i rn i larly,  a considerable
number of manholes, particularly where force mains dis-
charged into gravity  sewers  (discharge manholes), had
been severely attacked and  several totally destroyed.
Streets had been undermined  and the  infiltration of sand
had completely overwhelmed  the  treatment plant's grit
removal  facility.  Except for short periods  following a
heavy rain, sewage arriving  at  the plant was highly septic,
and treatment was  virtually  non-existant.

-------
In July of 1963, contracts aggregating  in excess  of  $13
mill ion were awarded to  implement the  immediate phase  of
the master plan.  Approximately $11 mill ion was allocated
to new sewerage.  Somewhat over $1 mill ion went to reha-
bi I itate the col lection system, and a  I ike amount was  used
to repair and update the treatment faci I ity.  The obvious
and immediate needs in the col lection  system  imposed a di-
lemma.   A number of major gravity I ines were beyond prac-
tical  repair and had to be abandoned.   The cost to remove
and replace these I  ines was considered  prohibitive,  and
as a result the system had to  be  reconfigured with the add-
ition of new I ift stations and force mains.

The new configuration significantly reduced the overall
retention time of sewage in the system,  improved  veloc-
ities, and removed most, if not all, major sources of
septicity from the gravity portion of  the system.  Sewage
arriving at the plant was generally fresh.  Odor  at  the
plant was abated and effective treatment restored.   Off-
setting to some degree the marked  improvement at  the plant
was immediate evidence of sulfide generation  in the  longer
force mains and the stripping  of  hydrogen sulfide  (HoS)  in
the discharge manholes.  The discharge  manholes of two
force mains which generated the most complaints about  odor
and which showed evidence of severe corrosive attack were
ultimately designated as Stations 5 and 7  in this  study.
It is worthy of comment that the  rehabilitation of the
system was completed in  late  1964.  In  July of  1969  field
crews taking background samples for this study found both
discharge manholes at Stations 5  and 7  brought to  the  point
of imminent col  lapse by corrosive attack.  Over one  inch
of mortar I ining had been consumed, no  mortar was  visible
between bricks  in the upper two thirds  of the manhole  wall,
and bricks had fa I len from or  could be  removed with  the
fingers from the top course.

Prior to appI ication by Jefferson Parish  in March  of 1968
for grant assistance from the  then, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration  (FWPCA), to conduct this study,
there was clear recognition of the urgent  need  for  effec-
tive control of sulfide generation  in  force mains,   In-
vestigation of possible methods suggested that  aeration
was by far the most feasible  approach.   In  I ight  of  an
article published by Laughlin  in  1964  (0, first  con-
sideration had been given to  aeration  of the  force main

-------
by  injection  of  air  immediately downstream of the pump
discharge.  The  City  of New Orleans about this time began
a series  of extensive experiments in this appI icat ion.
Observation of these  efforts forced the conclusion that
air  injection at the  inlet  of a long force main  is feas-
ible only  if  the force main is specif ice. I  iy designed over-
size with  a steady upgrade  from the point of air  injection
to the discharge.  The force mains in Jefferson Parish
were neither  suited or practically adaptable to aeration
at the pump discharges.

Before^, abandoning aeration  for a more costly chemical
treatment, attention  was turned to the possibil 
-------
and development grant under the Federal Water Pol Iution
Control Act as amended (466 et seq).  On 27 June  1968
the Council accepted a FWPCA grant  (WPRD-I 2 I-01(RI)-68).

The primary objective of this grant was to evaluate the
effectiveness of various full scale methods of  in-sewer
aeration for reducing hydrogen sulfide problems and to
develop design data for future designs.  Facilities con-
structed and evaluated included two aspirated air  U-tube
systems for force main discharges,  one in-I ine  Venturi
aspirator and one in-I ine Vortex-Shear aerator  in  a force
main and one eductor or air-I ift pump  installed  in a
gravity sewer.

-------
                      SECTION  IV

             DESCRIPTION  OF THE  PROJECT
SELECTION OF TEST  STATIONS

Figure  I  illustrates  the  configuration of the project and
the  location of test  stations  on a portion of the street
map  of the "Old Metairie" area of Jefferson Parish.  A
schematic flow diagram  of the  test sewers showing the
aerator  locations,  sewers and  approximate sewage flows
is shown  in Figure 2.

Station  I is a manhole  in a  30" gravity sewer located
1200 ft  upstream from the Hel ios Treatment Plant and 835
ft downstream of Station  2,   The average dry weather flow
through  Station  I  during  the evaluation phase of the study
was  on the order of 3.0 MGD  which corresponds to a  I iquid
depth of about 14  in.  in  the pipe.  Surge effect from up-
stream force main  discharges appear to be large I> damped
out  at this station.  Four  untreated gravity laterals con-
tribute  about  .2 MGD  or 7%  of  flow through Station  I.
Accordingly with 937°  of the  flow through Station I   from
the  air-I i f t aerator  instal led at Station 2 and 39/° of
this flow from the ll-tube at Station 5, Station ! was
considered to be a key  samp I ing station in evaluating the
performance of the air-I ift  aerator and the cumulative
effect of upstream aeration.

Station  2 is the location of the air-lift aeration  device.
This is the only station  in  a  gravity sewer.  In the
original scope, Station 2 was  spaced a calculated distance
downstream of aerators  at Stations 5 and 15 on the  basis
of a method proposed  by C.  L.  Swanson (7).  Ultimately
Station  15 had to  be  deleted to remain within available
funds.   The spacing (2025 ft)  downstream of Station 5 was
retained for Station  2  although the basis for the calcul-
ation was largely  inval idated  by the ommission of Station
15-  The sewer at  Station 2  is 30 in. and the dry weather
flow was on the order of  2-8 MGD during the evaluation.
Station 2 is located  185  ft  downstream of the intercept
of two 2l in. sewers  and  525 ft downstream of Station 13.
It is the unaerated flow  of  the 21 in. sewer from the
deleted Station  15 (see Figure l) that inval idatcd  the

-------
                     ftTfyiElhJTj: PLA
                    ../STA. 6-
 •*• DELETED
FIGURE I-PLAN OF DEMONSTRATION SYSTEM
                       10

-------

2
Q.
0
co
"CD
10" G
0
"o
426 /*
5.5 MGD \.
o
*\
0 0
0 *fr
1
21" G ">
1.5 MGDU *J
3 	 ^ i
*-* 0
in -
6_«
CM
i
^ v
i «
o to Z
^/oL^/q
0. 3 M G DU %N ^-^y V^
g
(9
Z
in
)
Q
e>
Z
_? 12" FM , %
J*'!.! MGD'^^'^O**!' 1.2 MGD 'A*' 1.3 MGD ~W 2.8 MGD ~^J 3.0 MGD*1^
v /
* 0.05 MGDU o
> Z
o
LEGEND °
MeOU UNTREATED FLOW INTO AERATED SYSTEM
£j SAMPLE STATION LOCATIONS
(40^92^3^ PUMP STATION LOCATIONS
FM FORCE MAINS
9 GRAVITY SEWERS
(A) IN-LINE VORTEX-SHEAR ASPIRATOR LOCATION
MM IN-LINE VENTURI ASPIRATOR LOCATION
fYYVj VENTURI ASPIRATED "u" TUBE LOCATIONS
^2\ AIRLIFT AERATOR LOCATION
DEMONSTRATION SYSTEM SCHEMATK
z
b.
loo

Q N
z z
u.
10 =
6 9.
^r 2
g 2
c,, iM
0
ro —,,
O I i
®_


-------
calculated spacing and which undoubtedly  contributed to
the odor problem subsequently encountered.   Approximately
I.3 MGD of the flow to Station 2  is  from  Station  13  with
upwards of I.0 MGD of this flow from the  U-tube  installed
at Station 5.  Accordingly the ratio of treated to  un-
treated sewage arriving at Station 2 was  about 40-60.  Be-
cause this station did not exist  prior to installation of
the aeration device, and extreme  turbulence  occurred after
installation of the air-l ift aerator, Station  2 was  not
considered a samp I  ing station.

Station 13 is a manhole  in a 2l  in.  gravity  sewer  located
1500 ft downstream of the U-tube  instai led at  Station 5.
Data from this station in conjunction with data from Sta-
tions 5 and 6 is the only basis for  evaluating the  cal-
culated spacing for aeration devices developed by this
demonstration.  The average dry weather flow through
Station 13 during test hours  is about  I.3 MGD.  Liquid
depth during sampling ranged between 9  in. and  14  in.
corresponding to flows of I and 2 MGD respectively.
Approximately 0.2 MGD of the flow through Station  13 is
from five untreated laterals entering the system  down-
stream of Station 5 and  I.I MGD from the  U-tube at  Sta-
tion 5 thus approximately 80% of  each sample at Station
13 is from the U-tube  installed at Station 5,  and Sta-
tion  13 was selected to be the key sarnp I ing  station in
the evaluation of U-tube performance as we I I as aerator
spac i ng.

Station 6 is the first manhole 370 ft downstream  of Sta-
tion 5-  This location was selected  to  evaluate the per-
formance of the U-tube at Station 5  because  of the  ex-
treme turbulence generated by the discharge  from  the 12
in. force main at Station 5 before  installation of  the
U-tube.  The dry weather flow through Station  6  is  about
I.I MGD.  Of this flow about 0.05 MGD  is  from  an  8   in.
untreated gravity sewer thus upwards of 95%  of the  flow
through Station 6  is from the U-tube at Station  5.

Station 5 is the discharge manhole for  3000  ft of 12 in.
force main from the pump station  at  Stations 30-40  and
is the location of the larger of  two Venturi aspirated
U-tubes.  The invert of the  12  in. force  main  into  this
manhole is 7 ft 2  in. above the sewer  invert.   The  fal I
and splash of this stream accounted  for the  stripping
of hS and a significant aeration at this station prior
                            12

-------
to diverting the  flow  through the U-tube.  The pumping
rate through this U-tube  averaged 1500 GPM during test
hours and dry  weather.   After adjustment of the controls
at Station 40, the duration of the pumping and off cycles
ranged between five and  nine minutes depending on sep-
arate or simultaneous  discharges from Stations 7 and  3! •
Flow through the  U-tube  at Station 5 averaged  I.I MGD.
Taps were provided to determine pressure and to take
samples upstream  of the  U-tube.

Stations 30-40 are the dual  wet wells of the pumping  sta-
tion discharging  to Station 5.  Station 30 receives the
force main discharge from Stations 31-32-  Station 40
receives the gravity discharge from Station 7.  The two
wells are bottom  connected by a 24  in- equalizer.  The  pump
suctions are  installed in Station 40.  Both Stations  30
and 40 had been sealed and provided with t>  in. vents  carried
under a rai I road  embankment to an open area because of
continuing complaints  about odor from residents  in the
immediate vicinity. The  force main discharge  from Sta-
31-32 is relatively high.  Prior to aeration the free  fall
to the water surface in  Station 30 was on the  order1 of
4 ft at high water and 7  ft at low water.  With the start
of the aeration devices,  the high water  level  was raised
about 2 ft to  prolong  the pumping cycle.  Low  water re-
mained as previously set.  As a consequence, there was
considerable turbulence   in Station 30, both before and
after activation  of the  aeration devices.  The average  dry
weather flow through Stations 30-40 during test hours is
about I.I MGD.  Of this,  approximately .5 MGD  is a fairly
uniform untreated flow from two 10  in. gravity sewers.
The flow from  the U-tube  at Station 7 was intermittent,
general ly 9 min out of 2  I at a rate of very nearly 0.7  MGD
or an average  of  just  under .3 MGD.  The flow  from the
aeration device at Stations 31-32 was somewhat  less  fre-
quent, generally  5 min out of 24 at a rate approaching
I.4 MGD or again  an average of just about .3 MGD.   It  can
only be assumed that a sample from either Station 30  or 40
taken near high water  immediately after cessation of  the
force main discharge would have between 40% and 857? of
aerated sewage depending  on the separate or simultaneous
discharge of the  two upstream stations.  Because of the
questionable significance of samples from Stations 30 and
40, and the numerous complaints from residents  in the
vicinity about opening the sealed covers at these stations,
                            13

-------
the taking of data after activation of the  aeration  devices
was minimal.

Station 7  is the discharge manhole for 2050 ft  of  10 in.
force main from the pump station designated H53 on the
plan.   It  is also the  location of the smaller aspirated
air U-tube.  The pumping rate through this  tube averaged
just under 600 GPM.  The duration of pumping averaged 9 min
with an interval of 12 min between pumping.

Stations 31-32 are, respectively, pressure  taps  in the
force main immediately before and after the  in-I ine  Venturi
and Ashbrook Aerator located  in an 8  in.  force  main  1220
ft  downstream of pump station H52 and 300  ft upstream
of Station 30.  The pumping rate through  the aeration de-
vices ranged between 920 and  1080 GPM.

BACKGROUND DATA

The  initial  instrumentation for this project  included 24  hr
clock operated samplers and battery operated recording
D.O. and temperature probes both purportedly sealed  and
suitable for operation in the sewer atmosphere.  After  re-
peated failures and repairs during the first months  of
samp I ing it became obvious that this  instrumentation was
totally unsuitable and that the sampling  procedure would
have to be revised.  Reviewing available  i nstrumentation
it was decided to use  specific  ion electrodes with extend-
ed  leads for suIfide,chI oride and pH measurement directly
in the sewer stream.   No rel iabIe data was  col Iected dur-
ing the summer of 1968.

In early spring of  1969  it became apparent  that design  data
from Rocketdyne would  not be  received  in  time to permit
advertising and construction  of the aeration devices in
time for evaluation that year.  Field work  was  I imited
during  1969 to verification of sampl ing methods and  proced-
ures.  The taking of samples  to establ ish background data
was  initiated June  19, 1970 with the  aeration  devices
under construction  and scheduled for  activation in August
1970.  Background data, viz:  data accumulated  prior  to
activation of the aeration devices  is tabulated on pages
86 thru 88 of Appendix B.
                           14

-------
AERATOR  DESIGN AND INSTALLATION

Design criteria for the U-tubes and Venturi  aspirators was
developed  for  this project by Rocketdyne  under  contract
14-12-434  with the FWPCA and  is fully described in Rocket-
dyne  Report  entitled "U-Tube Aeration"  (3)«   Spacing of
the aerators was based on empirical methods  developed by
C. L. Swanson  (7).  Prel imi nary design  data  was received
from  Rocketdyne in May of 1969-   it was  immediately appar-
ent that the configuration developed by  Rocketdyne for the
aspirated  U-tube was vastly more sophisticated  than had
been  envisioned and would greatly exceed  the estimated
cost, however,  since a I  I other aspects  of the design were
complete  including spacing of the devices,  it was  decided
to advertise for bids and, if necessary,  either so) icit
additional  funds or negotiate the el imination of certain
f ac i I i t i es  to  rema i n within available funds,

FWPCA and  Louisiana State Board of  Health approvals were
received  in  July of 1969 .   On this
occasion two of four contractors submitted  bids in Iine
with  estimated cost and within budgeted  Funds.   The con-
tract was  awarded to the low bidder, Pratt  Farnsworth,  Inc.
of Metairie, Louisiana.  Construction was initiated  in
March and  completed in August of  1970.

It is worthy of comment here that the high  bids initially
received from  a I I  contractors and subsequently  from two of
the four bidding the readvertisement can  be  largely attrib-
uted  to  an  understandable concern over  the  requirement to
sink  3 ft  to 4 ft diameter casings  for  the  U-tube  to depths
of 50 ft  in  developed residential areas.   In actual fact,
no problems  were encountered and  indications are that the
casings could  have been extended to considerably greater--
depths without difficulty.

The U-tube  has three characteristics essential  to  effective
transfer.   First,  pressure resulting from a  head of water;
second, a  homogenous dispersion of  air  as bubbles  due to
vertical flow;  and third,  an extended contact time due to
the inherent rise rate of the bubbles opposing  the direction
                             15

-------
of an only si ightIy greater rate of  I iquid  flow  in  the
down leg of the tube,

The Venturi aspirated U-tubes as  installed  at  Stations  5
and 7 are  iIlustrated in Figures 4 through  7.  The  Venturi
is shown in Figure 3.  Basic design  objectives and  con-
straints include:

a)   A Venturi throat pressure below  ambient to  aspirate
     the required volume of air;  in  this  demonstration  to
     realize  an air/water volume ratio  on the  order of  O.I.

b)   A smooth flow I  ine that wi I I freely  pass  stringy ma-
     ter i a I .

c)   A Venturi throat diameter that  wi I I  pass  a  3  in. or
     in some  cases 4 in. diameter sphere.   In  this  demon-
     stration 4  in. was used.

d)   A down  leg diameter that wi I I produce  the minimum
     velocity adequate to maintain optimum  entrainment  of
     the air  bubbles.   In this demonstration  a value
     between  I.5  and 2.0 FPS was used based on experiment-
     al work  by Rocketdyne  (3).

e)   A return bend and up  leg diameter  that wi I I  insure a
     velocity adequate to transport  grit  and  larger solids
     I  ikely to be encountered  in sewage,  in this demon-
     stration 4 FPS.

f)   A casing of  maximum practical depth  to increase pres-
     sure  within  the U-tube and  enhance oxygen transfer.
     In this  demonstration  the target depth was  50  ft  and
     actual depth real ized  43 ft and 57 ft  for Stations 5
     and 7 respectively.

g)   The maximum  vertical distance obtainable  between the
     center I  ine of the Venturi  and the  center I ine of the
     U-tube discharge.   In  this  demonstration  dimensions
     of 9.5 ft and 7.0 ft were  used  for Stations 5  and  7
     respectively.  This dimension will  significantly effect
     the total head  loss through the system and  consequent-
     ly Venturi design.

PVC, suitably reinforced with fibreglass, was  selected for
construction  of the U-tubes.
                            16

-------
               / o
                                o
                SECTION
        I   ASPIRATION INLET
        2  ASPIRATION PORTS • SPECIAL DRILLING
        3  UPSTREAM TAP-STANDARD  DRILLING
FIGURE 3-DETAILS OF VENTURI ASPIRATORS

-------
   FORMER
   DISCHARGE
 8 GRAVITY
                                UPSTREAM
                                SAMPLING  TAP
                                  STATION 5B
                                  VENTURI
                                  ASPIRATOR
                             U-TUBE DISCHARGE
                             DISCHARGE MANHOLE
                             STATION 5A
                        21" GRAVITY
FIGURE 4-PLAN  OF U-TUBE AT STATION  5

-------
FIGURE 5-ELEVATION OF U-TUBE AT STATION 5

-------
             10'
 10" GRAVITY-
                             jt^UPSTREAM TAP
                             VT  STATION  7B
                                      .VENTURI
                                      ASPIRATOR
                           DISCHARGE MANHOLE
                       /    STATION 7A
FIGURE 6-PLAN OF U-TUBE AT STATION 7
                     20

-------

\
\
\\
''i n
- ]
^ j











\
\

\

\


s
\
x
\
\
\

t








* U—
N
\
\
\
\
^ k
I 	 >
1
S.




\
V

k 	 JL-
\
\
\

\

\
\
\
\
\













                                             i
                                            ~ro
                                            ID
si
>
\
V
\
s
s
s
\
s
\
\
s
\

s

\

\

\ n

N"t=i
nj
















o
f
M
v\
\) —
k\ 7
\

\

\

\
\
^
\
\

s

\

\

s

N

N
^C\x
























FIGURE 7 -ELEVATION  OF U-TUBE AT STATION 7
                     21

-------
Taps were provided to permit pressure  readings  at  the
Ventur i throat, after the Ventur i,  at  the  top of the down
leg, at the bottom of the down  leg, at  the  bottom of  up
leg and at the top of the up  leg.  There  is also  pro-
vision for metering the aspirated  air to  the Venturi
throat.  The original configuration provided a rel ief
col Iar at the entrance to the U-tube  (see Figure  8).
This collar released entrapped  air from the down  leg  then
sealed as syphon action was establ ished.  This seal was
removed the first week  in November  1970 and the U-tube
piped sol id to the Venturi  in an unsuccessful  attempt  to
increase the volume of air aspirated.   A  final modification
in November of 1971 (see Figure 9), also  aimed unsuccess-
ful I y at boosting the volume of air aspirated, shifted
the increase from Venturi outlet size to  down  leg diameter
from ahead of to after the entrance elbow.

The steel casings for the U-tubes  were  jetted  down, open
ended, using hydrant pressure with occasional  Iight driving,
then cleaned by jetting and pumping,  maintaining  the  casing
fuI I of water at al I times to resist  soi I pressure at  the
bottom.  The U-tubes were sunk
and maintained fuI I of water wi
during placement of concrete.
means of a tremie  with a 6  in,
the U-tube in about 4 ft lifts,
six yard load filling 25 ft of
in the water fi I led casings
th si ight positive pressure
Concrete was placed by
tube on alternate sides of
  At Station 5 the first
the casing was placed with-
out incident.  When placement of the  second  load  was
started an hour  later several feet  of defective  seam  open-
ed in the down leg just above the 25  ft  level.   About half
a yard of the second pour entered the U-tube  plugging it
sol idly.  This necessitated  replacing the  U-tube  and  sink-
ing the 48 in. diameter casing  now  half  filled  with con-
crete to a depth of over 75  ft  to permit instal I at ion of
a new 50 ft U-tube.  The operation  was stopped  at 68  ft
when low pressure jetting became  ineffectual,

The tube length  was reduced  to  43 ft.   It  is  apparent from
this experience  that open ended casings  can practically
and economical ly be sunk to  depths  we I I  in excess of  50 ft
in these soils,  even  in fully developed  residential  areas
as was the case  in this demonstration.   No problems were
encountered at Station 7 with the depth  increased to  57 ft.

The Venturi  aspirators employed with  the U-tubes  are  essen-
tial ly standard  Dal I flow tubes, product series  121  as
                           22

-------
                             NEOPRENE DIAPHRAGM
                             PRESSURE RELEASE
                             VACUUM  SEAL
         ORIGINAL ENTRANCE  ELBOW
                                    SEALED WITH
                                    FIBREGLASS
            INTERIM MODIFICATION
FIGURE 8-ORIGINAL U-TUBE  ENTRANCE ELBOW
           AND INTERIM  MODIFICATION
                     23

-------
                       SUPERCHARGING
                       CONNECTION
                       SUPERCHARGING PORTS
                       CLEAR ACRYLIC TUBE
                       VENTURI
                       DOWN LEG OF U-TUBE
FIGURE 9 - FINAL MODIFCATION TO U-TUBE
           ENTRANCE ELBOWS.
                   24

-------
manufactured by BIF.   These  "tubes were modified by drill-
ing additional ports  to  augment  aspirat ion as illustrated
in Figure 3•

The in-line Ventur i asp i rator  i nstaI Ied at Stat i on 31 and
shown  in Figure  10  is basically  similar to those applied
to the ll-tubes, but  i nsta I led 300 ft from the discharge of
the force main.   The  300 ft  of pipe downstream of the
Ventur i replaces  the  ll-tube  as a reaction chamber.  As in
the case of the U-tubes,  the vertical  distance from the
center I ine of  the Venturi  to the center! ine of the force
main discharge is critical.   By  locating this Ventur i
4 ft 0 in. above  grade at  Station 31,  a total drop of I 2
ft to the force main  discharge in Station 30 was realized.
Also instaI  led at Station  31  and shown in Figure 10  is
an Ashbrook "Inl inator".   This is a patented device oper-
ating on the Vortex-shear  diffusion principle offered by
the Ashbrook Corp.  of Houston,  Texas in a variety of stan-
dard sizes and configurations.   The 1000 GPM unit install-
ed in this demonstration involved reduction from the 8 in.
force main to  a 4 in.  inlet  nozzle arid, according to the
manufacturer,  required an  upstream pressure of from  15
to 20 psig.    In operation  the  upstream pressure was  13 psiy
with a flow of 910  GPM.   In  this regard,  the Ashbrook
device does not compare  favorably with the Li-tube and in
this demonstration  failed  to aspirate.  A brief experiment
in which air from high pressure  bottles was  injected at
30 psig immediately upstream showed a transfer of 4 mg/I
D.O.  Since the Ashbrook would not aspirate and since the
continued injection of air from  bottles would have been
impractical  and costly,  no further evaluation of this de-
v i ce was made.

The aeration device installed  at Station 2 and illustrated
in Figure II  is a modified air I i f t pump designed to  acco-
modate the f u I I flow  of  the  sewer with a I i f t of" 2 ft 6  in.
The incoming sewage flows  down the casing/ is air I ifted  up
the riser and  discharged into  the leaving gravity sewer .
The 2 ft 6  in.  lift was  provided only to permit a support
system clear of the flowing  stream so that stringy mate-
rials would not be  trapped.   This proved to be a mistake
and undoubtedly contributed  to the stripping of hydrogen
sulfide that rendered this configuration of an air I ift
unacceptable.  Otherwise performance was excel lent.  The
air I ift concept,  if  the stripping of HoS can be control  led
still  appears  to  be the  best compromise for aeration at
                           25

-------
        I  ASHBROOK AERATOR
        2  VENTURI AERATOR
        3  UPSTREAM TAP
        4  DOWNSTREAM TAP
FIGURE 10-PLAN OF STATION  31
                  26

-------
to!
i

-------
selected points  in an existing gravity sewer  at  locations
other than force main discharges.  The airl ift permits
injection of the air at almost any depth to optimize
oxygen transfer.  This configuration uses  a casing  depth
of 20 ft.  The requirement to maintain a velocity of  4  FPS
in vertical risers is obviously detrimental from the  stand-
point of retention time if a strictly conventional  air-
I  ift  is used.  Accordingly the airl ift for this demonstra-
tion was modified to provide for  injecting aeration air
into the casing or down leg  I I .5  ft below  the operating
water level and 8.5 ft above the  bottom of the casing.
With a 24  in. casing and a 14  in.  I ift pipe,  the down leg
velocity in this case was roughly  I.6 FPS  opposed to  a
bubble rise rate taken at .8 FPS  or a net  bubble travel
rate of .8 FPS.  Thus, retention  time in the  maximum  pres-
sure zone below  I I .5 ft was approximately  12  seconds.

The volume of air required in a conventional  airl ift  can
be approximated from the equation  V=H/250  Log ((S+34)/34)
where V^voIume of air  in cubic feet per gal Ion of water,
H=the I ift above operating water  level  in  feet and  S=
submergence below operating water  level  in feet.  The
optimum air/water volume ratio for oxygen  transfer  was
taken at something less than .20.  Higher  ratios were not
necessary to supply the required  oxygen and would present
the possibiI ity of slug flow rather than the  desired  even
dispersion of small  bubbles,  Accordingly  this application
is modified by  injecting air to a  maximum  of  20% by vol-
ume 11.5 ft below operating water  level.   The effective
submergence is taken to be I I .5 ft with a  s.g. of  I .0 plus
8.5 ft with an s.g. of .8 or 18-3  ft  in  lieu  of  20  ft.
With a lift of 2-5 and a Q of  1500 GPM, the volume  of lift
air required is 2.5/(250X.I 875) or  .053 CF/Gal.  and 1500  x
.053 = 79.5 CFM.  Aeration air required  is 20% and  1500/7.48
X  .2 = 40 CFM.  Total air required =  119.5 CFM.  The  start-
ing head for this airI ift is 20 ft HoO or  8.87 psig.

No problem was encountered  in sinking the  aerator casing
which could and as events subsequently demonstrated prob-
ably should have been sunk to at  least 50  ft  to  increase
the contact time under increased  pressure  for greater trans-
fer of oxygen  into the sewage stream.  One comment  is  in
order about operation.  Aeration  air must  be  admitted after
the I  ift is in operation and then with caution as this air
is entering against a significantly  lower  pressure  than
                           28

-------
the  I ift  air  and  excess air in the down leg will render  the
air  I ift  inoperable.   A sensitive control valve for  accur-
ate metering  of  aeration air is essential.

The aerator at Station 2 was spaced in  relation to the
aerator at Station  5  with the objective oi maintaining  a
residual  D.O. of  1.0  mg/I  in the sewage.  No basis per  se
for calculating the required spacing of aeration  devices
in a  sewer system could be found in pub I ishecl  I iterature.
However,  on the basis of existing publications on sulfide
production and control, Mr. C. L. Swanson, the LPA Project
Officer at the time,  developed and submitted an empirical
method (7) for approximating the required spacing of aera-
tion  devices.  This method was employed  in locating  Station
2 with relation to  Stations 5 and I.1) in the original  scope
of this project.  Unfortunately, it was necessary to delete
a number  of stations  including Station  15 to remain  within
ava i  IabIe funds.

Because of the el imi nation of Station 1.5 and the  entry  of
the untreated 21  in.  stream from Station  15 between  Sta-
tions 2 and 13, Stations 5A and 1,3 were selected  to  eval-
uate  this method  for  calculating the required  spacing of
aeration  devices.   A  discussion and evaluation of Swanson's
method (7) for calculating required spacing of aeration
devices in contained  in Section Vl  of this report.

The actual installed  cost  of  the several aeration devices
is tabulated  below:

      St at i on  5 -  Aspirated air li-tube instal led on the  end
      of a I 2  in.  force main.   Flow = 1700 GPM, depth r-
      43 ft.   Installed cost - $16,000.00.

      Stat i on  7 -  Aspirated air U-tube instal led on the  end
      of an 8  in.  force main.   Flow - 650 GPM,  depth  =
      57 ft.   Installed cost  - $11,000.00.

      Stat i on  31  - Venture  aspirator installed  in  an  8 in.
      force main.  Flow = 1000 GPM.   Installed  cost -
     $7,000.00.

     Ashbrook aerator installed in an 8  in. force main.
      Flow = 1000  GPM.   Installed cost - $9,000.00.
                            29

-------
     Stat i on 2 - Eductor or air-l i f t pump  instal led  in  a
     30  in. gravity sewer.  Maximum and average  dry  weather
     flow = 2000 GPM and 1500 GPM, respectively.   Installed
     cost - $13,000.00.

TEST PROCEDURES

Readings of temperature, flow, pH, D.O., BOD^, COD and
sulfides were taken at the selected stations shown  in Fig-
ures I  and 2 before and after aeration.  Additional  read-
ings of  immediate oxygen demand  ( I OD ) and  D.O. were  taken
before and after each aeration device.

D.O. and  I OD measurements were made using  the Azide  modifi-
cation of the Winkler Method.  I OD samples consisted of
100 ML of sewage diluted with 200 ML of aerated  distilled
water  in a standard 300 ML BOD bottle.  DO measurements
were made five and ten minutes after combination.   I OD  was
determined by the f o I lowing equation:

              IOD = 300 DO  - 200 D0
                            oo

where D0|  is the DO of the mixed 300 ML sample  and  D02  is
the DO of the di lution water, usual ly at or  near  satur-
ation.

COD determinations were made per Standard Methods (4) using
the dichromate reflux method.

BOD5 determinations were made per Standard Methods .

Pressure drops and air aspiration rates for  the Ventur i
and Ashbrook devices were recorded.  Final ly, pressure  read-
ings were taken by personnel from Rocketdyne to determine
actual head losses through the U-tube.  Head loss data
through the U-tube has been compiled and reported by  Rocket-
dyne  in their report on "U-tube Aeration"  (3).  Samples  for
determination of D.O., IOD, BOD^, and COD were  taken  in
standard 300 ML BOD bottles.  The bottles were  either  im-
mersed in the stream or f i I led from pressure taps with
hoses extending to the bottom of the bottle  to  minimize
aeration in sampl ing.  For BODc and COD determination,  the
completely filled bottles, free of  air bubbles, were  sealed
and packed in ice for transport to  the  lab.  D.O. and  IOD
determinations were run in the field.
                           30

-------
pH and sulfide  determinations were made using electrodes
either  in  stream  or  in  a plastic beaker at the pressure
taps.   In  the  latter  case,  a hose extended to the bottom
of the beaker  which was filled and slowly overflowed with
the electrodes  immersed we I I  below the surface.  The pH
electrode  used  was Cornings  No.476027.  The sulfide elec-
trode was  Orion Model  94-16.   The reference electrode  in
both cases was  Orion  90-02.   Orion Specific Ion Meters
Models 404 and  407 were used for suI fides and pH respect-
 ively.   The Orion 94-16 sulfide  electrode is represented
by the manufacturer to  be essential iy interference free
and capable of  stable readings down to a sulfide concen-
tration  of 10"' moles per I iter.  The- electrode develops
a potential  proportional  to  the  activity of the sulfide
 ion in the sample.  The electrode does not respond to
bound or cornp I exed su I fides,  however  with pH and ionic
strength known, the total  dissolved suI fides (the sum  of
h^S, HS~ and S~)  can  be computed.  This relationship is
shown in Figure I 2.   The electrode responds only to sulfide
 ion (S=) and  in this  demonstration within the shaded band
on Figure  I 2.

 In domestic sewage with a pH at  or below 8,  ionic strength
 is not too significant  and  need  only  be approximated.  For
example, if an  ionic  strength of 10-3 moles per I iter  is
assumed, then  variations in  ionic strength over the fuI i
range of I0~~ to  10"^ rnoles  per  I iter would introduce  an
error of 6% or  less  in  the  determination of total  suif ides.

On the other hand, for  any  ionic strength in the range of
10-4 to  I 0 ~^ moles per  liter,  a  variation be tweet; a pH of
6 and 8  represents a  range  of roughly three powers of  ten
in sulfide ion  activity and  extreme accuracy in the measure
of pH is essential.

Since high  dosage with  NaCI  was  involved in this demonstra-
tion in  determining time of  travel  (detention time), ionic
strength (I.S.) was programmed on the basis of  measured
chlorides  with:

                I.S. = CL-(mg/l)/35457

The above  formula empiricalIy converts mg/i  CL~ to solution
                            31

-------
FIGURE 12-LOG FRACTIONS OF DISSOLVED SULFIDES
                    32

-------
ionic strength  in moles per  liter.   The  result  in  the  case
of NaCI   is  identical with that derived by  converting mg/l
CL- to mg/l NaCI then computing mg/l Na  and  applying the
formula:  ionic  strength = 2  I Z.^C.   After  dosage with  NaC I
was terminated  measurement  of  chloride concentration was
discontinued.   The  average  value  of  background  chlorides
(200 mg/l)  was  assumed for  all subsequent  sulfide  measure-
ments,  i.e. an  ionic strength  of  5.6 x  10-3  moles  per
liter.   To  verify the above  formula  a composite sample was
made up  of  six  samples taken hourly  at Station  I  on July 16,
1970.  Chlorides were measured  in stream concurrently  with
the  individual  samples.  The conductivity  of the composite
sample was  580  micromhos equivalent roughly to an ionic
strength  of .007M.  The average of the six chloride measure-
ments was 236 rng/l  and 236/35457  = .0066M.  All  pH measure-
ments were  read to  two decimal places.   This is welI with-
in the capabiI ity of the Orion 407 which has an expanded
pH scale  with a full scale  deflection of 2.

With the  exception  of the Orion 90-02 reference electrode,
no problems were encountered in this instrumentation.   These
reference electrodes appear  to be somewhat vulnerable  to
the sewer environment, and  required  constant verification
and frequent rep Iacement of  the outer f i I I i ng so i ut i on
(I 0% KNO^).  Since  the same  reference  is used with both the
pH and sulfide  electrodes,  the stability of  the reference
electrode can be verified with standard  pH solutions,

it is worthy of comment that the  Orion 404 meter can be
calibrated  in the  lab for direct  readout of  total  suIf ides,
using sulfide standards, however,  standards  for field  ver-
ification would have to be  at  or  above a pH  of  13 to be
reasonably  stable.  At pH  13 the  resulting potential  is in
the vicinity of -800 MV which  is  beyond  the  maximum (-700
MV) scale of the 404-

In this  demonstration, the  sulfide electrode was cal ibrated
in the  lab  using an Orion Model 801  meter  which has a  range
of -999-9 to +999.9 MV and  standard  sulfide  solutions  of
.001, .01 and  .1 mg/l all at a pH above  13.   The calibra-
tion was  incorporated in the computer program (Appendix A)
which was used  to calculate  total  dissolved  suI fides from
the field measurements i n absoIute m i I I i voIts us i ng the
sulfide  electrode and the Orion 404  meter.
                           33

-------
Like any biological function, the generation of sulfides
is temperature dependent, and since the purpose of this
demonstration  is to evaluate the effects of aeration on
sulfides, the effects of temperature must be accounted for
by standardization to a base temperature.  For this demon-
stration, a base temperature of 85° F was selected since
this was the average of alI  sewage temperatures before
activation of the aeration devices.  All instream sulfide
measurements have been standardized to 85° F by applica-
tion of the formula:

                 S85 = S(I.09385-T),

where S • total dissolved sulfides as computed from  in-
stream measurement of sulfide ion activity units and T =
the instream temperature, °F.  This formula evolves from
observations by Baumgartner (5) and subsequently by Pomeroy
and Bowl us (6) that rate of sulfide generation  in sewers
increases about 3-9% per degree F rise  in temperature be-
tween I  imits of 60° F to  100° F.  The extreme range  in
this demonstration was 76° F to 89° F.

In this demonstration, the determination of total dissol-
ved sulfides is based on measured pH, absolute MV S~ and
temperature.  The program (for the  IBM  1130) to compute
total  dissolved sulfides for this  input  is described  in
Append ix A.
                           34

-------
                       SECTION  V

                        RESULTS
TEST STATIONS

Recapping briefly, Stations  I,  13,  6  and 40 are the key
downstream sampl ing  stations,  I isted  in order of progress-
ion upstream from the  downstream  terminal  as previously
shown  in Figures  I and 2-  Station  I,  the downstream term-
inal is approximately  835  ft  downstream of the air-l ift
aerator at Station 2-   Station  2  is located 525 ft down-
stream of Station 13 and  185  ft downstream of the inter-
cept of the sewer from Station  13 and an untreated sewer
of roughly equal flow.  Station  13  is 1500 ft downstream
of the U-tube aerator  at Station  5-  Station 6 is 370 ft
downstream of Station  5.   Station 40  is the wet we I  I of the
I ift station pumping to Station 5 through 3000 ft of I 2
in. force main  and is  400  ft  downstream of the U-tube at
Station 7•  The U-tube at  Station 7 is installed on the
discharge end of 2050  ft of  10  in.  force main.  Stations
2,  5B and 7B did not exist prior  to the installation of
the aeration devices.   Station  2  is the air-lift aerator.
Stations 5B and 7B are pressure taps  in the force mains
immediately upstream of the  U-tube  Venturi  aspirators lo-
cated at Stations 5  and 7.   No  readings were made at
Station 5 before  installation of  the  aeration devices be-
cause  of extreme turbulence  and  complaints of odor from
residents in the vicinity.   Station 6, 370 ft downstream
from 5 with nominal  velocities  and  no turbulence is the
sampl ing station selected  to  evaluate the performance of
the U-tube installed at Station 5-  Measurements had to be
taken at Station 7A, the discharge  manhole at Station 7,
both before and after  activation  of the U-tube despite the
fact that this manhole had considerable turbulence before
installation of the  U-tube and  contained upwards of 30%
unaerated sewage after activation of  the U-tube.  This was
because velocities in  the  one downstream manhole between
Stations 7 and 40 were found  to exceed 5 FPS and made
sampl ing and instream  measurements  impossible.

RAINFALL AND TEMPERATURE BACKGROUND

Figure 13 is an hourly plot  of maximum and minimum  instream
and air temperatures over  the test  period.   Minimum
                            35

-------
            100-
OJ
o\
CO
Ul
Ul
K
<9
UJ
O
            70-
            60-
            50-
            40-
            30-
                                  MIN. STREAM
              12  I  2  34  5  «  78 9  IO  II  12  I  234 5  6789  10  II

                                        NOON
         FIGURE 13-  INSTREAM  AND AIR TEMPERATURES

-------
temperatures were generated  entirely  in  the last two days
of the project  and  relate  only  to  measurements taken at
Station  I on November  5th  and 6th.   These are the only days
during the test period  when  instream  temperatures below
80° F were recorded.   Tests  were terminated when instream
temperatures dropped to  76°  F on November 6th.  Figure 14
is a daily pIot  of ra i nfa I I  and resu11 i ng system d i Iut i on
during the test period.

The curve from  Figure  14 is  included  as  an approximate in-
dication of the percent  dilution on all  daily plots of
sulfides, D.O., BOD5 and COD.   The dry weather flow to the
plant averages  5-5  MGD.  Daily  flows  significantly above
5.5 are the result  of  rainwater infiltration.  The bar
graph on Figure 14  gives the  daily occurrence and duration
but not the  intensity  of significant  rains during the test
period.  The curve  on  Figure  14 represents the totalized
daily flow to the treatment  plant.   Maximum pumping cap-
acity at the treatment  plant  is si ightly in excess of 10
MGD.  Normal or dryweather flow is about 4 MGD for 24 hrs
but at a rate of about  5.5 MGD  during test hours.  A plot
of 10 MGD, therefore,  indicates continuous pumping at
maximum capacity for the entire 24-hour  period and a dilu-
tion of  150%.   At anything above 7 MGD the entire system
would be heavi ly surcharged  and no instream measurements
or samp I  ing would be attempted. Samples and measurements
were generally  taken only  when  flow in the system was near
normal with gravity sewers not  significantly more than half
fuI I .  It is obvious,  however,  from the  amount of rain en-
countered throughout the test period  that some degree of
residual  dilution figures  in  a  good percentage of the
measurements.   The  effect, both immediate and residual, of
rainwater dilution  is  apparent  in  a tendency of the various
parameters to track the  dilution trace.

ANALYTICAL TESTING

One thousand eighty-nine (l,089J  instream measurements
were made at the seven   test  stations over the period
July 2,  1970 to August  7,  1970  before activation of the
aeration devices.   On  August  8, 1970,  aeration devices
were activated  at aerator  installations,  Stations 2, 5, 7
and 31.  Subsequently,  twelve-hundred thirty-six (1,236)  in-
stream measurements were made  at  nine stations over the per-
iod August II to November  6,  1970.   A tabulation of all
                          37

-------
OJ
oo
       1970
        o
        o
        oc
        UJ
        Q.
        
-------
 instream readings  is  included  as  Appendix B to this report.
 To give meaningful  results,  alI  instream sulfide measure-
 ments used  in the  plots  and  tabulations  have been standard-
 ized to 85°  F as previously  described.

 AIRLIFT AERATOR

 Station I   is the downstream  terminal  of  this demonstration
 and reflects both  the performances  of the air I ift aerator
 instal led  at Station 2 and the  cumulative effect of a I I  up-
 stream aeration devices.  93%  of  the  flow through Station  I
 is from the  air I ift aerator  at  Station 2 and 37% of the
 flow had additionally been through  the U-tube at Station 5.
 Figure 15  is a daily plot of D.O. at  Station I,  the down-
 stream terminal.   No measureable  D.O.  was recorded at this
 station before activation of the  aeration devices.  After
the aeration devices were activated,  a residual  D.O. was
 always evident ranging from  a  low of  0.2 mg/I  to a high of
 3.8 mg/l  and averaging I .4 mg/l .

 Figure 16  is the daily plot  of  suI fides  at Station I.  Dis-
 solved suIfides (Sgr) were consistently  present  at Station
 I before activation of the aeration devices, ranging from
 a low of 0.03 mg/l to a  high of 3.45  mg/l, and averaging
0.63 mg/l.    After  activation of the aeration devices 40
measurements were  made.  Only three of the 40 measurements
showed traces of sulfide (.01 mg/l,  .04  mg/l and  .09 mg/l).
 In the remaining 37 measurements  no sulfide was  detected.

 Figure 17  is the hourly  plot of 69  dissolved sulfide mea-
surements taken at Station  I (29  before  and 40 after acti-
vation of aeration devices).   Figure  18  is the daily plot
of BOD^ and  COD run on samples  taken  at  the same time su i -
fides were measured at Station  I.   Before activation of the
 aeration devices,  BODc ranged  from  a  low of 48 mg/l to a
high of 334 mg/l with an average  of 169  mg/l.  COD ranged
from a low of 158  mg/l to a  high  of 554  mg/l with an aver-
age of 310 mg/l.   After  activation  of the aeration devices
BOD5 ranged  from a low of 42 mg/l to  a high of 281 mg/l
with an average of I 28 mg/l  and COD ranged from  a  Iow of
 117 mg/l  to  a high of 304 mg/l  with an average of 208 mg/l.
The indicated reduction  attributable  to  in-line  aeration
was 100% for dissolved suI fides,  24%  for BODr and 33% for
COD.
                           39

-------
1970
 UJ

 ?
 X
 o

 o
 Ul
 8
 o
 -I
 •s.
 o
 Ul

 O
 (E
JUNE

 20 25
        0


       150






       100






       50
JULY
AUG

 4
      -e—•	OPO o
           BEFORE  AERATION
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
SEPT.

10 IS 20 25
   OCT.


5  10 15 20 25
I  !  I  I  T
                                                 cP
                                             o

                                            o o
                                   AFTER AERATIOM
                                                       oo
                                                       o
NOV.


-f-
                                                   o
                                                   o
                                                   §
 FIGURE  15- DISSOLVED  OXYGEN  AT STATION I.

-------
1970
Q
UJ
3
O
8
O
UJ
O
tr
UJ
Q.
JUNE
 20 25
        0
       ISO


       100


       50
 .JULY
5  10 15 20 25
AUG
 4
           BEFORE AERATION
   AUG.
10 IS 20 25
                                 TTI
  SEPT
5  10 15 20 25
OCT.
NOV.
 ?
                                   AFTER AERATION
  FIGURE  16-  DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT  STATION I.

-------
to




CO
UJ
Q
J*l
CO
o
Ul
o
JJJ
5
_i
&
2



5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0

2.5
2.0

1.5
1.0

0.5
0.0
; BEFORE AERATION (0)
AFTER AERATION (X)

-
-
-
•
•
—
: o
~ 0
'- 0 ° ° 0
o
'. o o o o
O r\
1 o O x"xxx xxxxSx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx x°P
1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' 1 ' 1
789 10 II 12 1 2345678
A M TIME OF DAY PM
FIGURE 17 -DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT STATION 1.

-------
1970
 Ul
 o
 UJ
 <9

 X
 o
 o

 H
 z
 a:

 H
 JUNE

  2O 25
500




400




300




ZOO




 100




  0


 ISO





 too





 50
    JULY
     AUG
o
                  I

                  »
                  0
       8
       J
A o


o §
            BEFORE  AERATION
   AUG.

JQ  15  20 25
   SEPT.


5  10 15 20 25
"1f  i  r I
   OCT.


5  10 15  ZO 25
»  i  i   i  T
 NOV.

-4-
                        X
                        o
                                         X
                                         o
                                                      X


                                                      o
                          * X


                          X



                          o

                          QD
                                      AFT£R AERATION
                                                                 0-BOD,


                                                                 X- COD
   FIGURE 18 -  BOD5   AND COD AT  STATION  I.

-------
U-TUBE EVALUATION

Station 13 is a manhole 1500 ft downstream of the discharge
of the U-tube at Station 5.  79% of the flow through Sta-
tion 13 is from the U-tube at Station 5 and the remainder
from untreated gravity laterals.  Figure  19 is the daily
plot of D.Q.  at Station 13 before and after activation of
the aeration devices.  Before activation of the aeration
devices, 15 of 23 D.O. measurements registered 0.  The
highest D.O.  recorded was 0.4 mg/l and the average of the
23 measurements was 0.01  mg/l.  After activation of the
aeration only two of twenty-seven D.O. measurements re-
gistered 0.  The highest D.O. was 2.1 mg/l and the aver-
age of the 2? D.O. measurements was 0.7 mg/l.  Figure 20
is the daily plot of dissolved sulfides (Sor) at Station
13.  Before activation of the aeration devices,  in only
one of 24 measurements was there no detectable sulfides.
Dissolved sulfides ranged from this one zero measurement
to a high of I .3 nig/I with an average of 0.30 mg/l .  After
activation of the aeration devices there was no measurable
sulfides in 16 of 24 measurements.  There was one reading
of 0.23 mg/l, all other measurements were below 0.10 PPM
and the average of the 24 measurements was 0.02 mg/l dis-
solved sulfides (Sg5).  The apparent reduction  in dissolved
sulfides at Station  13 attributable to aeration was 93%*
Figure 21   is the hourly plot of 48 sulfide measurements
at Station 13 (24 before and 24 after activation of the
U-tube at Station 5).  Figure 22  is the daily plot of BOD5
and COD at Station 13 run on samples taken at the same
time sulfide measurements were made.  Before activation
of the aeration devices BODr ranged from  a  low of 53 mg/l
to a high of 458 mg/l with an average of  176 mg/l.  COD
ranged from a low of 96 mg/l to a high of 634 mg/l with  an
average of 315 mg/l.  After activation of the aeration
devices BOD^ ranged from a  low of 36 mg/l to a high of
308 mg/l with an average of  150 mg/l.  COD ranged from  a
low of  161  mg/l to a high of 408 mg/l with an average of
250 mg/l.  Based on the average values, the apparent  re-
duction attributable to aeration was 2\%  for COD  and  15%
for BOD5.

Station 6  is the first manhole 370 ft downstream  of the
discharge of the U-tube at Station 5.  Based on  measure-
ments at time of sampling, the fraction of aerated sewage
through this station averaged 96%.   Figure 23  is  the  plot
                           44

-------
Ul
        1970
        UJ
        <9


        i

        o
        UJ



        8
        o

        I-

        J

        o
        UJ
        o
        cr

        ui
        Q.
JUNE


  20 23
 0


ISO






100







50
JULY
                    oo o
AUG


 4
                                08
                                 n
                     O O
                   BEFORE AERATION
   AUG.


10 15 2O 25
SEPT.


10 15 20 25
 OCT.



10 15 20 25

III!
                      O

                      o

                      -8-
                                                 o


                                                 o
                                           0°0
                                   AFTER AERATION
NOV.
         FIGURE  19- DISSOLVED OXYGEN  AT STATION 13.

-------
a\
        1970
         V)
         UJ
         Q
         Z)
         CO

         Q
         Ul
         O
         co
         CO
         ID
         _J
         Q
         UJ
         O
         DC
         UJ
         OL
JUNE

  20 25
 2



  I



 0

150



IOO



50
JULY
AUG

 4
                   BEFORE AERATION
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
   SEPT

5  10  15  20 25
—^—^—i^—^^^^—^^^B^M—^pnB
   OCT.

5  10 15 20 25
i  i  I  i  T
NOV.
                                   AFTER AERATION
         FIGURE  20-DISSOLVED  SULFIDES  AT  STATION  13

-------



CO
uT
_j
t/t
if*
Q
Ul

CO

S
_j
X
o
*









5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5

3.0


2.5
2.0


1.5


1.0

0.5



0.0
: BEFORE AERATION (0)
•_ AFTER AERATION (X)
-
-
-
-
—
-
.
~
-
-
.
	
[ O

r o
: o o
~~ « o
o o
° O H n 0
O a 8°
* c* PP A» SM *****&** *
I ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' I ' I ' 1 ' 1
789 10 II 12 1 2345678
A-M- TIME OF DAY ™
FIGURE 21- DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT STATION 13.

-------
OO
         1970
          o
          UJ
          o
UJ
o

g
          Z
          O
          _J
          O
          Ul
          O
          (T
          UJ
          QL
JUNE

  20 23
500



40O



30O



200



 IOO



  0

 150



 IOO



 50
                  JULY
                        *  X
                       X X
                6
                o
                              o
                      AUG

                       4
O X
                                    *   C
                     BEFORE  AERATION
            AUG.

         10 IS 20  25
     SEPT

     10 15 20 25
   OCT.

5  10 15  20 £5
I  I  !   |  T
NOV.
o

xx
                                                    §
                                                    o
                                                          X
                                                          o
                                    X

                                    X
                                                                °6
                                                                  0- BODp

                                                                  X- COD"
                                            AFTER AERATION
            FIGURE  22- BOD.  AND  COD  AT STATION   13  .

-------
D.O. measurements  recorded  at  Station  6  before and after
activation of the  aeration  devices.  The aeration re-
sulting from the seven  foot  fa I I  from  the force main into
Station 5 before  installation  of  the U-tube is clearly
evident.  Only  five  of  thirty-two measurements showed no
D.O.  The high  was 2.1  mg/I  and the  average of 32 measure-
ments was 0.8 mg/l.  After  installation  of the U-tube
which eliminated the seven  foot fall,  D.O. at  Station 6
ranged from a  low  of 0.6 mg/l  to  a high  of 2-8 mg/l  with
an average of  I.6  mg/l.  Figure 24 is  the daily plot of
dissolved sulfides at Station  6 before and after activa-
tion of the aeration devices.  Before  activation of the
aeration devices only three  of thirty-two measurements
showed no measureable sulfides.   The high of 6.0 rng/l was
the highest concentration of dissolved sulfides recorded
in the demonstration.   The  average of  the 32 measurements
was 0.51 mg/l dissolved sulfides. After activation of the
aeration devices,  dissolved  sulfides at  Station 6 ranged
from zero to a  high  of  0.18  mg/l  with  an average of 0.05
mg/l. The apparent reduction in dissolved sulfides (Sec)
attributable to aeration was 90%. Figure 25 is the hourly
plot of 41 measurements of  dissolved sulfides.  Figure 26
is the daily plot  of BODr and  COD run  on samples taken at
the same time sulfide measurements were  made,  before and
after activation of the aeration  devices at Station 6.
Before activation  of the aeration devices, BODr ranged from
a low of 33 mg/l to  a high  of  285 mg/l  with an average
of 151 mg/l•  COD  ranged from  a  low  of 75 mg/l to a high
of 539 mg/l with an  average  296 mg/l.   After activation
of the aeration devices, BODr  ranged from a low of 28 mg/I
to a high of 294 mg/l with  an  average  of I 28 mg/l and COD
ranged from a  low  of I 23 to  a  high of  529 mg/l with an
average of 260  mg/l.  The apparent reduction at Station 6
attributable to aeration was I 2%  for COD and \7% in BOD.

Station 5  is the location of the  larger  of two Venturi
aspirated U-tubes.  Before  installation  of the U-tube, a
12 in. force main  discharged into the  manhole, designated
5A in Figure 2, with a  seven foot fa I I  from the  invert of
this force main to the  invert  of  the receiving 21" gra-
vity sewer.  2400  ft of 8  in.  gravity  sewer with its in-
vert set 0.4 feet  above the  invert of  the 2l in. sewer
also discharges into 5A.  The  invert of  the 12 in. U-tube
discharge was set O.I feet  above  the  invert of the re-
ceiving sewer,  consequently  with  the activation of the
U-tube,  the seven foot  fa I I  of the force main  discharge
                           49

-------
1970
 UJ
 o

 X
 o

 o
 Ul

 3
 o
 CO
 CO
 a
 o
 UJ
 O
 tr.
JUNE

 2O 25
       0


      ISO





      IOO





       50
JULY
AUG

 4
          0    O
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
  SEPT.

5  10 IS 20 25
'  i  '  '  i
   OCT.

5  10 15 20 25
i  i  i  i  i
NOV.
                                      o

                                      o
                                       8
           BEFORE AERATION
                                  AFTER AERATION
  FIGURE 23 -  DISSOLVED OXYGEN  AT STATION  6.

-------
1970
 co

 e
 u.
 to

 0
 Ul


 o
 CO
 CO

 5
 _J

 Q
 Ul
 o
 cc
JUNE

  ZO 23
 0


ISO





IOO





50





 0
JULY
AUG
           BEFORE AERATION
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
                                T  T  I
                              -e	e-
SEPT
                                           10 15 20 25
   OCT.

5  10 15 20 25
i  T  i  r  T
NOV.
                                  AFTER AERATION
  FIGURE  24-  DISSOLVED  SULFIDES  AT STATION  6

-------



CO
g
u.
••J

CO

o
UJ
2
CO
CO
Q
_J
\

O O* xQ^i GIJ O O 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 789 10 II 12 1 2345678 A w TIME OF DAY PM FIGURE 25 - DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT STATION 6.


-------
OJ
        1970
         v.
         o
         z
         Z
         UJ
         O
         K
         tf
 JUNE
                 20 23
500

40O

3OO

ZOO

 IOO

  0
 150

 IOO

 50
  JULY
5  10 15 20
   AUG
                      X  X
                        I
                 -* X
                                    ft'
.X
                    BEFORE  AERATION
   AUG.
10 15 20 25
SEPT
10 15 2
                                                o
                                                x
                       9
                       o
 OCT.
',° p f°
                                    AFTER AERATION
NOV.
                                     0-BOD5
                                     X-COD
         FIGURE  26-  BOD5  AND COD  AT STATION  6.

-------
and resulting extreme turbulence at Station 5A were com-
pletely el irninated.  The flow  in the 8  in. gravity sewer
during samp I ing was consistently at or just below a half
pipe  indicating a relatively steady contribution of about
100 GPM.  The flow through the U-tube averaged around
1400 GPM with an aspiration of 15 CFM for an air/water
volume ratio of 0.08-  Oxygen transfer averaged 5-1 mg/l
from an average initial demand (IODJ of 2.5 mg/l to an
average residual D.O. of 2.6 mg/l.  Table I  is a tab-
ulation of  13 sets of measurements taken at 5B, a tap
immediately upstream of the Venturi, and in 5A the man-
hole receiving the combined discharges of the U-tube and
the untreated 8 in. gravity sewer.  Flow through the U-tube
accounted for 96% of the combined discharges.  The data
in Table  I  reflects the original  entrance elbow config-
uration of  the U-tube as shown in Figure 8 and consequent-
ly relates  to sulfide, D.O., BOD5 and COD data at Sta-
tions 6,  13 and I .

Table 2 is  a tabulation of data taken after final modifi-
cation of the entrance elbow as shown in Figure 9«  There
is no indication that oxygen transfer in the U-tube was  in-
creased by  this modification, however, there was one sign-
ificant improvement.  With the original configuration,  a
period of 40 to 50 seconds elapsed between the  initial  flow
of sewage through the Venturi and the start of aspiration.
After modification, this lag was reduced to between  10
and 15 seconds.  Since the average duration of flow during
an operating cycle was about eight minutes, the total
aeration per cycle was improved by roughly 7%-  Data for
various air/water ratios and corresponding head  losses  are
also  included in Table 2.  Note that the upstream head
measured  immediately upstream of the Venturi  is negative
when aspiration is closed off or throttled.  Under these
conditions  the capacity of the I  ift station  is actually
increased by the installation of the U-tube.   It  is appa-
rent from this data that optimum oxygen transfer with  natu-
ral aspiration occurs with flows above  1900 GPM, however,
a 3 to 4 ft  increase  in head loss results.  Supercharging
to obtain higher air/water ratios resulted  in drastically
increased head  losses without a corresponding gain  in
oxygen transfer.  There appears to be about  I 20 GPM or  an
$% reduction in pump capacity from the  installation of
the U-tube  at this station for normal one pump operation.
For two pumps there appeared to be a  loss  in capacity  on
the order of 300 GPM or I 2%»  This reduction  in capacity
                           54

-------
   TABLE  I       IOD AT STATION 5B, UPSTREAM
                 OF THE VENTURI AND DO  IN 5A
               RECEIVING THE U-TUBE DISCHARGE
Sta. 5A
DO mg/l

  2.4
  3.6
  2.8
  2.8
  4.1
  2.9
  I  .9
  1.9
 '~l.6
  2.0
  2.8
  2.2
  2.6
  2.6
Date
	
10/1/70
10/7/70
10/7/70
10/12/70
10/14/70
10/19/70
10/20/70
10/20/70
10/21/70
10/22/70
10/22/70
10/23/70
10/24/70
Average
Sta. 5B
IOD mg/F
1.3
1 .0
2.2
2.3
-0.5
2.0
3.9
3.9
2.0
4.3
3.1
3-9
2.6
2.5
                                                 m
Transfer
 g/l  02

   3.7
   4.6
   4.9
   5.1
   3.6
   4.9
    .8
    .8
   3.6
   6.3
   5.9
   6.1
   5.2
   5.1
                                                    5
                                                    5
Air/Water Volume Ratio 0.07
                         55

-------
TABLE 2      TABULATIONS OF VARYING SEWAGE
             AND ASPIRATION RATES AND THE
           EFFECT ON TOTAL OXYGEN TRANSFER
         HEAD LOSS IN THE U-TUBE AT STATION

Water
F 1 own ate
(GPM)
1570(1)
2060(2)
2000(2)
2180(2)
1580(1)
2180(2)
2090(2)
2090(2)
1340(1)
1400(1)
1960(2)
1920(2)
1280(2)
900(1)
1620(2)
1620(2)

A i r
F 1 owrate
(CFM)
0
0
5.5(3)
10.5(3)
7.5(3)
16.0(3)
17.0(3)
20.0(3)
14.0
15.0
28.0
28.0
20.0(4)
19.0(4)
40.0(4)
60.0(4)


• Air/Water
Vo 1 ume Rat i o

_ _
0.021
0.036
0.036
0.055
0.061
0.071
0.078
.. 0.080
0.107
0.109
0.120
0.158
0.185
0.277

Upstream
Head
(FT H20)
-4.75
-5.08
-3.75
-2.75
-5.25
-0.98
-0.92
-0.60
3.50
'3.83
7.50
7.08
20.83
17.25
28.60
29.17
Total
Oxygen
Transfer
(MG/L)
•
— — —
1 .1
2.4
3.3
3.5
4.7
. 4.7
4.5
4.9
6.4
6.5-
7.7
7.9
9.1
8.9
             Lift Station 40
(I)  One pump  )
(2)  Two pumps )
(3)  Aspiration Air Throttled
(4)  Supercharging with Compressor
                      56

-------
can be entirely  el iminated by  I i m i t i ng  (throttl ing) the
aspiration  air  but  with some reduction  in  oxygon transfer.
Data from Station 5 indicates that  U-tube  design can gen-
erally be adapted to existing pumps  even when little or
no reserve  pump  capacity exists providing  dissolved sui-
fides are below  2 mg/I.  When  a higher  concentration of
dissolved sulfides  make optimum oxygen  transfer desirable,
it may be necessary to change  the pump  impel! ers or pos-
sibly pumps and  motors to accomodate the higher head loss.

Table 3  is  a  tabulation of dissolved sulfides (Ss-j and
D.O. taken  at Station 5 after  act i vat i or1 and before mod-
ification of  the entrance elbow lor  the iJ-tube,  It will
be noted that no D.O. was found  in  any  sample from 5B, the
tap  in the  force main immediately upstream of  the Venturi .
Immediate oxygen demand (IOD)  was not run  on these samples.
The residual  D.O. measured in  5A, the manhole receiving the
U-tube discharge correlates very  we!I with the data tabul-
ated  in Table I  when IOD was measured  in the samp I"S from
5B.   In contrasting the samples from 5B with those ol 5A
in both Tables  I  and 3, it must be  real ized that the mea-
surements do  not relate to the  same  slug of sewage,  it
was not possible to make the two  measurements «ithin the
approximately 30 second interval  of travel between points
5B and 5A.   The  pairs of measurements  in   >B and )A were  in
a I I cases taken  during the same operating  cycle and the
average values  are  considered  significant.  The data from
Table 3 confirms that the oxidation of  su  ! 1 ides is only
partially completed in the U-tube.   The reduction  in dis-
solved sulfides  from Station 5B to  5A based on tin  axerage
values of  .15 mg/I  and .06 my/I respecti\el>  is on r he
order of 60%  with a high average  D.O,  (2.3 mg/l) per-
sisting  in  Station  5A.   This contrasts  to  a 90- reduction
at Station  6,  only  370 ft downstream, and  93;'1 at Station
13,  1450 ft downstream, with no further aeration beyond
the air-water interface in the  gravity  sewer.  While ob-
viously there is some oxygen enrichment ot the sewer atmo-
sphere as entrained air leaves  the  stream, this occurs  in
the first few feet  when residual  D.O.  in the stream  is
highest and the  cont i nu i ng ox i dat ion o I  sulfides in t he-
gravity sewer appears largely,  if not entirely, the result
of D.O.  imparted to the stream  in the U-tube.

Station 40  is one of dual  wet  we I Is of  the pump station
pumping to  the  U-tube at Station  5.   Station 40 receives
the 18 in.  gravity  sewer carrying the discharge from the
                            57

-------
   TABLE  3
       TABULATION  OF DISSOLVED SULFIDES  AND
       DISSOLVED OXYGEN  AT  STATIONS  5B
       (UPSTREAM OF THE' VENTURI)  AND  5A  (THE
       MANHOLE  RECEIVING THE  U-TUBE  DISCHARGE)
Date

08/18/70
08/31/70
08/31/70
08/31/70
08/31/70
09/08/70
09/09/70
09/18/70
09/28/70
09/30/70
10/07/70
10/14/70
10/19/70
10/20/70
10/20/70
10/21/70
10/22/70
10/22/70
Averages
Ti
  me
1010
0845
0945
1045
1510
I 120
1000
1645
1435
1000
1025
1450
1055
1015
1500
I 150
1000
1445
5B-
mg/l S^
0.06
0.07
0.14
0.14
0.31
0.07
0.13
0.04
0.06
0.17
O.I 1
0.46
0.31
0.01
0.09
0.04
0.03
0.41
0.15
15 mg/l DO
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
                                                   5A
mg/l Sg:
0.05
0.04
0.08
0.06
0.21
0.05
0.15
0.01
0.04
0.06
0.07
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.20
0.06
J mg/l DO
2.8
1 .8
O.I
I .6
2.4
2.3
1 .3
3.6
3.6
2.8
2.7
4.1
2.9
I .9
1.9
1 .6
2.0
2.8 '
2.3
                            58

-------
ll-tube at Station  7 together  with  the flow of the 10  in.
gravity sewer entering  the  manhole designated Station 7A .
Station 40  is connected to  Station 30 by a 24 in. equal izer
providing a combined  wet we I I  volume of 5,000 gal .   Since
these two wet we I Is also receive the combined flow of two
10  in. and one  8  in.  gravity  sewers in addition to the  in-
termittent discharge  of the two aerated force mains, no
clear cut significance  can  apply to any sample.  Despite
the questionable  nature of  samples from Station 40 (as  dis-
cussed earl ier, the data obtained  related to a sewage flow
containing between 40%  and  S5% aerated sewage).  This  is
the only data  indicating the  downstream effect of the ll-tube
at Station 7.   Figure 27 is a daily plot of D.O. at Station
40 before and after activation of  the aeration devices.
Before activation  of  the aeration  devices D.O. ranged from
a  low of 0.4 nig/I  to  a  high of 3.5 mg/ I  with an  average
value of 1.9 mg/l.  This high D.O. appears to be the re-
sult of high fa I Is from the 10 in. force main into Station
7A  (4 ft), the  18  in. gravity into Station 40 (2 ft to
5 ft) and the 8  in. force main into Station 30 (3 ft to
6 ft).  After activation of the aeration devices 0.0,  in
Station 40 ranged  from  a low  of 0.3 nig/I to a high of 3.8
mg/l with an average  value  of 2-3  mg/l.   it is significant
in comparing data  before and  after aeration that the U-tube
at Station 7 el iminated the four foot fa I  I  into  7A with  the
attendant oxygenation and stripping of a considerable
amount of HoS.  The fa I Is into Stations 40 and 30, whi Ie
altered to ranges  of  0  ft to  5 ft  and I ft to 6  ft, res-
pectively, by raising the high water  level to prolong the
pump cycle, sti I I  existed with substantial iy the same tur-
bulence, oxygenat i on and stripping  of sulfide as  before.
Figure 28  is the  daily  plot of suI fides at Station 40,   Be-
fore activation of the  aeration devices dissolved suI fides
(^85) 'n Station  40 ranged  from 0  to a high of 3.(H mg/l
with an average value of 0.42 mg/l•  After activation of
the aeration devices  dissolved suIfides (See) at Station
40 ranged from  0  to a high  of 0.32 mg/l with an  average
value of O.I I mg/l and  an apparent reduction  in  dissolved
su I fides attributable to upstream  aeration of 74/^.  Fig-
ure 29 is the hourly  plot of  dissolved suI fides  before
and after activation  of the aeration devices.  Figure 30
is the daily plot  of  BOD5 and COD  at Station 40.  Before
activation of the  aeration  devices, BODr ranged  from  a
low of 21  mg/l  to  a high of 320 mg/l with an average value
of  174 mg/l.  COD  ranged from a low of 64 mg/l to a high
                            59

-------
        1970
ON
O
        Ui
        O
        O
        Ui
O
5
-i
        3
        UJ
        O
        tz
          JULY
       5 10 15 ^0 25
                         AUG
                          4
               50 -
0 -
                   BEFORE  AERATION
   AUG.
10 15 20 25
SEPT.
10 15 20 23
 OCT.
10 15 20 25
i  I  i  T
NOV.
                                               o
                                               O
                               O

                               O
                                 AFTER AERATION
          FIGURE 27- DISSOLVED OXYGEN AT STATION  40.

-------
1970
 V)
 U
 o
 u.
 Q
 UJ

 3
 o
 tO
 CO
 o
Q
 z
 UJ
 o
 tr

 K
JUNE

 20 2:
        0


       150





       IOO





       50
                 JULY

               5  10  15 ZO 25
AUG

 4
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
  SEPT

5  10 IS 20 25
   OCT.

5  10 15 20 25
'  i  i  i  T
NOV.
            BEFORE  AERATION
                                          AFTER AERATION
  FIGURE 28- DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT STATION 40.

-------
a\




CO
111
o
ID
CO
o
UJ
o
CO
CO
0
_l
o










5.0
4.5
4.0


3.5
30

2.5
2.0


1.5
1.0


Oc
• O


0.0
: BEFORE AERATION (0)
L AFTER AERATION (X)
-
r o
-
.
•
_
:
-
'•_
•
.
-
'_
'. 0 0
° o
1 o o

o o . Q ox o
"oo°° ° o°°
|L ox° xxx xR)XoXxoo
i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i • i
789 10 II 12 1 2345678
A M TIME OF DAY PM
FIGURE 29- DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT STATION 40.

-------
OJ
        1970
         X
         z
         UJ
         o
111
<9
>
X
o
         UJ
         o
         £E
         Ul
         Q-
       JUNE

        20 23
500




40O




300




200




 IOO




  0

 150




 IOO




 50




  0
JULY

10 15 21
                     AUG
            X  X

               X

          xx    o


             o o

                        8n    O °  °
                         ° O   ° o  •
                                 X •
                    BEFORE  AERATION
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
  SEPT

5  10 15 20  25
ii'ii
   OCT.

5  10 15 20 £5
        I
                                                                I  f   T  I
NOV.
                                                 X

                                                 d1
      o        o
      x   9


         <*>
                                          AFTER  AERATION
                                                               0-BOD5

                                                               X-COD
         FIGURE  30- BOD5 AND COD AT STATION  40

-------
of 528 rng/l with an average value of 306 mg/l.  After  acti-
vation of the aeration devices BOD^ ranged from a  low  of
42 mg/l to a high of 351 mg/l with an average value of
152 mg/l.  COD ranged from a  low of 149 mg/l, a high of
393 mg/l with an average value of 251  mg/l.  The apparent
reduction attributable to aeration is 13% for BOD^ and I 8%
for COD.

Station 7  is the location of the smalIer of two U-tubes
and is the upstream terminal of the demonstration.  The
U-tube at Station 7 is  installed on the discharge  end  of
2050 ft  of 10 in. force main.  The center! ine of  the  Ven-
turi is 30 in. above the center I ine of the original dis-
charge.  Flow through the U-tube in normal automatic sin-
gle pump operation with an aspiration of 4 CFM was on  the
order of 600 GPM.  Upstream pressure immediately ahead of
the Venturi ranged between 23 and 37 in. H^?) with  an aver-
age value of 25-2 in. HoO.  With no aspiration, flow  in-
creased to about 660 GPM.  Upstream pressure was negative
ranging between -22 and -63  in. HoO with an average value
of -33.8 in. H^P) .  The flow with the former free discharge
of the force main averaged 670 GPM.  It appears that the
U-tube at Station 7 with normal pump operation and with an
aspiration of about 4 CFM increased the system head by
about 55 in. h^O which resulted in an \\%  loss  in  capacity.
With two pump operation and normal aspiration at 8 CFM up-
stream pressure ranged between 80 and 100  in. h^O.  Flow
was reduced from a free discharge capacity of 920  GPM  to
795 GPM or about a \4%  loss  in capacity.  Aspiration at
795 GPM was between 7 and 8 CFM which is equivalent to an
air-water ratio of .07.  For normal single pump operation
viz: a flow of 600 GPM and an aspiration of 4 CFM  the  air-
water volume ratio was  .05.

The entrance elbow was modified in the same manner as  pre-
viously described for Station 5 U-tube, but did not appear
to improve transfer.   However, the lag between sewage  flow
and the start of aspiration was reduced.   In the case  of
Station 7,  the reduction was from an average  I 10 seconds
with the original configuration to between 30 and  40 sec-
onds with the new elbow.  Figure 31 is the daily plot  of
D.O. at Station 7A before and after activation of  the
aeration devices.  Before activation of the aeration de-
vices D.O.  in Station 7A ranged from 0 to  a high of  1.7 mg/l
with an average value of  .62 mg/l.  After  activation of
                           64

-------
ON
        1970
         I!
         3

         O
         Ul
         3
         o
         UJ
         o
         a:
         UJ
         a.
JUNE

 ZQ 2S
                0


               ISO





               IOO





               50
JULY

AUG

 4
                        o
                        o  o
     -e-9-
                   BEFORE  AERATION
   AUG.

10 15 2O Z9
                                         *  I  I
  SEPT.

5  10 [5 20 25
1  ?  i  i  i
                                                8
   OCT.     NOV.

5  10 15 20 25	5
                                             o
                                   AFTER AERATION
                                                      o



                                                      000
          FIGURE  3!-DISSOLVED  OXYGEN  AT  STATION   7.

-------
the U-tube, D.O. ranged from a  low of 0.2 mg/l with a high
of 3.8 mg/l with an average value of 2-1 mg/l,   tt should
be noted here that before activation of the U-tube samples
had to be taken  immediately after flow from the  force main
stopped and are  not fully representative of conditions
during the force main discharge.  The same  is true for
sulfide, BODr and COD samples.  Figure 32  is the daily
plot of sulfides at Station 7A .  Before activation of the
U-tube, dissolved sulfides (Sor) ranged from zero to a
high of .91 mg/l with an average value of  .26 mg/l.  After
activation of the ll-tube, dissolved sulfides (Sgcj)  in 7A
ranged from zero to a high of  .21 mg/l with an average
value of .06 mg/l.  Figure 33  is the hourly plot of sul-
fides  in Station 7A.  Figure 34  is the daily plot of BODr
and COD at Station 7A before and after activation of the
U-tube.  Before  activation of the U-tube, BODr ranged
from a low of 88 mg/l to a high of 178 mg/l with an aver-
age value of 126 mg/l,  COD ranged from a  low of 158 mg/l
to a high of 385 mg/l with an average value of 237 mg/l .
After activation of the U-tube, BOD^ ranged from a  Iow  of
31 mg/l to a high of 160 mg/l with an average value of
96 mg/l.  COD ranged from a  low of 105 mg/l to a high of
268 mg/l with an average value of 186 mg/l.  The apparent
reduction attributable to the U-tube was 77% for dissolved
sulfides,  22% for COD and 24% for BOD5.  Table 4 is a
tabulation of IOD and D.O. taken at Stations 7B  and 7A.
This data reflects the original configuration of the U-tube
and consequently relates to other downstream data taken
during the demonstration.  No  instream data was  taken
after modification of the elbows of the two U-tubes since
aspiration rates were not increased.   IOD  ranges from a
low of I.0 mg/l  to a high of 5-5 mg/l with  an average
value of 3.1 mg/l.  D.O. ranged from a  low  of 0.4 mg/l  to
a high of 3-8 mg/l with an average value of  1.7  mg/l.
There  is good correlation between the D.O.  recorded  in
Figure 31  for Station 7A after  activation  of U-tube as
originally configured and the 0.0. recorded  in Table 4.
VENTURI AND ASHBROOK AERATORS

The pumping rate through the  in-I ine Venturi  ranged  be-
tween 920 and 1080 GPM.  During test hours  and  dry weather,
the pumping cycle ranged between  four and six minutes,
and the interval between pumping  from seventeen to twenty
                           66

-------
1970
CO
iZ
CO
o
bJ

o
CO
CO
5
_j
Z
4E

O
5
^
O

Ul
o
a:
UJ
a.
JUNE
20 25

5
4


3


2

1


150

100


50

o





-


~


~

-
O

_
.
. \
V
r
s
I
i




"" 	 8 E
FIGURE 52
„,„ „ ,„ _._
JULY
5 10 15 20 25
f i •









o

Ol y"4

I
f\
fj \
i V i i
! T












hi
i
Jl
IA/N
I/V 1
AUG

















N
! : i i r
i ; ' I
; ii K

'"\ i '
\ A /
Vj








FORE AERATSON













|









AUG. SEPT OCT NOV.
10 15 20 25 5 10 15 20 25 5 10 15 20 25 5
— r- i 	 1 	 1 ! T 	 T" T — 1 | ! I i 	 T r "T^- r —















O O °O° O g^Q Q Q (jggQQ

» 1 1* f\ 1
A W \ 11
A ' M n H

' \ 11 i
k ' i \ A • •
' l\ / 1 1 \ i \ N\A ! ! i
V U VM M U 1
; J 1 ^^ ' « ! U * I
y ' \ / \ \ ^ •' v V"" 1^1 \
I/ '-; » V V / w V
V s v \ /
V
1| AFTER AERATION
- DISSOLVED SULFiDES AT STATION 7-

-------
Os
00



CO
Ul
o
-i
CO
o
Ul
o
CO
CO
a

i







5.0
4.5

4.0
3.5

3.0
2.5


2.0
15
I.O
0.5

0.0
: BEFORE AERATION (0)
•_ AFTER AERATION (X)
-
"
-
	
-
-
-

'
"'
-
- 0
L
: o
- xfltfxxxx°x * xxx x « x
1 ' I ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' I ' 1 ' l ' I ' 1 ' 1
789 10 II 12 1 2345678
AM TIME OF DAY PM
FIGURE 33- DISSOLVED SULFIDES AT STATION 7.

-------
1970
 <9
 a
 o
 Ul
 o

 X
 o
 _J
 5
 ui
 o
 oc
 UJ
 Q.
 JUNE
500




400




300




ZOO




 IOO




  0

 150




 IOO




 50
  JULY

5 10 15 20 25
AUG
   o x
            BEFORE AERATION
   AUG.

10 15 20 25
  SEPT

5  10 15 20  25
it'll
   OCT.

5  10 15 20 £5
T  T  T T T
NOV.

-4-
               X

               X   X

                  o

               §
                      x

                      o
                                                               0-BOD5

                                                               X- COD
                                     AFTER AERATION
 FIGURE 34-BOD5 AND COD AT STATION 7

-------
    TABLE 4
       IOD  AT STATION 7B,  UPSTREAM
      OF THE VENTURI  AND D.O.  IN  7A
      RECEIVING  THE  U-TUBE DISCHARGE
Date
10/7/70
10/7/70
10/12/70
10/14/70
10/19/70
10/20/70
10/20/70
10/21/70
10/22/70
10/22/70
10/23/70
10/24/70
Average
Sta. 7B
IQD mg/l

   1.3
   2.2
   1.8 '
   I .0
   2.9-
   4.5
   3.3
   3.4
   5.5
   3.4
   3.9
   3.5
   3.1
Sta. 7A
DO ing/I

  2.0
  2.4
  3.8
  3.3
  1.6
  0.6
 .-2.4
  0.7
  0.4
  1.7
  0.2
  1.6
  1.7
Transfer
mg/l O2

   3.3
   4.6
   5.6
   4.3
   4.5
  "5.1
   5.9
   4.1
   5.9
   5.1
   4.1
   5.1
   4.8
Air/Water Volume Ratio 0.04

-------
minutes,   Prel iminary tests disclosed that  the  Ashbrook
device  would  not aspirate a measureable  volume  of air.
Pressure  drop across the Ashbrook was  10  psi  and upstream
pressure  was  12-5 psi   with a flow of 910 GPM.   Because of
the  failure of the Ashbrook to aspirate  and the impractic-
abi I i ty of suppIy i ng air in bottIes only  the  i n-I i ne
Venturi was activated during this demonstration.

Samp I ing  taps were located  immediately upstream and down-
stream  of both the in-I ine Venturi and the  Ashbrook device.
The  location  of the downstream tap proved to  be too close
to the  Venturi  outlet to provide for absorption of oxygen
or the  oxidation of suI fides.  Transfer  of  oxygen across
the  in-I ine Venturi  based on eight samples  at the taps
was consistently less than  I my/I, however,  when a 50 ft
length  of garden hose was imposed between the downstream
tap and the samp I ing bottle, transfer  in  five samples
averaged  above 2 rng/I .  Obviously no correlation exists
between a 50  ft length of 3/4 in. garden  host  and several
hundred feet  of 8 in.  force main and this data  is mean-
ingless to this demonstration.  On the other  hand it serves
to prove  that the reaction was  incomplete at  the tap pro-
vided downstream of the  Venturi  and designated  Station 32,
COD and suIf ides run on  these samples from  Station 32 were
in many  instances higher arid never significantly lower
than corresponding measurements run on samples  i rom Sta-
tion 31  immediately upstream of the Venturi  despite an
aspiration of 5 to 6 CFM equivalent to an air-water volume
ratio of  .04.   Station 30 receives the discharge from the
in-line Venturi  at Stations 31-32-  The  three to seven
foot drop from this force main to the wet we I I  water sur-
face was  not  el iminated.   19 D.O. measurements  before
activation of the Venturi ranged from a  low of  0.7 nig/I  to
a high of 3-0 mg/l  and averaged 2-03 mg/l.   13  D.O. measure-
ments taken after activation of the Venturi  ranged from a
low of  I.0 mg/l  to a high of 3-8 mg/l and averaged 2.33 mg/
This would appear to credit the  in-I  ine  Venturi with a
gain of 0.3 nig/I  or no significant improvement  over the
aeration  real ized from the fa I I  and splash  of a high force
main discharge.   In any  event the persisting  stripping of
hydrogen  sulfide brought violent complaints from residents
in the vicinity and forced curtailment of samp I ing from
Station 30.
                            71

-------
                       SECTION VI

                   SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Tables  5  and  6  ore tabulations of mean values  of  a I I  mea-
surements  of  DO,  dissolved sulfides (Sor), BOD^ and  COD
before  and after  aeration, and the percent reduction in
dissolved  sulfides,  BODc and COD attributable  to  aeration.
These values  are  derived from measurements  in  the mixed
stream  and are  not weighted to reflect the percentage of
unaerated  flow  in each sample.  Table 5,  however,  includes
a tabulation  of the  approximate percentage of  the flow
that  issues  From  the aeration device  immediately  upstream
of the  samp I ing station at the time of samp I ing.  The
remainder  of  the  flow into samp I ing stations at the  time
of samp I ing  is  from  untreated gravity sewers previously
shown in  Figure 2-  With the exception of Station 40,
these percentages are based on measured depth  of  flow in
gravity sewers  and metered flow through the  Venturis at
the time  of  sampling.  As wi I I be discussed  later  in this  re-
port,  it  proved impossible to accurately  determine  a ratio
oF aerated to untreated sewage in either  Station  30  or
40.  The  tabulations in Tables 5 and 6 I ist  the stations
in order  of progression from the upstream terminal  (Sta-
tion 7) to the  downstream terminal (Station  I)  and  pre-
sent a  concise  summary of the results of  this  demon-
strat ion.

It will be noted  that a significant D.O.  is  recorded be-
fore activation of the aeration devices at Stations  7, 40,
6 and 13.  This is attributable to the Fa I I  with  resultant
splash  and turbulence from the high force main discharges
at Stations 7,  30 and 5 and a high gravity drop  into Sta-
tion 40.   With  the installation of the U-tubes, the  falls
of seven  and  four feet,  respectively, from the invert of
the force  mains to the invert of receiving sewer  were
el irninated from Stations 5 and 7,  but the three to  seven
foot drops from the  invert of the force main and  gravity
sewer to the  water surface in the receiving  wet we I Is at
Stations 30-40  remained.   As would be expected, the
stripping  of  h^S  at  Stations 7, 30-40, and 5 was  extreme
prior to activation  of the aeration devices  with  pro-
nounced odor  and  clear evidence of corrosive attack.  Par-
ticularly  vehement complaints from residents  in the
                            72

-------
TABLE 5     TABULATION OF AVERAGE VALUES OF ALL MEASUREMENTS OF DO AND DISSOLVED
            SULFIDES (Sg5) BEFORE AND AFTER ACTIVATION OF AERATION DEVICES


Stat ion
7B(l)
7A(2)
40(3)
5B(I)
5A(2)
6
13
2(0
1
% Flow (4)
Aerated at
Samp 1 i ng Po i nt
0
80
40-85
40-95
96
95
79
39
93%
D.O. mg/
Before
Aerat i on

0.6
1 .9
_ . _ .
...
0.8
0.0
	
0
1 (5)
After
Aerat i on
0
2.1
2.3
0
2.5
1 .6
0.7
_ — _
. 1 .4
SRC; mg/
Before
Aerat i on

0.26
0.42
. . . .
...
.0.51
0.30
_ _ _
0.63
1 (5)
After
Aerat i on
0.27
0.06
O.I 1
0.15
0.06
0.05
0.02
. — .
0 '

S85 (5)
W *J
Reduct i on

in
•74%

«...
90%
93%

100$
 (l)  Stations  nonexistent  before  aeration.   5B  and 7B  are taps upstream of the
     Venturi aspirators.   Station 2  is  the  airl ift aerator.

 (2)  4  ft  and  7  ft-fall  into  stations 7A  &  5A,  respectiveIy,  from  force main prior
     to  aeration only.  El iminated by U-tube.

 (3)  3  ft  to 6 ft fa I I  into station  from  gravity  sewer before, and  after aeration.

 (4)  This  column, except for  Station 40,  is based on measured flow at  the  sampling
     station and is the percentage of total  flow  (or volume)  in the sampling sta-
     tion  at the time of sampling issuing from  the aerator  immediately upstream.
     The conditions controlling at Station  40 are explained  in the text.

 (5)  These values are as measured in the  mixed  stream  and are not  weighted to
     reflect the percentage of aerated  flow in  the samples.

-------
         TABLE 6
Stat i on

7B

40
5B
5A
6
13
I
              TABULATION OF AVERAGE VALUES OF ALL
              MEASUREMENTS OF COO AND BOD5 BEFORE
              AND AFTER ACTIVATION OF THE AERATION
              DEVICES
         COD
 Before
Aerat i on
  306
  296
  315
  310
 After
Aerat i on

  220
  186
  251
  352
  319
  260
 , 250
 ' 208
Reduct i on
                          22%
   2\%
   33^
BOD5
Before
Aerat i on

126 '
174
	
	
151
176
169
After
Aerat i on
103
96
1 52
221
194
125
150
128

Reduct i on

24% .
! 3%
	
	
\1%
\ 5%
24%

-------
vicinity of Stations 30-40 had forced  the  Parish  to  seal
the covers of these wet wells and  run  a  6  in.  vent  under
a railroad embankment out  into an  open field.   Opening
these sealed covers at Station 30-40 to  take  samples and
measurements brought  immediate and violent opposition which
persisted despite assurances that  the  work would  be  of
short duration and was specifically aimed  at  reducing and
possibly el iminating the odor.

Unfortunately after aeration, even with  dissolved sulfides
reduced 74% to a mean value of O.I  mg/l,  some  odor persist-
ed and sampling had to be curtailed at Stat i on 30-40,  Th i s
appears to confirm observations by Pomeroy and Bowlus (6)
to the effect that, while concentrations at or below O.I
mg/ I dissoIved suIfides may be acceptable in a  smoothly flow-
ing gravity sewer with a nominal pH (about 7),  concentra-
tions significantly below O.I mg/l  dissolved sulfides can
produce totally unacceptable  levels of h^S in  the sewer
atmosphere if there is turbulence,  particularly if  the pH
is at or be Iow 7•

Contrary to the situation persisting at  Stations  30-40,
the U-tubes at Stations 5 and 7 are set  with  the  invert of
their discharge practically  level  with (O.I ft above) the
invert of the receiving sewer.  The aerated stream  from
the U-tube blends very smoothly with the untreated  stream
and there was no detectable odor of HoS  in either manhole
even though dissolved sulfides as  high as  0.2l  mg/l  on one
occasion were recorded  in the combined (aerated and un-
treated) stream.  Table 5 gives good  indication of  the
continuing oxidation of the dissolved  sulfides in the
gravity sewer downstream of the aeration device.  At Sta-
tion 7A, the discharge manhole directly  receiving the
aerated discharge of that U-tube,  the  mean D.O. was 2.1
mg/l and the reduction  in dissolved sulfides  was  74%'
This amounted to a decrease from a mean  of 0.26 mg/l before
aeration to a mean of 0.06m9/l  after aeration.  At  Sta-
tion 6, 370 ft downstream of the discharge of the second
U-tube (Station 5A), the mean D.O. decreased  to I.6 mg/l
(from 2.5 at 5A) and the reduction in  dissolved sulfides
was 9®%•  This amounted to a decrease  from a  mean of 0.51
mg/l before aeration to a mean of  0.05 mg/l after aeration.
At Station 13, 1450 ft downstream  of 5A, the  mean D.O.
dropped to 0.7 mg/l and the reduction  in dissolved  sul-
fides was 93%-  This amounted to a decrease from  a  mean
                           75

-------
0.30  mg/l  before aeration to  0.02 nig/I  after aeration  by  the
U-tube.

Contrasting the sulfide concentrations  in the system be-
fore  and  after aeration, aside  from the significant overalI
reduction,  it will  be noted that  before aeration, except
for Station 13, there was a typical  consistent build-up
as the  flow progressed downstream.   After aerat:  m, except
for Station 40, there was a consistent  drop as the fIow
progressed  downstream.  The dip  in  sui fide concentration
at Stat ion  13 before activation oi  the  aeration devices
appears to  reflect  the transfer of  oxygen to and the strip-
ping  of h^S from the sewage by  the  seven foot fa!I  from
the force main into Station 5A  and  the  continuing oxidation
of suI I ides in the  sewer between  Stat ions 6 and  I3»  This
is supported by the measured  D.O.  before instal I at ion  of
the IJ-tube  of 0.8 rng/l and O.Oi mg/ !  at  Stations 6 and  13,
respect i veIy,  before act i vat i on o1  t he  a e r a t ion devices.
As shown  by Table 5, the percentage of  aerated sewage  in
any sample  at the time of samp I ing  is,  except for Station
40, based on the measured flow  in the sampi ing station  at
the time  of samp I ing.   In the cases of  both Stations 30
and 40, which are two 9 Ft 0  in.  diameter bottom connected
wet we! is with a combined volume  on the order of 5000  gals,
that  receive the continuous flow  of two 10 in. and one  8
in. gravity sewers  plus intermittent  flows from an S  in.
and 10  in.  Force main, the percentage of aerated sewage
in any  sample could range from  40/&  or less,  to 85V:>.   It
can be  assumed that percentage  approaches the higher value
because of  the fact that samples  were consistant!y taken
only  at high water  level and  in the case of Station 40,
dur i ng  or  i mmed i ate Iy foI Iow i ng  i nfIow  from Stat ion 7.
However,  the significance oF  data from  Station 40  is some-
what  questionable.    In all  other  stations the rate of  flow
of contributing gravity sewers, the Flow through the
Vent.uri aspirators  and the flow  in  the  sewer receiving  the
combined  flows could be readi ly determined.

Table 6 tabulates the mean values of  a!I  BODr and COD
measurements taken  before and after activation of the
aeration  devices.   There appears  to be  a significant re-
duction attributable to each  aeration device and a sign-
ificant cumulative  reduction  after  aeration at all sta-
tions.  There does  not appear to  be a really clear cor-
relation between suI fides and either  BOD^ or COD,  With
                            76

-------
the degree of treatment involved  in this demonstration, no
substantial reduction in BODr or COD could be anticipated.

The low average BODr and COD measurements tabulated  in
Table 6 show quite clearly the heavy residual dilution
from persistently heavy rainfall encountered both before
and after activation of the aeration devices.  This  was
previously illustrated in Figure  14.  Figure 14 would
appear to  indicate a substantially heavier dilution  in
the period before activation of the aeration device, how-
ever,  instream measurements and sampl ing during both per-
iods were  I imited to times when the flow was at or near
normal and consequently the residual effects of dilution
were probably more nearly equal.   It can be presumed that
dilution did not seriously penal ize and certainly did not
unduly favor the performance of the aeration devices.

The spacing of Station 2 in relation to Station 5 was
based on an empirical method developed by C.L. Swanson  (7).
The method is evaluated by appI ication of data taken at
Stations 5A and 13.

Swanson (7) hypothesized that oxygen demand  in a sewer
originates from:

     I.   Oxidation of suIfides produced  in the si ime
         layer, Pomeroy and Bowlus (6).

     2.   Oxidation of suIfides produced  in the flowing
         stream, Pomeroy (8).

     3.   Oxidation of sulfides and other materials pro-
         duced  in deposited sol ids  in the sewer.

     4.   BOD demand of sewage  (10).

     5.   TrickI ing fiIter effect  in which the sewer  sur-
         face  is analogous to the  rock surfaces of a
         trickl ing fiIter under submerged flow conditions.

Since no BOD reduction was observed between  Stations 6  and
13 (see Table 6) it was assumed that the trickling filter
effect was nil and accordingly this factor was eliminated.
Since deposited sol ids were minimal  in the test reach  of
sewer this factor was el iminated.
                            77

-------
 It  was  assumed that sufficient oxygen would  be  available
 in  the  sewer  atmosphere to meet the demand and  that trans-
 fer  would  be  dependent on the width of the air-water inter-
 face  and directly proportional to the D.O. deficit  (D.O.
 at  saturation minus the D.O. of the sewage stream)  arid
 the  Reynolds  Number as demonstrated by Davy  (9).   No attempt
 was  made to correct oxygen transfer for temperature or
 oxygen  concentration in the sewer atmosphere.

 The  input  tor calculation of required spacing by  Swanson's
 method  (7 J  is:

 BOD  at  Station 5A (Table 6)                     194  mg/l
 D.O.  at Station 5A (Table 5)                      2-5 mg/l
 Average  i nstream temperature                    29° C
 D.O.  at Station 13 (Table 5)                      0.7 mg/l
 Deoxygen!zation constant (KyQj                    0.15
 Sewer Diameter                                   21  in.
 Average Depth of Flow                            II  in.
 Average veIoc i ty                                  2.12 FPS

 On  the  basis  of data from Stations 5A and  13 the  calculated
 spacing by Swanson's method (?) would be about  2200 ft.
 The  actual distance is 1500 ft.  This apparent  discrepancy
 must  be viewed  in the I ight of the fact that roughly .15 MGD
 of the  I.4 MGD  flow into Station 13 is from  four  untreated
 laterals entering the system between Stations 6 and 13-
 As  a  consequence I\% of the flow into Station  13  is not
 reflected  in  the data from Station 5A and the calculated
 spacing should  exceed the actual  distance by an appreciable
 amount.  No data was taken from the four laterals and con-
 sequently  it,  cannot be determined if or to what extent the
 bu i  I d up in BODr- between Stations 6 and 13 (See Table 6)
 is  attributable to the four untreated laterals.  On the
 other hand, since the average D.O.  before aeration  was
 0.8 mg/l at Station 6 and zero at Station  13, (see  Table
 5)  it can be  assumed that the D.O.  of the four  laterals
 approached zero or possibly carried an oxygen demand.  If
 it  is assumed that the !\% contribution of the  four later-
 als was at zero D.O. and the D.O. at Station 5A adjusted
by simple proportion to 2-2 D.O.  (.89 x 2-5 = 2.2)  then
the calculated  spacing by Swanson's method (7)  would be-
come  1491 ft  or very nearly the actual spacing  (1500 ft)
between Stations 5A and 13-
                           78

-------
                     SECTION  VII

                      REFERENCES
 i.  Laugh I in,  James  E.,  "Studies in Force Main Aeration",
    Journal of the Sanitary  Engineering Division, Pro-
    ceedings  of the  American Society of CiviI  Engineers,
    4I50-SA6,  PP  13-24  (Dec  1964).

 2.  Bruijn, Jacob and Tuinzaad,  Hendrick, "The Relation
    ship  between Depth  of  U-Tubes and the Aeration
    Process",  Journal of the American Water Works
    Association, 50, PP  879-883  (July 1958).

 3.  Mitchell,  Rex C, "U-Tube Aeration"1,  Rocketdyne
    Division  of North American Rockwell  Corporation,
    EPA Project; 17050 DVT, Contract 68-01-0120.

 4.  Standard  Methods for the Examination of Water and
    Waste Water, Twelfth Edition (1965).

 5.  Baumgartner, Wm. H., "Effect of Temperature and Seep-
    ing on Hydrogen  SuIfide  Formation in Sewage", Sewage
    Works Journal, 6-3,  PP 399-412  (May  1934).

 6.  Porneroy,  Richard and Bow I us,  Fred D „ , "Progress Re-
    port  on Sulfide  Control  Research",  Sewage Works
    Journal ,  i*-4, pp  597-640 (July 194^

 7.  Swanson,  C.L., EPA  Project Officer,  "Literature
    Review and Development of Empirical  Methods for
    the Spacing of Sewer System  Oxygenation Fac iI ities"
    (Dec  9, 1968).

 8.  Porneroy,  Richard, "Generation and Control  of Su I f i des
    in Filled  Pipes", Sewage and Industrial Wastes, VoI   31,
    No. 9, PP  1082-1095  (September  1959).

 9.  Davy, W.J., "Influence of Velocity on Sulfide Gener-
    ation in  Sewers", Sewage and Industrial Wastes, Vol   22,
    No. 9, PP  I 132-1 137  (September  1950).

0.  Babbitt,  H.E., Sewage  and Sewage Treatment, John
    Wiley and  Sons Publishers, 7th  Edition, pp 317-319
    (1967).
                           79

-------
                    SECTION VIII

                     APPENDICES
                                                    Page  No
A.  Computer Program for Total Dissolved
    Sulfide Calculations ........
B.  Tabulation of Field Data  .........        85
                           80

-------
                      APPENDIX  A

COMPUTER PROGRAM  FOR  TOTAL  DISSOLVED  SULFIDE CALCULATIONS
To attempt hand calculation  of total  dissolved suI fides
from electrochemical  measurements  in  a project of this size
would be  impractical.   Accordingly,  a rel iabIe computer
program  is essential  to this method  of measurement.

The program  language  is IBM  1130/1800 Basic Fortran IV.
The computer employed was  an IBM  I 130 8K with disc, a
1442 card reader-punch  and an I I 32 printer.

AM field data was  ultimately punched on cards,  however,
only three variables  (chlorides, pH  and absolute MvS ) are
used in the program to  compute the total  dissolved sulfides

The program derives from procedures  out I ined in the Orion
Reference Manual for  the 94-16 sulfide electrode employed
in this demonstration.   A  reference  curve  corresponding to
Figure 5 of the Orion 94-16  Manual was determined generat-
ing SULIA (sulfide  ion  activity  As"").  The  Factor f for
converting sulfide  ion  activity  to total  dissolved sulfides
is computed from precise pH  measurement and approximate
ionic strength on the  basis  of Table  3 in  the Orion 94-16
Manual.  The computed  value  of dissolved sulfide concen-
tration  is then punched on the data  card to which may be
added any additional  pertinent field  data  for subsequent
I  i st i ng and corre I at i on.

-------
                                       • IOCS ICARD. 11 J2PR INTER .DISK!
                                       •LIST ALL
                                       •ONE WORD INTEGERS
                                       •NAME TSULF
                                       •ARITHMETIC TRACE
                                       •TRANSFER TRACE
                                             REAL MV
                                             INTEGER STA.DATEdliTINE
                                             DIMENSION ARGI10I. VALI10)
                                             WRITEIJ.10I
                                          10 FORMAT! U.'                                          SULPHIDE
                                            1         PPM      IONIC    CONCTN   SULPHIDE     PPM    './.1X.'
                                            2STATION    DATE      TIME      MV    ACTIVITY     PH     CHLORIDES
                                            3 STRENGTH   FACTOR   CONCTNIM) SULPHIDE 'I
                                          20 READI2.JO)  I DATE I II . 1-1.2 I .STA.T IMt.PH.MV
                                          30 FORMAT(2I2iA2.I».13X«F5.2«F5.0)
                                             DATE(3>»70
                                             CLPPM-200.
                                             Xl-71*.
                                             X2-845.
                                             T1-ALOOI0.001I
                                             Y2-ALOOI0.100I
                                             SLOPE-IT2-Y1I/I«2-»1I
                                             B'Tl-SLOPE'Xl
                                             rY-SLOPE»MV«8
OO
                                             ARSID-1
                                             AR6I2I-2
                                             ARG(3I.»
                                             AROI4I-4
                                             ARGI5I.7
                                             ARGIt)>t
                                             ARGI7)-10>
                                             ARGHI-12.
                                             ARG{9)»13«
                                             ARGdOI-l*.
                                             DO 100 L-l.»
                                             GO TO (52.5».5«i5»I.L
                                          92 VALI1)>I.*E1*
                                             VALI2I-».»SU
                                             VAL(3l-».»eU
                                             VAL(»l-».7t7
                                             VAL(»I"1.7E»
                                             VALI6)»I>9E*
                                             VALITI-I.OE2
                                             VALHI-10.J
                                             VALHI-1.7*
                                             VALI10I.1.
                                             GO TO to
                                          ?« VALI1)>(.*E1*
                                             VALI2I-«.»E1S
                                             VAL(II»t>»Etl
                                             VAL (»)"». 7E7
                                             VAl.UI-l.7E6
                                             VAL(»I.».2E»
                                             VALI7I.6.3E2
                                             V'ALHI.10.9
                                             VAUI9I-3.7*
                                             VALI10I.1.
                                             GO TO »0
                                          56 VAi.ll). I. »E19
                                             VAI.l2Ut.m3

-------
                                                        VALI3)-».9E11
                                                        VAL «•!•».»E7
                                                        VALI9l-l.»E6
                                                        VALI4I-9.7E4
                                                        VAL<7>.«.«£2
                                                        VALlll-10.3
                                                        VALitl-».T4
                                                        VALI10I-1.
                                                        00 TO »0
                                                     91 VM.lll-t.Mlf
                                                        VALC2I-«.»E1»
                                                        VALI3l'i.9Ell
                                                        VU.I4UV.1E7
                                                        VALI9I-1.9E6
                                                        VAL(6I-1.1£9
                                                        VALI7I-1.0E3
                                                        VALKI-11.2
                                                        VALI9I-3.74
                                                        VALI10I-1.
                                                     60 DO 70 1*1(10
                                                        VAL(II*AL06(VAt60
                                                     $0 CONTINUE
                                                     90 FFACT-VALI1-1I»IPH-AROII-U!•(VAL(11-VAL(1-1)I/(AKOtIl-AHOl1-11)
                                                        GO TO IV2t«4»«6t9tl(L
                                                     92 A-EXPIFFACT)
OO                                                     GO TO 100
r-j                                                  9* B-EXPIFFACTI
                                                        SO TO 100
                                                     96 C-EXPIFFACTI
                                                        GO TO 100
                                                     91 0-EXPIFFACTI
                                                    100 CONTINUE
                                                        A*GUI»10.E-»
                                                        ARSI2I-10.E-9
                                                        ARGHI-10.E-2
                                                        ARGI4I-10.E-1
                                                        VALlll'A
                                                        VALI21-B
                                                        VALI3I-C
                                                        VAL 141 *D
                                                        DO 200 1-1.4
                                                        IFIXION-ARG(I»220i200<200
                                                    200 CONTINUE
                                                    220 FFACT-VALU-l>»(XION-ARGT[ME«KVtSULIA«PM«CLPPM.XION»FFACT
                                                       l.SCTM.SCTPM
                                                    900 FORMATI9X>A2>4X.3I2iI10>F8.0i2X.Ela.3.F7.2>3X>4E10<3iF10-4)
                                                        WRITEI2I450) SCTPM
                                                    »50 FORMATI64X004A
                                                   STA  .0090  DATE >0093  TIME «0094  I    .0039  L    «0096

-------
                                             STATEMENT ALLOCATIONS
oo
10 .0082 30 -012* 900 -012E *90
70 -0313 80 -032B 90 -0333 92
FEATURES SUPPORTED
TRANSFER TRACE
ARITHMETIC TRACE
ONE -ORO INTEGERS
IOCS
CALLED SUBPROGRAMS
FALOG FEXP FAOO FADOX FSUB
SIARX SFIF SSOTO SREO SHRT
»EAL CONSTANTS
.20000CL 03-0062 .7860COE 03-006*
•100000E 01-006E
•lOQOOGg 02-007A
•890000E U-0086
.37*0<10E 01-0092
•880000E 03-009E
•20000GE 01-0070
•120000E 02-007C
•970000E 08-0088
.920000E 05-009*
. 190000E 07-OOAD
• 01>D 20 -0199 52 -0203 5* ,'12*1 it -027F it .0260 60 -02F9
-0362 9* -0369 96 -0370 »8 -0377 100 -037C 200 -03C« 220 -03CC
FSOBX FMPT FDIV FLO FLD« FSTO FSBR FOVR SFAR SFA«»
SCOMP SFIO SlOIX SI Of SIOI SUBSC CARD! PRNTZ SDFIO
•8*5000E 03-0066 • 100000E~02-C06i *100000E 00-006A *394S7oE 05-006C
«*OOOOOE 01-0072
.13QOOOE ^2-007E
.17000DE 07-008A
»830000E o3»0096
.liOOOOE 06-OOA2
•60COOOE 01-007*
•J^OOOOE 02-0080
•89QOOOE OS-008C
•980000E 08-0096
.100000E C*-OOA*
•7QOOOQE 01-OU76
•890000E 20-0082
•aoooocE 03-ocee
•180000E U7-U09A
•132000E 02-OOA6
•900000E 01»007«
•890000E 16-OOt*
•103000E 02-0090
.970000E Oi-009C
.100000E-01-OOA8
                                               •323640E 05-OOAA
INTEGER CONSTANTS
     3-90AC      2-OOAO       l-OOAE-     70-OOAF
                                             CORE REQUIREMENTS FOR TSULF
                                              COMMON      0  VAIUABL.CS     It  PROGRAM    978
                                             END OF COMPILATION

-------
                      APPENDIX  B

                      F IELD  DATA


Data on pages  86  through  88,  inclusive,  is before activa-
tion o f the  aeration  d e v ices.

Data on pages  89  through  92 represents conditions after
activation of  the aeration  devices.

             DEFINITION OF COLUMN  HEADINGS

Date - The month,  day and year of the in-stream measurement
       and samp I e .

Station - The  Station No. (See Figure 2).

Time - The hour and minutes based on the 24 hour clock.

Depth (inches  - The depth of  Flow in the gravity sewer.

Temp (°F) -  Ihe  i nstream temperature of the sewage.

pH - The pH  measured  i nstream.

Su I f i de Activity  (MV)   - The  sulfide activity in absolute
                          millivolts measured i nstream .

D.O. - The D.O, run on a 300 m! sample taken simultaneous
       with  in stream  measurement  of  pH and MV S~ .

BODr - The five day BOD run on a  300 ml  sample taken sim-
       taneous with  i nstream measurement of pH and MV S .

COD - COD run  on  the  same sample  as  BODr.

EBOD - BOD5  adjusted  from the  incubation temperature (20°C)
       to the  actual  i nstream  temperature.
Standard Su I f i des  (Sg^)  - mg/l  total  dissolved su! fides
                          adjusted  to a standard temper-
                          ature of  85°  F.

Effective su I f i des - mg/I total  dissolved  sulfides in stream
                     at  stream  temperature.
                            85

-------
oo

DATS
70270
70270
70870
70870
70870
70870
70870
70970
70970
70970
70970
70970
70970
71670
71670
71670
71670
71670
71670
71770
71770
71770
72070
72070
72070
72470
72470
72470
72470
62370
62670
63070
63070
70270
70270
70670
70670
70670
70670
71370
72070
72470
72470
72770
72770
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
80470
80470
80670
80770
80770
STA-
TION
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
J
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
TIME
HOURS
1621
1200
721
821
930
1030
1200
1219
1319
1449
1549
1730
1803
915
1030
1120
1300
1400
1500
930
1220
1430
913
1013
1200
900
1000
1134
1333
1920
1600
910
1439
1054
1534
854
1030
1200
1424
1394
1430
1039
1424
804
1004
624
824
939
1054
1424
1534
1634
1724
1324
1524
724
710
1020

DEPTH
INCHES
13.30
11.29
14.00
14.00
14. Ou
14.00
14.00
14.00
12.90
12.00
11. SO
11.00
12.00
13.90
It. 79
11.00
14.29
13.29
11.29
22.90
,
12.00
24.00
29.00
41.00
13.29
16.00
22.90
23.79
.
(.00
7.00
6.73
9.29
11.50
9.29
12.00
9.00
7.00
5.50
10.29
10.79
11.00
11.00
10.29
9.75
8.30
9.00
9.29
10.79
1.00
7.50
8.00
e.oo
10.00
8.29
8.79
10.90

TEMP
FAR.
16.0
19.9
89.0
• 6.0
19.0
83.3
86.0
88.0
88.0
89.0
88.0
«6.0
19.3
83.0
88.0
87.0
87.0
87.0
87.0
86.0
88.0
87.0
83.0
86.0
• 6.0
82.0
82.0
83.0
86.0
84.0
84.0
83.3
84.3
84.0
87.0
83.0
84.3
83.0
88.0
87.0
83.0
83.0
84.0
82.0
83.0
80.0
83.0
83.0
83. a
87.0
88. 0
86.0
86.0
86.0
86.0
83.0
82.0
87.0


PH
6.90
7.01
7.10
7.33
7.42
7.36
7.13
7.01
6.90
7.01
7.20
7.00
6.96
7.18
7.17
7.23
7.20
7.13
7.06
8.19
7.19
7.11
7.17
7.32
7.20
7.56
7.59
7.85
7.60
6.94
7.05
7.44
7.12
7.0C
7.00
8.00
7.21
7.30
7.28
7.21
7.02
7.60
7.54
7.32
7.44
7.21
7.30
7.32
7.32
7.23
7.23
7.29
7-17
7.30
7.74
7.iO
7.27
6.96
5ULFIDE
ACTIVITY
M.V.
530.
340.
519.
933.
580.
571.
979.
598.
555.
540.
539.
920.
509.
559.
970.
570.
560.
940.
955.
590.
560.
563.
530.
556.
550.
562.
576.
575.
575.
520.
550.
551.
585.
365.
547.
580.
562.
571.
558.
554.
508.
570.
558.
510.
545.
475.
535.
545.
553.
540.
545.
542.
950.
573.
565.
470.
450.
350.

0.0.
MG/L
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.
.
.
0.0
0.0
c.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
1.3
0.2
0.8
r.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.3
2.1
1.9
0.0
0.5
l.S
0.6
1.1
0.6
1.4
0.0
1.3
0.4
1.0
0*8
0.7
1.0
1.4
1.1
0.0

8005
MG/L
137
48
101
134
132
191
210
199
189
228
157
33*
240
138
190
151
167
179
173
176
268
168
89
90
300
81
85
149
182
160
122
ioe
105
231
285
205
218
230
207
194
285
166
137


108
93

103
76
79
96
136
148
162
33
51
204

COO
MG/C
333





418
380
256
406
267
419
373
195
372
272
298
364
296
311
407
326
158
192
354
174
180
280
216
30}
298
218
256
383
486
354
381
332
336
539
391
335
355
89
196

117
160
190
169
275
111
149
4;i
416
85
75
901

E60D
MG/L
268
92
190
262
249
367
ill
420
398
499
331
654
461
260
401
307
380
364
331
344
565
341
156
176
587
137
143
281
336
291
222
193
194
420
579
359
403
434
436
394
537
294
249


169
163

194
138
167
188
266
290
317
58
86
414
STANDARD
SULFIDCS
MG/L
0.16
0.24
O.C4
0.06
1.63
0.96
3.45
0.88
1.08
0.21
0.11
0.05
0.03
0.65
1.41
1.16
0.61
0.16
0.63
0.41
0.61
1.01
0.08
0.33
0.29
0.30
0.82
0.32
0.64
0.07
0.49
0.17
6.00
1.83
0.40
0.33
0.77
0>65
0.40
0.37
0.02
U.48
0.22
0.01
0.11
0.00
0.08
0.16
0.32
0.12
0.16
0.12
0.32
1.31
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.59
EFFECTIVE
SULFIDES
MG/L
0.17
0.24
0.04
0.06
1.65
0.98
3.58
0.99
1.21
0.24
0.13
0*05
0*03
0.65
1.58
1.29
0.66
0.17
0.68
0.42
0.68
1.09
0.07
0.34
0.30
0.27
0.74
0.32
0.66
0.07
0.47
0.16
5.89
1.76
0.43
0.30
0.75
0.65
0.49
0.40
0.02
0.45
0.21
0.01
0.10
0.00
0.07
0.14
0.32
0.13
0.18
0.12
0*33
1.36
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.64

-------
oo
807-0
• OT70
60T70
63070
70270
70670
70970
71J70
71670
63070
70270
70270
70670
70670
70670
70670
71770
72*70
72*70
72770
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
60470
10*70
• 0770
• 0770
80770
80770
62370
62670
62670
63070
63070
63070
70270
70270
70670
71370
71370
71370
71770
72070
80670
80770
80770
80770
80770
80770
62370
62670
63070
43070
70270
70670
70670
70670
70670
70870
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
*0
*0
*0
40
*0
40
40
»0
*0
40
1300
152*
1800
1110
930
1045
1515
9*5
930
14*9
1130
15*7
930
1100
1210
1434
1145
1051
1*36
1016
836
951
1108
1436
1546
1646
1736
1336
1536
1045
1312
1536
1812
1341
911
1527
830
1055
1356
1011
1441
1115
900
1030
1315
1100
1345
626
626
826
1220
1445
1715
1450
1545
845
1*15
1030
830
1000
1135
1400
600
14.00
9.75
9.50
•
•
•
•
•
•
s.oo
6.25
13.00
7.00
.
10.50
8-50
9.00
10.25
10.00
10.00
10.90
10.25
10.50
9.29
9.75
10.00
10.25
9.75
8.90
10.50
27.90
10.00
10.25
•
•
(
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
t
.
,
,
«
.
(
,
•
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
87.0
66.0
•*.o
8*.0
85.0
85.0
89.0
83.5
85.0
66.0
85.0
65.0
94.0
84.5
65.5
87.0
67.0
82.0
8*<0
85.0
64.0
84.0
86.0
67.0
88.0
86.0
85.0
66.0
65.0
87.0
87.0
67.0
82.0
86.0
84.0
83.5
84.5
• 5.0
86.5
85.0
87.0
83.5
83.5
6*. 5
86.0
86.0
85.0
82.0
62.0
63.0
87.0
66.0
65.0
83.0
82.5
82.5
85.0
85.0
83.0
83.5
84.0
67.0
84.0
7.00
7.62
7.27
7.32
7.3*
7.21
7.25
7.17
7.27
7.09
7.05
(..»»
7.98
7.30
7.62
7.30
7.11
7.57
7.46
7.»9
7.31
7.37
7.38
7.22
7.36
7.31
7.16
7.13
7.75
6.98
6.96
7.51
7.22
6.9*
7.12
7.10
7.32
7.05
7.26
7.05
7.00
• •30
7.50
6.00
7.27
7.79
6.98
6.96
6.98
7.0*
6.89
6.81
7.52
7.;2
7.00
7.21
7.18
7.08
8.*0
7.50
7.60
7.*8
7.02
550.
950.
539.
555.
570.
5*0.
500.
.70.
5*5.
569.
550.
530.
579.
5*0.
550.
565.
562.
565.
550.
506*
5*0.
593.
5oO.
535.
550.
550.
545.
558.
550.
530.
535.
519.
535.
530.
547.
540.
550.
581.
562.
565.
540.
563.
500.
9*3.
570.
532.
526.
510.
490.
530.
550.
530.
550.
550.
545.
565.
582.
558.
595.
560.
560.
969.
501.
0.8
0.7
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.6
1.7
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
.
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.1
C*2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
2.2
1.8
2.2
2.2
1.3
2.2
1.2
0-7
1.7
2.3
2.6
1.8
•
1.1
2.B
2.3
3.0
2.5
2.7
2.1
2.2
2.2
i.a
2.2
1*2
1.2
0*4
0.6
2.1
2*3
139
123
184
86
104
178
138
154
93
162
201
292
260
179
275
218
456
2*»
151

53
98
86
72
117
94
180
199

200
114
90
138

303
160
314
322
248
325
312
290
189
481
269

375
40
52
62
273
224
277
140
123
136
180
261
192
256
320
204
172
437
320
421
167
228

385
245
156
334
371
345
426
272

362
634
396
300
240
96
144
189
232
259
224
213
309
309
629
363
315
290
606
559
382
410
792
784
678
601
571
699
688
779

485
85
112
165
607
• 80
756
316
31*
230
386
393
386
517

357

27*
241
334
160
196
336
302
275
175
317
379
550
472
331
926
4*3
930
*11
27*

96
176
168
1*6
2*7
18*
339
389

406
232
183
233

550
285
581
607
»9»
613
634
517
337
890
526

707
67
68
108
555
438
522
245
211
234
339
492
336
456
581
414
312
0-50
0.09
0.06
0.33
0.96
0.11
0.00
0.00
0.17
1.30
0.47
0.12
O.J1
0.11
0*09
0.68
0.93
0.37
0.19
0.00
0.10
O.J4
0.36
0.08
0.17
0.21
0.23
0-67
0.06
0.11
0.18
0.01
0.10
0.14
0.32
0*20
0.22
5.29
2.92
1.52
0.23
0.05
O.QO
0.02
1.13
0.01
0.09
0.03
0.01
0.11
0.79
0.2*
0.12
0.41
0.41
1.04
3.91
0*80
0.41
0.29
O.J1
0.5,4
0.01
0.55
0.09
0.08
0.32
0.96
0.11
0.01
0.00
0.17
1.35
0.47
0.12
0.30
0.10
0.09
0.7?
1.01
0.33
0.14
0.00
0*10
0.23
0.39
0.09
0.19
0.22
0.23
0.70
0.06
0.12
0*20
0.01
0.09
0.15
0.30
0.19
0.21
5.29
3.09
1.52
0.25
0.09
0.00
0.02
1.18
0.01
0.09
0.03
0.01
0.10
0.85
0.29
0.12
0.38
0.37
0.95
3.91
0.80
0.36
0.27
0.20
0.59
0.01

-------
GO
GO
71370
71370
72070
72*70
72*70
72770
72770
72770
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
73070
90*70
90*70
(0*70
80770
J0770
10770
(0770
• 0770
62370
62670
62670
63070
63070
63070
70270
70270
70670
71370
71370
71370
71770
72070
10770
10770
80770
80770
*0
*0
*0
*0
*0
«0
»0
»0
*0
*0
*0
»0
»0
*0
*0
»0
*0
*0
*0
*0
*0
*0
»0
*0
92
52
SJ
52
52
92
52
92
92
92
9J
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
10*9
1330
1*00
1015
1*00
7*0
9*0
13S9
too
too
919
1030
1*00
1910
1610
1700
1300
1500
1630
6*6
1000
122*
1900
1735
1330
900
1515
900
1030
13*5
1000
1*30
1100
8*5
1010
1300
1030
1330
815
1209
1*3*
170*
• 3.5
(5>0
•*.o
• 3.0
• 5.0
• 2.0
96.0
9*.0
80.0
92.0
• 3.0
95.0
87.0
97.0
97.0
86.0
96.0
96.0
9*.0
92.0
86."
87.0
86.0
95.0
17.0
86.0
85.5
96.0
•6.0
16.5
87.0
99.0
16.0
•*.o
B«.5
• 7.0
• 7.0
16.0
8*.0
97.0
• 6.0
• 5.0
7.36
7.20
6.99
7.55
7.65
7.29
7.39
7.32
7.13
7.26
7.35
7.41
7.18
7.28
7.32
7.25
7.*8
7.68
7.70
7.00
6.96
6.8*
•6.80
7.41
6.79
7.69
7.19
7.37
7.01
7.26
6.98
7.00
9>08
8.95
9.10
7.36
8.*0
6.96
7.00
6.82
6.88
7.47
566.
562.
516.
565.
970.
910.
550.
540.
*80.
9*9.
5*5.
558.
550.
550.
553.
535.
560.
550.
550.
505.
535.
5*5.
5*0.
555.
570.
976.
550.
355.
582.
590.
565.
550.
590.
555.
560.
566.
492.
520.
507.
555.
512.
560.
3.4
2.6
0.7
1.8
2.4
1-0
0.8
2.2
3.5
2.5
1.8
1.9
1.8
l.a
1.7
2.2
1.6
1.6
1.6
2.1
2.7
2.3
2.2
2.2
,
0-5
0.7
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.8
1.4
1.5
1.2
,
1.0
1.0
0.6
1.2
0.8
262
166
178
197
161



5*
159
95


83
137
190
223
184
18*
21
237
170
170
192

337
168
322
357
405
435
285
*•*
197
4S1
358

420
30
120
27*
450
317
929
259
»07
253
69
266
229
7«

1**
159
201
239
275
201
368
336
325
6*
464
400
*69
516
418
632
*70
512
660
690
990
6*8
853
421



69>
179
709
630
903
467
313
323
3*5
30*



>«
261
166


169
27t
372
*36
360
33*
39
464
3*5
333
362

699
323
630
699
• 07
88*
601
9*7
398
890
727

• 22
5*
650
536
8*8
0.70
0.77
O'O*
0.38
0.39
0.01
0.17
0.10
0.00
0.19
0.1*
0.31
0.30
0.22
0.25
0.08
0.28
0.07
0.07
0.02
0.19
0.65
0.5*
0.2*
5.62
0.53
0.37
0.26
6.19
5.*5
1.77
0.49
0*05
0.00
0.00
0.61
0.00
0.06
0.02
1.54
0.0*
O.JO
0.66
0.77
0.0*
0.35
0.39
0.01
0.17
0.10
0.00
0.17
0.19
0.31
0.32
0.2*
0.27
o.ot
0.29
0.07
0.07
0.02
0.20
0.70
0.56
0.2*
6.07
0*53
0.37
0.27
6.43
5.77
1.91
0.55
0*05
0.00
0.00
0.66
0.00
0*06
0.02
1.67
0.05
0,30

-------
OO

DATE
90970
91670
92670
92870
93070
100770
100770
100870
100970
101270
101470
101970
102070
102070
102170
102270
102270
102370
102470
110570
110570
110570
110570
110570
110570
110970
110570
110570
110570
110570
110970
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
110670
61870
81170
83170
63170
63170'
83170
90670
90970
91470
91470
91670
92670
92870
93070
100770
STA-
TION
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
5A
5A
5A
5*
if
5A
5A
5*
9A
5A
5A
5A
5A
5A
9A
TIME
HOURS
1130
1600
144J
1920
1035
1110
1610
1150
1250
1230
1530
1155
1150
1700
1350
1110
1600
1*20
1320
930
945
1000
1030
1100
1130
1330
1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
900
930
1000
1030
1100
1130
1330
1400
1430
1500
1530
1600
1015
855
955
1055
1400
1520
1130
1015
930
1335
1650
1425
1*40
1005
1030

DEPTH
INCHES
14.50

17.00
17.00
15.50
12.00
13.50
12.00
12.00
13.79
17.00
15.00
15.00
U.50













































TEMP
FAR.
14.0
8*.
e*.
««.
e:.
12.
12.
at.
11.
12.
ei.
si.
ao.
ao.
ao.
81.
82.
• 3.
62.
78.
71.
78.
76.
76.
78.
78.
78.
76.
76.
78.
78.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
76.
88.
84.0
66.0
87.0
88.0
87.0
60.0
85.0
86.
67.
64.
64.
84.
62.
82.


PH
7.08
7.14
6.61
7.06
7.22
7.20
7.19


7.21
7.26
7.27
7.2*
7.21
7.3*
7.29

7.17
7.33
7.62
7.6*
7.59
7.56
7.41
7.15
7.34
7.32
7.36
7.31
6.98
7.17
7.52
7.23
7.29
7.38
7.44
7.32
7.29
7.13
7.14
7.04
6.89
6.96
1.75
7.12
7.23
7.05
7.09
6.96
7.30
7.18
7.42
7.30
6.94
6.64
6.68
7.02
7.06
SULFIOE
ACTIVITY
M.V.
505.
460.
425.
520.
475.
470.
445.


310.
175.
»S5.
360.
»55.
460.
430.

415.
305.
120.
360.
420.
430.
190.
410.
420.
390.
435.
450.
370.
330.
460.
435.
429.
410.
470.
535.
360.
435.
345.
305.
310.
280.
580.
520.
535.
530.
532.
536.
530.
540.
465.
520.
500.
440.
510.
520.
524.

0.0.
M6/L
0.7

1.1
1.4
1.1
2.5
2.5
1.1
2.0
1.1
2.6
1.*
1.2
1.4
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
0.9
1.5
1.*
1.4
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.*
2.4
2.3
2.4
0.6
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.7
1.1
2.3
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
2.8
1.8
0.1
1.6
2.4
2.4
2.3
1.3
2.1
2.1
3.6
3.7
3.6
2.8
2.7

BOD5
MS/L
261

39
42
153
141
116
105



































443
60
60
72
30
321
382
168
141
207
285
,144
132
214
231

COD
MG/L
304

117

177
257
191

250


































795
121
176
185
181
526
662
187
357

309
63

193
310

E»OD
MG/L
550

107
76
251
211
196
114



































934
145
117
146
63
652
694
317
276
420
516
262
240
361
401
STANDARD
SULFIDES
MC/L
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.0*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0*00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.09
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.21
0.05
0.15
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.04
0.06
0.07
EFFECTIVE
SULFIDES
MO/L
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.0*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.04
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.23
0.05
0.15
0.00
0.02
0.01
o.oo
0.04
0.05
0.06

-------
100770
100170
100>70
100970
101270
101*70
101970
102070
102070
102170
102270
102270
102370
102*70
• 1170
13170
13170
13170
83170
63170
90170
90970
91*70
91*70
91170
92*70
92470
93070
100770
100770
100(70
100(70
100970
101270
101*70
101970
102070
102070
102170
102270
102270
102370
102*70
(1170
(1(70
(3170
(3170
(3170
(3170
(3170
91*70
91*70
90170
90170
90(70
92*70
92470
92(70
93070
100770
100770
190170
100(70
9A
9A
JA
5*
9A
9A
iA
9A
9A
9A
9A
9A
9A
9A
59
58
96
9B
56
98
56
96
56
56
58
96
96
96
96
96
96
96
96
96
98
96
96
96
96
SB
96
98
98
6
•
6
6
t
6
6
6
6
7»
7A
7A
7A
7 A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
19*9
10*9
1630
1139
11*0
1*99
1100
1020
1905
1199
1009
1*90
1109
1209
1010
8*9
9*9
1049
13*9
1910
1120
1000
919
1319
1649
1*19
1*39
1000
1029
19*0
10*0
1*19
1130
1139
1*90
1099
1019
1900
1150
1000
1**9
1100
1200
900
1090
919
1019
1100
1*19
1930
1019
1*00
1010
1130
1*00
1200
1*09
1*20
990
9*5
1919
1000
1990
(2.
(3.
• *.
(3.
(2.
(1.
(!•
SO.
(0.
(0.
(i.
(2>
83.
(2.
86.
«*.o
(6>0
>7.0
((.0
67.0
(*.0
(9.0
89.
(7.
(*.
(*.
(*.
12,
(2.
(2.
(3.
(*.
13.
(3.
(1.
(1.
(0.
(0.
(0.
(1.
(2.
(3.
(2.
87.
88.
9.90 (4.0
1C. 00 (9.0
(.90 (6>0
1C. 00 (7.0
10.29 (6.0
86.
(7.
(*.
(9.
(6.0
(3.
(*.
8*.
(2.
(2.
(2.
(3.
(*.
7.21



7.10
7.28
7.08
7.09
7.14
7.9*
7.20
7.62
7.7(
7.32
(.(2
7.16
7.23
7.05
7.02
7.03
7.30
7.22
7.50
7.31
6.8*
6.78
6. (7
7.18
7.20
7.18



7.10
7.11
7.6*
7.1(
7.13
7.*6
7.2(
7.80
7.94
7.2*
7.19
8.60
7.08
7.30
7.10
7.10
6.97
7.37
1.25
7.06
7.13
7.23
7.08
6.99
7.1*
7.26
7.2«
7.20


4(0.



493.
910.
4(0.
480.
910.
920.
900.
960.
900.
469.
599.
530.
942.
539.
539.
9*9.
539.
540.
490.
520.
910.
460.
519.
340.
539.
490.



4*9.
990.
969.
900.
930.
910.
920.
979.
909.
*(0.
510.
570.
515.
5*0*
918.
520.
535.
480.
915.
930.
929.
930.
540.
500.
540.
540.
53C.
490.


3.6
2.9
3.2
3.
2.
*.
2.
1.
1.
1.
2.0
2.(
2.2
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
1.7
1.4
1.9
0.6
1.0
1.7
1.7
2.8
2.4
1.7
1.6
2.7
3.*
3.C
2.0
2.4
2.4
2.0
2*6
1.0
230
197
21*











525
39
90
58
(4
493
342
2(1
210
364
241
73
129
177
225
218
197
243











42
2*8
2(
68
38
91
29*
153
207
41
47
90
11
S3
78
160
123
13"
117
129
230

384
407










928
109
1(0
189
180
652
648
169
325
137
406
195

556
317
236

401
407










160
549
123
251
143
165
413
187
349
192
133
Ut
116
105

21*
268
225

251
388
279
3(9











1107
71
176
119
177
1001
621
530
396
739
438
133
234
291
379
367
345
4*1











(5
523
91
128
7*
104
575
299
420
74
89
176
142
114
142
270
207
i'-9
205
23*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.21
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.07
0.1*
0.1*
0.1*
0.31
0.07
0.13
0.00
0.02
0.0*
0.00
0.06
0.17
0.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.46
0.31
0.01
0.09
0.0*
0.0!
o.*;
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.03
0*10
0.03
0.0*
0.18
0.00
0.02
0*10
0.05
0.06
0.21
0.01
0.17
0.11
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.92
0.01
0.01
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.07
0.19
0.15
0.16
0.3*
0.07
0.13
0.00
0.02
0.0*
0.00
0.06
0.19
0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.3y
0.27
0.01
0.08
0.03
0.02
0.37
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.03
0.0*
0.19
0.00
0.02
0.10
0.05
0.06
0.20
0.01
0.17
0.12
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00

-------
'•-O
100970
101270
101*70
101970
102070
1C2070
102170
102270
102270
102370
102*70
90170
90170
90170
92*70
92670
92170
93070
100770
100770
100170
100(70
100970
101270
101*70
101970
102070
102070
102170
102270
102270
102370
102*70
81170
13170
13170
13170
13170
• 3170
91*70
91*70
91170
92*70
92670
92«70
93070
100770
100770
100(70
100970
101270
101*70
1019TO
102070
102070
102170
102270
102270
102370
102*70
81770
• 1770
• 1770
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
7A
78
7i
7B
7B
78
7B
78
78
71
78
7B
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
7B
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
19
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
30
30
30
1100
1100
1*10
1020
950
1*39
1039
935
1*20
1035
1123
1000
1120
13*0
1150
1*00
1*19
9*9
9*0
1310
950
13*3
10SO
1050
1*03
1015
9*5
1*30
1010
9JO
1*13
1030
1120
930
930
1030
1120
1*30
13*0
1100
1*23
17*0
1350
1**0
1500
1020
1100
1600
1129
1220
1220
1519
1125
1120
1620
1219
10*0
1519
11*0
1230
1205
1*30
15*3
























9.75





10.00
10.25

11.00
13.50
U.OO
11.25
12.25
11.30
9.75
9.50
9.75
13.00
10.00
10.00
9.50








13.
13.
• 1.
• 1.
• 0.
• 0.
• 0.
• 1.
• 2.
13.
12.
(*.
15.
16.0
13.
>*.
•*.
12.
12.
12.
13.
«*.
• 3.
(3.
ll>0
• 1.0
10.
10.
10.
11.
12.
13.
12.
• 7.
16.0
• 5.0
• 6.0
• 7.0
• 7.0
• 6.
17.
l*.0
17.0
1*.
84.
S3.
82.
12.
• 3.
• 3.
12.
81.
(1.
• 0.
90.
10.
• 1.
12.
»3-
12.
11.
It.
17.
7.1*
7.19
7.2*
7.21
7.10
7.23
7.21
7.01
7.16
7.02
7.02
7.13
7.27
7.11
6.11
7.07
7.10
7.12
7.11



7.12
7.16
7.01
7.11
7. It
7.25
7.9*
7.16
7.0(
7.03
7.27
7.10
7.11
7.20
7.01
7.01
7.31
7.21
7.00
6.0*
6.78
6.95
7.23
7.22
7.12


7.1*
7.22
7.12
7.12
7.16
7.26
7.23

7.31
7.26
7.*1
7.05
7.18
*15.
*93.
520.
505.
520.
520.
930.
515.
505.
*95.
530.
530.
330.
575.
520.
5*0.
550.
5*0.
520.



500.
*I5.
533.
530.
5*0.
5*0.
5*0.
5*0.
505.
515.
500.
*95.
530.
520.
515.
515.
*ao.
510.
*30.
*90.
4*0.
*95.
490.
499.
470.


310.
325.
3CO.
385.
*75.
435.
*55.

*70.
300.
595.
550.
553.
2.3
3.1
3.3
1.6
0.6
2.*
0.7
0.4
1.7
0.2
1.6
.0
.0
0.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0.3
O.I
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.7
.0
.0
0.2
1.*
2.1
1.5
0.*
1.4
1.*
0.6
1.1
1.7
1.9
0.3
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.*
1.1
0.4
0.8
2.5
2.1
2.1


61
62
88
137
tt
72
11*
99
101
152
151











51
75
73
73
36
265
308
223

!••
45
162
151
201
200
18*











257
131
210
218

261
208
1*0
237
166

203
251
208

278
250










181
123
206
190
112
498
406
330

292
m

161
317
270

240










523
277
400


111
117
172
240
160
131
192
167
182
266
27*











10*
1*7
138
143
73
53B
603
453

329
12
29*
264
351
337
322











342
276
427
0.00
0.00
o.oa
0.03
0.01
0.05
0.03
0.06
0.03
0.01
0.01
0-11
O.OB
0.05
3.00
0.09
0.21
0.46
0.20
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.16
0.08
0.18
0.15
0.06
0.18
0.01
0.0*
0.00
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.23
o.oo
0*01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0*00
o.oo
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0*00
0.00
o.oc
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.18
0.42
0.38
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.03
0.01
0.0*
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.11
o.ot
0.05
2.71
0.09
0.20
O.*l
0.18
0.0*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.13
0.07
0.15
0.12
0.05
0.16
0.01
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.2*
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.*7
O.*l

-------
• 2170
• 2170
13170
83170
90470
90670
90970
90970
92270
92270
11770
(1770
• 1770
12170
12170
90470
90170
90170
11770
11770
11770
12170
12170
90470
90170
90170
81170
82*70
93170
13170
90170
90170
90470
90970
91*70
92270
90170
90170
90170
90170
91170
10
13
10
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
31
31
31
31
31
31
3i
31
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
*0
00
»0
»0
00
*0
»0
»0
*0
»c
93
93
93
53
93
1019
U19
1*99
UOO
1009
1019
u;o
1309
1020
1039
1130
1*10
1920
930
13*5
930
1000
1020
1132
1*19
1922
932
13*7
932
1010
1030
930
1020
1330
1900
1*30
1555
1020
1315
1410
1090
919
1099
1329
1500
UOO
la-
st.
17.0
• 7.0
9*.
•*.
• 6.
96.
8*.
• *.
>e.
81.
99.
99.
97.
a*.
95. C
9*.
99.
99.
99.
99.
97.
8*.
a*.o
9*>0
97.
93.
96.0
87.0
95.
9*.
• 0.
96.
97.
9*.
9*.
• 5.
15.
IS.
94.0
7.13
7.1*
7.10
7.0*


7.20
7.22
7.20
7.18
t.62
7.*2
7.35
7.19
6.98

7. 17
7.31
1.69
7.**
7.39
7.22
7.00

7.38
7.33
7.18
6*87
7.0*
7.02
7.28
7.20

7.20
7.29
7.20
6.9*
7.11
7.27
7.33
7.10
*90.
510.
515.
511.


550.
5*5.
530.
530.
too.
560.
560.
500.
*90.

5*0.
5*0.
599.
560.
560.
530.
500.

5*0.
5*0.
*83.
520.
525.
5*5.
530.
520*

550.
520.
535.
*99.
520.
595.
539.
*95.
2.7
3.1
1.0
1.
3.
3.
1.
2.
1.
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
1.0
o.c
.0
0.8
1.0
1.1
0.1
0.2
2.1
0.7
0.6
2.
2.
0.
1.
2.
2.
3.
2.0
2.9
2.3





12*
127




266



315
270
299
70
69

523
• 83
330
300
3*5
127
9*

518
508
«2
196
67
351
62
162


195






333
• 65








752
555
**•
376
*65

768
975
768
571
378
»28
*92



251
1*9
208
393
U*
360









261
2*»




521



66*
569
630
1*8
1*0

996
177
122
633
727
269
191

9*1
923
85
3*3
131
713
117
29*


376






0.00
0.02
0.02
0.0*
0.00
0.00
0.29
0.19
0.07
0.07
0.30
0.31
0.39
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.08
0.10
0.17
0.29
0.3*
0.05
0.01
0.00
0.09
O.iC
0.00
0*10
0.07
0.32
0.05
0.03
0.00
0.29
0.02
0.10
0.01
0.0*
0.08
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.03
0.0*
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.19
0.06
0.07
0.33
0.35
0.43
0.01
0.01
o.oo
0.08
0.10
0.19
0.33
0.38
0.06
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.09
0.00
0.09
0.07
0.35
0.09
0.03
0.00
0.30
0.02
0.09
0.01
0.04
0.08
0.06
0.00

-------
   SELECTED WATER
   RESOURCES ABSTRACTS

   INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
                                              1. Report No.
                                                                    3. Accession No.
                                                                  w
   4. Title
         Instream Aeration to  Control Dissolved
         Sulfides in Sanitary  Sewers
     Author(s)
         Cooper, ,;..A., Jr.
   9. Organization
         de Laureal Engineers,  Inc.
         New Orleans, Louisiana
         Under contract  to   Department of Sanitation
                             Jefferson Parish, Louisiana
                             Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                  5. Report Date

                                                                  6.

                                                                  8. Performing Organization
                                                                    Report No,

                                                                 10. Project No.

                                                                     11010 ELP
                                                                   . Contract/Grant No.

                                                                     WPKD 121-01-68
                                                                  13. Type of Report and
                                                                    Period Covered
12. Sponsoring Organization

15. Supplementary Notes
                             Environmental Protection Agency
                             Report Number EPA-670/2-73-024
  16. Abstract  Field studies were  conducted employing full  scale prototypes of four  aeration
devices  installed in a sanitary sewage collection system.   The devices used included  an
In- l:ur:  Venturi aspirator,  an in-lire Yori,ex-..,hear aspirator, an air-lift pump, and Ven-
turi  aspirated U-tubes.  Only the Venturi aspirated U-tubes  proved to be satisfactory
under the conditions of this' study.   The U-tube installed  on the end of a sewage  force
main  reduced dissolved sulfides,  at  a sampling station 1500  ft downstream, from ,30 mg/1
to  .02 mg/1(equivalent to a 12  min detention).  Additionally, the U-tube virtually elim-
inated the stripping of H^S in  the discharge manhole where a severe odor problem  and
corrosive attack had existed.   Oxygen demand in the force  main immediately upstream of
the U-tube averaged 2.5 mg/1.   Oxygen transfer in the U-tube averaged 5.1 mg/1 with re-
sidual dissolved'oxygen in  the  effluent averaging 2.6 mg/1.

As  installed, and with oxygen transfer averaging 5«1 mg/1, no modification of existing
pumps was required.  Higher transfer concentrations approaching 7 mg/1 were obtained
irith  Venturi aspiration, but resulted in increased pump  head requirements.  Transfer
concentrations up to 8 mg/1 were  obtained with forced air  injection, but d^a  not appear
'o  justify the added cost of blowers and greatly increased pump head requirements.

\To  maintenance was required on  either of the two Venturi aspirated U-tubes during two
years of continuous operation in  this demonstration.

This  report was submitted in fulfillment of Project Number 11010 "LP, Grant Number WPRD
,121-01-68. under the sponsorship  of  the Environmental Protection Agency by the Department
of  Sanitation, Jefferson Parish,  Louisiana, 600 Helois Street, Metairie, Louisiana 70005.
The Project Director was Hay L. Condon, Jr.
  17a. Descriptors
      -"-Sulfide control, -;<-odor  control,  -^corrosion control,  aeration,
      Venturi aspirated U-tube,  Sanitary Waste Treatment
  17b. Identifiers
                oxidation, Upstream Aeration
  17c. COWRR Field & Croup
  18. Availability
  Abstractor
 19.  Security Class.
    (Report)

 20.  Security Class.
    (Page)

Jr.
                                          21. No. of
                                             Pages

                                          22. Price
Send To:
                                                        WATER RESOURCES SCI ENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                                        U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                        WASHINGTON. D. C. 20240
                                      institution   de Laureal  Engineers, Inc.
WRSIC 102 (REV. JUNE 1971)
                                                                                   GP 0  91 3.261

-------