United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington DC 20460
EPA/600/R-98/157
December 1998
Sewer and Tank
Sediment Flushing
Case Studies

-------
                                         EPA/600/R-98/157
                                           December 1998
       Sewer and Tank
    Sediment  Flushing:
         Case Studies
                   by
        William C. Pisano and James Barsanti
             Montgomery Watson
           40 Broad Street, Suite 800
              Boston, MA 02109

                   and

        James Joyce and Harvey Sorensen, Jr.
     Odor & Corrosion Technology Consultants, Inc.
           11250 West Road Building L
              Houston, TX 77065
           Contract No. 8C-R059-NTSX
               Project Officer

               Chi-Yuan Fan
      Water Supply and Water Resources Division
     National Risk Management Research Laboratory
              Edison, NJ 08837
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT RESEARCH LABORATORY
     OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            CINCINNATI, OH 45268

-------
                                  Notice
The information in this document has been funded by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under contract No.  8C-R059-NTSX. It has been subjected to the
Agency's peer and  administrative  review for publication as an EPA document, but it
does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency and no official endorsement should
be inferred. Also, the mention of trade names or commercial  products does not imply
endorsement by the United States government.

-------
                           Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with
protecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of
national  environmental  laws,  the  Agency  strives to  formulate  and
implement  actions  leading to a  compatible  balance  between human
activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To
meet  this  mandate, EPA's research program is  providing  data  and
technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a
science knowledge  base necessary to manage our ecological  resources
wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and prevent or reduce
environmental risks in the future.

The  National Risk  Management Research  Laboratory  is the Agency's
center for investigation of technological and management approaches for
reducing risks from  threats to  human health and the environment.  The
focus of the  Laboratory's  research program  is  on methods for the
prevention  and control of pollution  to air, land,  water  and subsurface
resources; protectipn of water quality in public water systems; remediation
of contaminated sites  and ground water;  and prevention and  control  of
indoor air  pollution. The  goal of this  research  effort  is  to catalyze
development   and    implementation   of   innpyative,    cost-effective
environmental   technologies;   develop   scientific   and   engineering
information needed  by EPA to support regulatory and policy  decisions;
and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure effective
implementation of environmental regulations and strategies.

This publication has been produced  as part of the Laboratory's strategic
long-term research  plan.  It is  published  and made available  by  EPA's
Office of Research and Development to assist the user community  and to
link researchers with their clients.
                                     E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
                                     National   Risk    Management
                                     Research Laboratory

-------
                                  Abstract
Past studies have identified urban combined sewer overflow (CSO) and stormwater
runoff as major contributors to  the degradation of many urban lakes, streams,  and
rivers. Sewage solids deposited in combined sewer (CS) systems during dry weather
are major contributors  to  the  CSO-pollution load. Innovative methods for  cleaning
accumulated sludge and debris in CSO and  stormwater conveyance systems  and
storage  tanks have emerged over the last 15 years by creating high speed flushing
waves to resuspend deposited sediments. Cleansing efficiency of periodic flush waves
depends on flush  volume, flush  discharge rate,  sewer slope,  sewer length, sewer  flow
rate, sewer diameter and population density. Maximum flushing volumes at upstream
points are limited by available space, hydraulic limitations and costs. Maximum flushing
rates at  the downstream point are limited by the regulator/interceptor capacities prior to
overflow. The relationship between cleaning efficiency and pipe length is important.  The
aim of flushing is  to wash the  resuspended sediment to strategic locations, i.e.,  to a
point where the waste stream is flowing with sufficient velocity, to another point where
flushing  will be initiated, to a storage sump which will allow later removal of the stored
contents, or to the wastewater treatment plant  (WWTP).  This reduces the amount of
solids resuspended during  storm  events, lessens the  need for CSO treatment  and
sludge removal at downstream  storage facilities, and allows  the conveyance of more
flow to the WWTP or to the drainage outlet. This report will  demonstrate that sewer
system and storage tank flushing that reduces sediment deposition and accumulation is
of prime importance to  optimizing  performance,  maintaining structural integrity,  and
minimizing pollution of receiving waters.

-------
                                   Contents
      Notice                                                                ii
      Forward                                                               iii
      Abstract                                                               iv
      Contents                                                              v
      Tables                                                                ix
      Figures                                                               x
      Abbreviations and Acronyms                                             xii
      Acknowledgements                                                     xiii

Chapter 1 - Introduction                                                      1
      Project Scope                                                         1
      Background                                                           2
      Odor and Corrosion Perspective                                          2
      Previous Research                                                      3

Chapter 2- Conclusions and Recommendations                                 5

Chapter 3- Sewer Sediments and Sewage Gases Estimation Techniques          6
      Introduction                                                           6
      Nature of Sewer Solids and Sediment in Sewers                            6
      Sewer Self Cleansing Criteria                                             7
      Desktop Procedure                                                     8

Chapter 4- Hydrogen Sulfide and Sulfuric Acid Estimation Techniques            11
      Sulfide Generation in Sewers                                             11
         Sulfide Ion (S=)                                                     11
         Bisulfide Ion (HS-)                                                   11
         Hydrogen Sulfide (Aqueous)                                          11
         Hydrogen Sulfide (Gaseous)                                          12
         Settleable Solids                                                    12
         Temperature                                                       13
         Sulfuric Acid Production                                              13
         Turbulence Reduction                                                13
         Concrete Corrosion                                                  13
         Metal Corrosion                                                     14

      Trends in Sulfide Production                                             15
         Water  Conservation Practices                                         15
         Industrial Pretreatment                                               15
         Design Deficiencies                                                 16

      Flushing Relationship to Hydrogen Sulfide Generation                        16
         Description of the Process                                            16
         Odor Producing Conditions                                           17
         Invert Erosion                                                      17

-------
                                   Contents
                                    (continued)
Dissolved Sulfide Prediction Procedure                                         18
         Sulfide Model Development                                         18
         Dissolved Oxygen Effects                                           19

Chapter 5- Overview of Sewer Cleaning Flushing
         Systems and CSO Tank Cleaning Technology                       20

      Conventional Sewer Cleaning Techniques                                20
         Power Roding                                                    20
         Balling                                                           20
         Jetting                                                           20
         Pigging                                                           20
         Power Bucket                                                    21
         Silt Traps                                                        21

      Sewer Flushing                                                       21
         Hydrass                                                         21
         Hydroself                                                        22
         Biogest Vacuum Systems                                           22

      Storage Tank Cleaning Alternatives                                      23
         Introduction                                                       23
         Primary Flushing Systems                                           24
          Traveling Bridge                                                  24
            Traveling Bridge - Scraper                                       24
            Traveling Bridge Suction Pickup                                   24
            Traveling Bridge with Washdown Nozzles                           24
          Mechanical Mixers and Submerged Jets                              25
          Fixed Spray Nozzles and  Headers                                   26
          Tipping Flushers                                                  27
           Flushing Gates                                                  27
         Secondary Flushing Systems                                        29
          Water Cannons                                                  29
          High Pressure Hoses                                             29
          Novel Approach for Cleaning Circular Tanks                          29

Chapter 6 - Case Evaluations                                               31
    Case Studies: Combined Sewer Flushing Facilities using Flushing Gates         32
      Case No. 1  Marht Wiesentheid                                         32
      Case No. 2  Gemeinde Schauenburg                                     32
      Case No. 3  Stadt Kirchhain                                            32
      Case No. 4  Stadt Heidenheim                                          34
      CaseNo.S-MarktGrossostheim                                          34

-------
                                   Contents
                                    (continued)
     Case No. 6 - Osterbruch-Opperhausen                                34
     Case No.7- Geimeide Hettstadt                                      36
     Hydraulic Analysis of Flushing Gate Performance for Sewers             36

  Case Studies: CSO Storage Tank Flushing Facilities Using Flush Gates       37
     Case No. 8 - Filterstadt-Bernhausen                                  37
     Case No. 9 - Stadt-Essen                                           39
     Case No. 10 - Markt-Wiesentheid                                     39
     Case No. 11 - Stuttgart-Wangen                                     41
     Case No. 12 - Heidenheim-Kleiner-Buhl                               41
     Case No. 13 - Cheboyan                                            42
     Case No. 14 - Sarnia                                                44
     Hydraulic Analysis of Flushing Gates for Rectangular Tanks              44

  Evaluation of Flushing Gates for Tanks                                   48

  Case Studies: CSO Storage Tanks Utilizing Tipping Flusher Technology       49
    Case No. 15 - Port Colborne                                          49
    Case No. 16 - Wheeler Avenue                                       52
    Case No. 17 - 14th  Street Pumping Station                              52
    Case No. 18 - Saginaw Township Center Road Storage Tank              58
    Evaluation of Tipping Flushers                                        58

  Other Flushing Case Studies                                           58
     City of Essen, Germany                                            58
     City of Konstanz, Germany                                          58
     City of Augsburg,  Germany                                          59

  City of Elizabeth, New Jersey - Mechanical Flap Gate Flusher               59

Chapter 7- Cost Analysis                                               60

  Case Study One: Fresh Pond Parkway Sewer Separation and Surface
  Enhancement Project Storm and Sanitary Sewer Flushing                  60
     Description of Piping Systems to be Flushed                           60
     Description of Flushing  Vaults                                       60
     Life Cycle Costs Comparison: Automated Flushing versus Periodic        61
       Details of the  Automated Cleaning System                           62
       Details of the  Manual  Cleaning System                              63

  Case Study Two: Cost Effectiveness of Sewer Flushing Versus Conventional
  Treatment                                                           65
         Description of Area                                             65

-------
                                    Contents
                                     (continued)
      Case Study Three: Cost Effectiveness of Sewer
      Flushing Versus Chemical Addition for Hydrogen Sulfide Control              67
             General                                                        67
             Chemical Treatment of Dissolved Sulfide                            68
              Pure Oxygen                                                  68
              Hydrogen Peroxide                                             68
              Chlorine                                                       68
              Potassium Permanganate                                       68
              Nitrate Solution                                                68
              Iron Salts                                                     68
             Flushing Gates for Sulfide Reduction                               68
              Case Study Description                                          69
             Cost Analysis                                                   69
             Condition 1 - Sulfide Treatment with Ferrous Chloride                 69
              Condition 2 - Sulfide Treatment with Ferrous Chloride and
                    Flushing Gates                                           69

      Case Studies: Cost Effectiveness Studies of CSO Tank Cleaning Methods     70
        Case Study: Eastern Beaches, Toronto, Ontario, Canada                   70
        Operation and Maintenance                                             70
          Flushing Spray                                                     70
         Manual Spray                                                       71
         Odor Control                                                        71
        Case Study: Sarnia Ontario                                             71
         Cleaning Alternatives                                                72


References                                                                  73

-------
                                  List of Tables
Table                                                                        Page

 3-1.   Minimum Velocity Criteria                                                 7
 3-2.   Minimum Shear Stress Criteria                                             7
 3-3.   Assumed Inorganic Material Composition                                    9
 3-4.   Distribution of Inorganic Material Settling Velocities                            9
 3-5.   Assumed Organic Material Size, Composition and Settling Velocities           10
 3-6.   Assessment of 3.05 Meter Tunnel                                          10

 4-1.   Dissolved Sulfide and Total Metals Concentration
       Trends at Hyperion WWTP, Los Angeles, CA                               16

 6-1.   Overview of Case Studies                                                31
 6-2.   Marht Wiesentheid, Germany                                             32
 6-3.   Gemeinde Schauenburg, Germany                                        32
 6-4.   Stadt Kirchhain, Germany                                                33
 6-5.   Stadt Heidenheim, Germany                                              33
 6-6.   Markt Grossostheim, Germany                                            34
 6-7.   Osterbruch-Opperhausen, Germany                                       34
 6-8.   Gemeinde Hettstadt, Germany                                            36
 6-9.   Summary of Pipe Flushing Results                                         37
 6-10.  Filterstadt-Bernhausen, Germany                                          37
 6-11.  Stadt-Essen, Germany                                                   39
 6-12.  Markt-Wiesentheid, Germany                                             39
 6-13.  Stuttgart-Wangen, Germany                                              41
 6-14.  Heidenheim-Kleiner-Buhl, Germany                                        41
 6-15.  Cheboygan, Michigan                                                    42
 6-16.  Sarnia, Ontario Canada                                                  44
 6-17.  Summary of Tank Flushing Results                                        48
 6-18.  Port Colborne, Ontario, Canada                                           49
 6-19.  Wheeler Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky                                      52

 7-1.   Flushing System Summary                                               63
 7-2.   Cost Effectiveness Analysis Flushing versus Manual Cleaning                 64
 7-3.   Average Daily and Average Maximum Hourly Velocity and Shear Stress        65
 7-4.   Pertinent Overflow Characteristics                                         65
 7-5.   Comparison Satellite Treatment Versus Automatic Flushing                   67
 7-6.   Present Worth Cost Comparison Flushing Gate Vs Satellite Treatment         67
 7-7.   Wastewater Characteristics                                               69
 7-8.   Chemical Treatment Costs                                                69
 7-9.   Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cost Comparison                    71
 7-10.  Alternatives Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cost Assessment         72

-------
                                List of Figures

Figure                                                                  Page

5-1.   Hydrassฎ                                                         21
5-2.   Flushing Gate                                                     23
5-3.   (a) Traveling Bridge                                                25
      (b) Submerged Jet                                                 25
5-4.   Fixed Spray Header and Nozzle Arrangement                         26
5-5.   Tipping Flusher                                                   27
5-6.   Plan View - Clough Creek OSO Treatment Facility, Cincinnati, OH        28
5-7.   Section View - Clough Creek OSO Treatment Facility, Cincinnati, OH     28
5-8   Lincoln Park Schematic                                             30
6-1.   Stadt Kirchhain - Off line Flushing Vault, Plan view                     33
6-2.   Stadt Kirchhain - Downstream Control Chamber, Plan View              33
6-3.   Stadt Heidenheim - Plan View                                       34
6-4.   Stadt Heidenheim - Section View                                     35
6-5.   Osterbruch-Opperhausen - Sectional Views                            35
6-6.   Stadt-Essen - Plan View Tank Influent                                38
6-7.   Stadt-Essen - Plan View Tank Effluent                                38
6-8.   Markt-Wiesentheid - CSO Storage Tank, Section View                  40
6-9.   Cheboygan Circular - CSO Storage Tank Plan and Section Views        42
6-10.  Cheboygan Circular - Photographs of Circular CSO Storage Tank        43
6-11.  Sarnia - CSO Storage Tank, Plan View                                45
6-12.  Sarnia - CSO Storage Tank, Section View                             46
6-13.  Sarnia - Photographs of Hydraulic Opening Mechanism                 47
6-14.  (a)    Port Colborne - CSO Storage Tank, Plan View                   50
      (b)    Port Colborne - CSO Storage Tank, Section View                50
6-15.  Port Colborne, Ontario Canada - CSO Storage Tank, Photographs        51
6-16.  Wheeler Avenue - CSO Storage Tank, Plan View                      53
6-17.  (a)    Wheeler Avenue - Photograph of Overall CSO Storage Tank       53
      (b)    Wheeler Avenue - Photograph of Filling Tipping Flushers          54
6-18.  14th Street Pumping Station -Tanks B1, B2 and B3                     55

-------
                            List of Figures
                                (Continued)

6-19. 14th Street Pumping Station, Saginaw Michigan - B-4                    56
6-20.(a) 14th Street Pumping Station - Flushing Sequence for Tank B4          56
    (b) 14th Street Pumping Station - Flushing Sequence for Tank B4          57
    (c) 14th Street Pumping Station - Flushing Sequence for Tank B4          57
7-1.  Fresh Pond Parkway - Locations of Flushing Vaults                      61
7-2.  Fresh Pond Parkway - Flushing Gate Chamber                          62
7-3.  Conceptual Schematic for High Rate Treatment                          66

-------
      Acronyms and Abbreviations
ac
aq
BOD
ฐC
cfs
cm
CS
CSHG
CSO
DO
EDP
EPA
EXTRAN
fps
ft
gpd
gpm
HP(hp)
hr
in
kPa
I
Ips
m
mg
MG
MGD
mm
N
NRMRL
pkwy
POTW
ppm
psi
QAPP
R&D
sec
SS
SWMM
TF
US
WWTP
$
Acre
Aqueous
Biochemical oxygen demand
Degrees Celsius
Cubic feet per second
Centimeter
Combined sewer
Calcium Silicate Hydrate Gel
Combined sewer overflow
Dissolved oxygen
Environmental Design & Planning, Inc.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Extended Transport Block
Feet per second
Feet
Gallons per day
Gallons per minute
Horsepower
hour
Inch
kiloPascals
Liter
Liters per second
Meter
milligram
Million gallons
Million gallons per day
Millimeter
Newton
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Parkway
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Parts per million
Pounds per square inch
Quality Assurance Protection Plan
Research & Development
second
Suspended solids
Stormwater Management Model
Tipping flusher
United States
Wastewater treatment plant
Dollars
Percent
inch

-------
                            Acknowledgements
The support of the project by the National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under the direction of Mr.
Richard Field, Wet-Weather Flow Research Program leader is acknowledged and appreciated.

William Pisano, Frank Ayotte, James Barsanti, Christopher Brown, Dennis Lai, David Slevin,
Joseph Uglevich III, and Brent Watts of Montgomery Watson,  Boston, MA, and James Joyce
and Harvey Sorensen of Odor and Corrosion Technology Consultants, Inc., Houston, TX were
the principal authors of this report. The following individuals provided invaluable technical
assistance during the development of this report:

Nicholas Grande and Gabriel  Novae, Grande, Novae & Associates, Inc., Montreal, Quebec,

Canada Mario Parente,  CH2M Gore & Storrie Limited, North York, Ontario, Canada
The cooperation of Chi-Yuan Fan, Project Officer, Urban Watershed Management Branch,
Water Supply and Water Resources Division, National Risk Management Research Laboratory,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is acknowledged.

-------
                                     Chapter 1

                                   Introduction

Past studies have  identified urban combined sewer overflow (CSO) and  stormwater runoff as
major contributors to the degradation of many urban lakes, streams, and  rivers.  Sewage solids
deposited in combined sewer (CS) systems during dry weather are major contributors to the CSO-
pollution  load.  In recent years, pollution caused by CSO has become a serious environmental
concern.    Although  requirements  vary  from  state  to  state concerning  allowable  overflow
frequencies, compliance has resulted in the design and construction of storage facilities as well as
utilization of in-line storage or constructing deep tunnels.  In the case of in-line storage, shallow
slopes and  low mean velocities allow debris to settle along the invert of the  pipe during storage
periods.  Accumulation  of sediments  results in a loss  of storage capacity that may  cause
surcharge or  local flooding and the establishment of  septic conditions that  create odor  and
corrosion problems.

Some  simple  calculations illustrate the  potential  impacts of overflows  on receiving  waters.
Estimates of dry  weather flow deposition in combined sewer systems have ranged from 5 to 30
percent of the  daily pollution loading.  If 25 percent of the daily pollution loading accumulates in
the collection  system, an intense rainstorm lasting  two  hours after four days of antecedent dry
weather  may wash the  equivalent of a one-day's flow  of raw wastewater overboard to  the
receiving waters.  The average antecedent dry  period between storm events is about four  days for
many areas of the  U.S.,  especially  along the eastern  seaboard.   Furthermore,  a  one-day
equivalent of  raw wastewater  discharged within  a  two-hour period, is twelve times  the rate at
which raw wastewater enters the collection system.

This report  will demonstrate that sewer system and storage tank flushing that reduces sediment
deposition and accumulation  is of prime  importance  to  optimizing performance, maintaining
structural integrity, and minimizing pollution of receiving waters.

Project Scope
The U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency's (EPA's) National  Risk Management Research
Laboratory's (NRMRL's) Office of Research and Development's Urban Watershed Management
Branch, Water Supply and Water  Resources Division  have supported the development of  this
project report for  the investigation of sewer and tank sediment flushing. The report is designed to
provide information and guidance to meet the following objectives:

1.   Investigate the cost-effectiveness of combined  sewer  in-line and CSO storage tank  flushing
    systems for removing combined sewer sediments and CSO storage  tank bottom deposits at
    actual installation sites in urban watersheds.

2.   Develop a long-term combined sewer hydrogen sulfide  monitoring program.

To meet these objectives, the following tasks were developed:

1.   Identification  of 18 sites in North America  and Europe for evaluation  of in-line (10) and CSO
    storage tank (8) flushing systems.

2.   Desk Top analyses  of published  and  unpublished information on  the  range of hydrogen
    sulfide concentration combined sewers, the correlation between sediment characteristics  and
    hydrogen sulfide generation, and the effectiveness of combined  sewer flushing systems to:

       •   Decrease the rate of hydrogen sulfide  generation during dry weather conditions by
           removing an important and often significant contributory source of available microbial
           food;

-------
       •   Eliminate  potential  for creating  highly unsafe  transitory hydrogen  sulfide levels
           associated with rapid biological activity of resuspended  sediments during high flow
           conditions;

       •   Lessen the potential for  sewer decomposition associated with elevated hydrogen
           sulfide generation; and

       •   Maximize sewer flow carrying capacity by removing sediment/blockages.

3.   Collect and analyze operational information on the 18 identified sites regarding:

       •   The effectiveness of systems design in terms of sediment removal;

       •   Capital and operation and maintenance costs;

       •   Operational problems and lessons learned from these sites.

4.   Perform cost-effective-benefit analyses of the 18 identified/selected in-line and storage tank
    flushing systems.

5.   Develop a generic Quality Assurance Protection Plan (QAPP) for conducting a field program
    for monitoring and  analyzing  long  term sediment characteristics  and  hydrogen  sulfide
    generation rates within a problem combined sewer system.

Background
Innovative  methods for  cleaning accumulated  sludge  and debris in  CSO  and  stormwater
conveyance systems and storage tanks have  emerged  over the last 15  years by creating high
speed flushing waves to resuspend deposited sediments.  In the last ten years,  at least three new
passive hydraulic systems have been developed and installed in Europe to routinely flush sewer
deposits and wet weather storage tanks.  In Europe, 77 installations have been  in operation since
1985 to flush sewers,  interceptors and tunnels ranging from 0.25 to 4.3 meters (10 inches to 14
feet) in diameter and flushing lengths of up to 335 meters (1100 feet) for large diameter pipes and
1000 meters (3300 feet) for smaller diameter.

Cleansing efficiency of periodic  flush waves depends on flush volume, flush discharge rate, sewer
slope, sewer length, sewer flow rate, sewer diameter and population density.  Maximum  flushing
volumes  at  upstream points are limited  by available space, hydraulic limitations  and costs.
Maximum flushing rates at the downstream point are limited by the regulator/interceptor capacities
prior to overflow. The  relationship between cleaning efficiency and pipe length  is important.  The
aim of flushing is to wash the resuspended sediment to strategic locations, i.e., to a point where
the waste stream is flowing with sufficient velocity, to another point where flushing will be initiated,
to  a storage sump which will allow later removal  of the stored contents, or to the wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP).   This reduces the amount of solids resuspended during storm events,
lessens the need  for CSO treatment and sludge  removal at downstream storage facilities, and
allows the conveyance of more  flow to the WWTP or to the drainage outlet.

Flushing  gates and tipping flushers for cleaning accumulated sludge and debris in CSO and
stormwater storage tanks  have  emerged in Germany and Switzerland.  Both methods create high
speed flushing waves to resuspend sediments on the tank floor and  sweep these materials to a
disposal channel at the end of the tank. The flushing gate system has been used extensively in
Europe with 209 installations and 436 units in operation since 1985. Approximately 60 percent of
the installations are for cleaning sediments from CSO tanks. The tipping flushers were initially
developed in Switzerland,  and were optimized to present design in Germany. Presently there are
several thousand CSO tanks throughout Europe using the tipping gate technology.

-------
Odor and Corrosion Perspective
Sewer sediments create odor and sewer decomposition problems in addition to CSO pollution.
The production and release of hydrogen sulfide gas in municipal wastewater collection systems is
responsible  for  numerous  odor complaints  and the  destruction  of  sewer  pipes  and  other
wastewater facilities. Sulfates  are  released  from organic substances contained in  the  sewer
sediments  by bacteria under anaerobic  conditions. In the absence  of  dissolved oxygen and
nitrates, sulfates serve as  electron  acceptors and  are chemically reduced to sulfides and to
hydrogen sulfide by  bacteria. The hydrogen  sulfide is then converted to sulfuric  acid,  which
disintegrates the sewer pipes.

The process begins with the biological reduction  of sulfate to sulfide by the anaerobic slime layer
residing below the water surface in wastewater collection systems. The anaerobic bacteria utilize
the oxygen in the sulfate ion as an electron acceptor in their metabolic processes. The resulting
sulfide ion  is transformed into hydrogen sulfide gas after picking  up  two hydrogen ions from
wastewater.

Once released to the sewer atmosphere, aerobic bacteria (Thiobacillus) which reside on  sewer
walls and surfaces above the water  line consume the hydrogen sulfide gas and secrete sulfuric
acid. In severe instances, the pH of the pipe can  reach  0.5.  This causes severe damage to
unprotected collection system surfaces and may eventually result in the total failure of the sewer
piping and the uncontrolled release of raw wastewater to the environment.

For obvious reason, the control and reduction of hydrogen sulfide in wastewater systems is of vital
importance. While,  the  biological and chemical processes  resulting  in  sulfide  production  in
wastewater are well  understood,  there are significant  contributing factors are not understood.
Even the well known Pomeroy-Parkhurst equations contains an empirical "M Factor" to account
for the unknown biological and chemical transformations which occur with sulfide  in wastewater
(USEPA, 1985).

Settled solids and other debris in sanitary sewers and wastewater collection systems can provide
a greatly increased surface area upon which anaerobic sulfate reducing bacterial slime can grow,
thereby increasing the incremental (per foot) sulfide production potential  of sewers. Methods need
to be developed to  measure the sulfide production  in a sewer with moderate to heavy settled
solids and debris and sample and to characterize the solids in the sewer.

It is important to develop a method to measure in-situ dissolved sulfide  concentrations inside the
interstitial spaces of  a typical debris pile in the  sewer. By measuring  the  pore space dissolved
sulfide concentration  in a typical debris pile and by removing the  debris pile and characterizing the
debris  by  sieve size and mineralogy, the  additional surface  area  provided by the  pile can be
calculated.  From knowledge of the practical pore space volume and the surface area, the specific
sulfide production rate can be determined. This would allow calculation of the mass of sulfide that
could be prevented by cleaning the upstream sewers.

The method analyzed to clean the pipes in this  study is passive flushing. This technology  holds
great potential as an economical way to maintain sewers in a  clean and free flowing condition.
Clean sewers provide maximum wastewater carrying  capacity thereby preventing sewer overflows
and protecting the environment. There is another benefit to be gained by maintaining sewers in a
clean and free flowing condition,  namely, sulfide odor and corrosion  reduction.  However, the
flushing event that  disturbs the settled debris  and solids and carries them downstream will
generate a significant turbulent wave. This hydraulic wave will  release the sulfide in the  debris
pore spaces and subject it to turbulence. The turbulence associated with the hydraulic wave will
strip  dissolved sulfide from the wastewater and  release it  as hydrogen sulfide gas. Although the
event is short-lived, the concentrations produced  may cause a short  burst of odor release from the
sewer  that could result in odor complaints. Identification  of the potential for odor release and
complaints as a result of sewer flushing may require measurement of the instantaneous spike in
sewer  headspace hydrogen  sulfide concentrations caused by the  hydraulic wave. Sewers that

-------
have not been cleaned in many years may have accumulated significant debris piles that may
cause a large spike in hydrogen sulfide release when first flushed. However, following one or two
flush events, the debris piles should be smaller or totally removed, thus  reducing the  hydrogen
sulfide spikes for the second, third and subsequent flushing events.

Previous Research
In 1966, EPA through its federal water program initiated research to demonstrate the feasibility of
periodic flushing during dry weather. The first phase of work performed by FMC Corporation
included a study of the overall flushing concept, small-scale hydraulic modeling, and design  and
development of cost estimates for constructing test equipment (FMC, 1966). The second phase
produced a flushing evaluation facility consisting of 0.30 meter and 0.45 meter (12 and 18 inch)
diameter test sewers  about 488 meters (1600) feet long, supported above ground  (thus allowing
for slope adjustment), including holding tanks at three points along the test sewer for the flushing
experiments (FMC, 1972). Limited periodic flushing of simulated combined sewer laterals was
accomplished. The report documenting this research recommended  a third phase be  made for
flushing larger sizes of pipe,  flush wave sequencing, and determination of solids buildup over long
periods of time.

In 1974, a combined sewer management study performed by Process  Research, Inc., Cambridge,
Massachusetts, focused on assessing alternative strategies for  abating  CSO discharges to
portions of Boston Harbor was completed (Process Research, 1974). As part of the research work
conducted during this study  a number of theoretical formulas for prediction of dry weather
deposition and  flushing criteria were developed. The development  of the deposition analysis
techniques stemmed from critical fluid shear stress considerations. The theoretical formulas were
roughly  field checked to ascertain solids  accumulations. Although  the  model was crude,  the
agreement with visual field observations was  reasonable.  The model was then used to analyze
deposition problem segments within  a service area  of 1200 hectares  (3000  acres)  entailing
roughly 152,500 meters (0.5 million feet) of sewer. Roughly 3000 manhole-to-manhole segments
were analyzed for deposition  and it was determined that roughly 17 percent of the segments
contained about 75 percent of the estimated  dry weather wastewater depositions. It turned out
that most of these segments were small-diameter combined sewer laterals. Flushing criteria were
empirically developed using data generated during the earlier FMC research to estimate required
flushing volumes.

In  1979, a three year research  and development  (R&D)  program sponsored  by  EPA was
conducted by Environmental Design & Planning,  Inc. (EDP)  in the Dorchester area of Boston to
determine the pollution reduction potential of flushing combined sewer laterals. It was concluded
that  small  volume flushing would  transport organics/nutrients  and  heavy  metals  sufficient
distances to make the option feasible and  attractive (EPA, 1979). Relevant conclusions were as
follows:

•  Approximately 20 to 40  percent of heavy metal (cadmium, chromium,  copper, lead, nickel,
   and zinc) associated with  particles entrained  by flush waves will  not settle within a two hour
   settling  period.

•  An automated sewer flushing module using a simple hydraulic gate powered  by an air
   cylinder, and  time clock triggered, operated  without intervention for  a 5.5-month  period to
   back up wastewater  and retract and induce  flush waves. Flushed pollutant loads were
   comparable to removals noted by manual flush tanker means.

•  An empirical methodology was prepared for providing first-cut deposition solids, nutrient  and
   organic daily collection system estimates simply by knowing the total length of pipe, service
   area, average pipe slope or ground slope,  and per capita wastewater flow rate. Methods were
   also developed to determine which segments in  collection systems should  be flushed to
   remove specified  portions of deposits.

-------
Based on the prototype success of the flushing R&D project,  a full-scale demonstration project
was  recommended to  obtain full-scale experience  in  Boston.  Clinton Bogert  & Associates
completed a detailed cost-effectiveness study  in 1980 with support from EDP focusing on the
Dorchester neighborhood in  Boston. It was concluded from the cost-effectiveness analysis that
sewer flushing can be an adjunct to, but cannot substitute for, structural alternatives and that the
use of storage treatment available  in large combined sewers in conjunction with sewer flushing
could reduce the cost of large stand-alone satellite storage facilities.

Sewer flushing of large-diameter combined sewers was investigated in the CSO Facility Plan for
the City of Elizabeth, NJ by Clinton Bogert & Associates. It was concluded  that daily flushing  of
troublesome deposition section within seven sub-areas using 12 automatic flushing systems was
estimated to reduce about 28 percent of the first flush overflow pollutant loading from the service
area. Control is by level sensing to centralized computer control. Combined sewers to be flushed
ranged from 0.45  to 1.4 meters (18 to 54 inches).  Construction of 12 flushing  modules was
completed in  1990. Estimated construction costs for complete modules (structural, mechanical,
electrical, and  site work excluding  computer control)  ranged from $175,000 for small diameter
lines up  to $275,000 (costs  based on ENR cost index of 5000). No evaluation data  has been
reported  regarding effectiveness.

-------
                                     Chapter 2
                                   Conclusions

The following conclusions were derived from the evaluations of the 18 sewer and tank sediment
flushing facilities and the case studies developed in Section 5.

1.  The tipping flusher and flushing gate technology appear to be the most cost-effective means
   for flushing solids and debris from tanks. The most efficient method for flushing large
   diameter flat depositing sewers is the flush gate technology.

2.  In general, the performance of both types of flushing equipment for tanks and flush gates for
   sewers was rated as good to excellent.  Based on calculations for most of the facilities using
   flushing gates, the terminal velocities at the end of the flushing wave exceeded 1 m/second.
   This terminal velocity was adequate for cleansing.

3.  Cost effectiveness analysis comparing flushing gate technology versus conventional large
   pipe cleaning operations using bucketing methods was  conducted for an actual project
   undergoing construction.  A system of flushing gates to  flush 1500 m of large diameter
   sanitary sewer and storm drains was examined.  Present worth savings of at least $500,000
   is expected  using the flush gate technology in lieu of periodic cleaning using conventional
   means.

4.  A desktop analysis was conducted comparing the use of the flushing gate technology to
   minimize potentially overflowing pollutant loads as an alternative to downstream high rate
   satellite treatment. The desktop analysis showed that periodic flushing of long flat depositing
   reach of a conduit prior to an overflow was extremely cost effective and superior to a satellite
   treatment facility.

5.  A desktop analysis was conducted to explore the use of flushing gate technology for
   minimizing sediments in a long flat depositing sewer carrying warm sewage with high organic
   loadings. Dissolved  hydrogen sulfide levels attributable to both the slime layer and to
   accumulated sediments were estimated. The present worth costs for treating excessive and
   dangerous levels  of hydrogen sulfide with  chemicals (iron salts) were estimated.  Flushing
   gate technology was explored to  reduce sediments and thereby reduce incremental hydrogen
   sulfide loadings. The cost effectiveness of chemical treatment versus flushing with reduced
   chemical treatment indicated that flushing  as an adjunct to chemical treatment is cost
   effective.

                                   Recommendations

1.  A demonstration project using flushing gate system to minimize sewer deposits within CSO
   impacting a  receiving water should be conducted. The project should involve long term pre
   and post construction overflow flow and pollutant characterization. The  pre project
   relationship  between dissolved sulfide and sediment deposits should also be understood.
   Instantaneous hydrogen sulfide levels during post construction flushing conditions should be
   monitored to note nuisance level  potential of instantaneous hydrogen sulfide spikes.  A cost
   effective analysis demonstrating the benefits of this technology using actual field experience.
   Operation and Maintenance requirements should  be prepared to document this work.
2.  Experimental laboratory work to document the kinetics of sediment generation of hydrogen
   sulfide is recommended followed by full-scale demonstration work.

-------
                                    Chapter 3
                  Sewer Sediments and Sewage Gases
                            Estimation  Techniques
Introduction
As noted in the Chapter 1, solids deposition in flat sewerage systems can be significant, in some
situations on the order of 15 to 20 percent  of the total daily solids input. In combined sewer
systems, these accumulations can be scoured during wet events and can contribute to first flush
conditions.  During overflow events, high concentrations of these accumulated pipe deposits can
be discharged into the environment.  Satellite  CSO treatment facilities have been used worldwide
to handle such problems.  In Chapter 6 the cost effectiveness of using automated sewer flushing
technology is conducted.

To  perform these  calculations,  a desktop  procedure is  utilized to estimate the  amount  of
depositing solids in a long pipe segment during  low flow average condition, and then  to estimate
during high flow conditions the amount of solids scoured from the sediment  beds, re-suspended,
and carried toward the overflow location.  Important concepts underlying this  crude desktop
procedure have been developed  using results from recent European research, which  focused on
sewer self, cleansing criteria.

Nature of Sewer Solids and Sediment Movement in Sewers
The generic term sewer sediment is used to  describe any type of settleable particulate material
that is found in storm water or sewage and is able to form bed deposits in sewers and associated
hydraulic structures. Some particles of very small size or low density may remain in  suspension
under all normal flow conditions and would be transported through a sewerage  system as
washload. Such particles have a negligible effect on the hydraulic capacity of sewerage systems,
but can  have  an important influence on  pollutant loading in the flow and at points of discharge
such as  treatment works and sewer overflows.

By contrast, larger (inorganic and organic) and denser particles (inorganic with a specific gravity in
the range of  1.5 to 2.5) having settling velocities  in the range  0.2 centimeters/second to 30
centimeters/second that are constantly inputted into sanitary systems, but at low rates  (5-15 mg/l
typical),  may only be transported  by peak flows that occur relatively infrequently.  In some cases,
they may form permanent stationary deposits at the point of entry to the sewer system.

If liquid  flows  over a sediment bed in a sewer running full or partially full, hydrodynamic  lift and
drag forces are exerted on the deposited particles.  If two combined forces do not  exceed the
restoring force, then entertainment  occurs,  resulting  in the movement of the particles at the
flow/sediment boundary.  Not all the particles  of a given size at the flow/sediment  boundary
dislodge and  move at the same time  because the flow is turbulent and  contains short term
fluctuations in velocity.  The limiting condition, below which sediment movement is negligible,
known as the  threshold of movement, is usually defined in terms  of either the critical bed shear
stress or the critical erosion velocity.

Once sediment is entrained,  it may travel down  the sewer in one of two general ways. Finer,
lighter material tends to travel in suspension, while heavier material travels in a rolling, sliding
mode as bedload.  In the transport of  suspended sediment, there  is a continuous exchange
between particles settling  out and those being  entrained upwards into the  flow.  Under  certain
conditions, fine grained and organic particles can form a highly concentrated mobile layer of 'fluid
mud'near the  invert (Ashley,  1992).

-------
If the flow velocity or turbulence level decreases, there will be a net reduction in the amount of
sediment  held in suspension.  The material accumulated  at  the  bed may  continue to be
transported as a stream  of particles without deposition.   However, below a certain limit,  the
sediment will form a deposited bed, with transport occurring only  in the surface layer (the limit of
deposition). If the flow velocity is further reduced, sediment transport will cease completely.  The
flow conditions necessary to prevent deposition depend on the pipe size and on properties of the
sediment, such as particle size and  specific gravity.  Flocculation of fine particles  can  also be
important. The flow velocities  needed to entrain sediment tend to be higher than those at which
deposition occurs.

Sewer Self Cleansing Criteria
An important parameter in the  criteria for sewer self-cleansing is average shear stress.  Average
shear stress is the amount of force the fluid exerts on the wetted perimeter of the pipe.  Another
important parameter is bed shear stress which is the amount of force the fluid exerts on the bed of
sediment in the pipe.  Bed shear stress is related to bed load scour and movement.

Historically, in respect to the sediments found in sewerage systems, the design  of systems has
been based on a set of  conditions that prevent the  deposition  of sediments in pipes.   These
conditions are based on  a minimum velocity of flow or a minimum shear  stress that the  flow
should  exert on the walls of the pipe to maintain self-cleansing conditions.  The minimum velocity
of flow or minimum shear stress corresponds to a particular depth of flow or with a particular
frequency of occurrence.  Available design  criteria  were  reported  by the Construction  Industry
Research and Information Association (CIRIA, 1987), and a summary of these, outlined by Nalluri
and Ab Ghani (1996), are  recorded in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2.

Table 3-1. Minimum Velocity  Criteria
Source
          Country       Sewer Type     Minimum       Pipe
                                         Velocity (mis)  Conditions
American Society of Civil
Engineers (1970)
British Standard (1987)
Bielecki(1982)
USA
UK
Germany
Sanitary
Storm
Sanitary
Combined
Not noted
0.6
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.5
Full/Half-full
Full/Half-full
Full
Full
Full
Table 3-2. Minimum Shear Stress Criteria
Source



Lysne(1969)

ASCE(1970)

Yao(1974)
Mag u ire

Bischof(1976)
Country



USA

USA

USA
UK

Germany
Sewer Type



Not noted

Not noted

Storm

Sanitary


Not noted

Not noted
Minimum Shear  Pipe Conditions
Stress (N/m )

2-4

1.3-12.6

3.0-4.0

1.0-2.0


6.2

2.5
Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

Full/Half-full

Not noted

-------
These criteria take no account of the characteristics of the sediment, of the suspended sediment
concentration,  the bed load or of any cohesion between the sediment  particles. Nonetheless,
inspection of Table 3-1  and Table  3-2 indicates that as stand  alone criteria taken individually
and/or jointly, minimum velocity and minimum shear stress levels of 1 meter/second and 2 N/m
be realized on a regular basis. Recent work by many researchers has shown that a single value of
minimum velocity or shear stress cannot adequately describe the self cleansing conditions in all
pipes of different size, roughness and gradient for a  range of sediment characteristics and flow
conditions.

In practice, sewer pipes will not be maintained self-cleansing at all  times. The diurnal pattern of
the dry weather flow and the temporal distribution and nature of sediments found  in sewer flows
may result in the deposition of some sediments at times of low flow and the subsequent erosion
and transport of these sediments, either as suspended load or bed-load,  at times of higher flow.
The deposited sediments will exhibit additional  strength due to  cohesion and provided that the
peak dry weather flow velocity or bed shear stress  is  of sufficient magnitude to erode  these
sediments, the sewer will maintain self cleansing operation at times of dry weather. May, et. al.
(1996), presented a definition to describe a  self cleansing sewer as "an efficient self-cleansing
sewer is one having a  sediment-transporting capacity that is  sufficient  to maintain a balance
between the amounts of deposition and erosion, with  a time-averaged depth of sediment deposit
that minimizes the combined costs of construction, operation and maintenance." To achieve such
self-cleansing performance, the following criteria apply:

1.  Flows equaling or exceeding  a limit appropriate  to  the sewer  should  have  the capacity to
    transport a minimum concentration of fine-grain  particles in suspension (applicable for all
    types of sewerage systems).

2.  The capacity of flows to transport coarser granular material as bed-load should  be sufficient to
    limit the depth of deposition  to a specified proportion of the  pipe  diameter. This criteria
    generally relates to combined and storm water systems. Limit  of deposition considerations,
    i.e., "no deposition" generally applies to sanitary sewer designs.  In this context, there must be
    sufficient shear in sanitary systems to avoid deposition of large particles.

3.  Flows with a specified frequency of occurrence should have the ability to erode bed particles
    from a deposited granular bed that may have developed a certain degree of cohesive strength
    (applicable to all systems).

To  meet these criteria,  new guidelines have recently been  developed  (CIRIA, 1996), and  are
currently being adopted throughout Europe for the design of sewers to control sediment problems.
Design criteria for the transport of fine grained  material in suspension, the transport of coarser
sediments as bed load  and the erosion of cohesive sediment  deposits and guidelines on  the
minimum flow velocity and  pipe gradient for  different types and sizes of sewer are outlined. To
account for the effects of cohesion (Criterion  3, above), the design flow condition should produce
a minimum value of bed shear stress of 2.0 N/m2 on a flat bed with a Colebrook White roughness
of 1.2 millimeters (CIRIA, 1996).

The third criterion is of specific interest to the  problem of cleansing accumulated mature sediment
beds. Various researchers have studied the  flow conditions required to release particles from a
deposited bed, which has developed a degree of cohesion. Summaries of investigations forming
much of the  basis for Criterion 3 are  as follows:

    •  Nalluri and Alvarez  (1992), whose laboratory studies used synthetic cohesive sediments,
       concluded that there were two ranges of bed shear stress at which erosion occurred: 2.5
       N/m2 applying for the weakest  material, comprising a surface layer of fluid sediment: and
       6 to  7 N/m2 for the more granular and consolidated material below. It was found that, after
       erosion, the synthetic cohesive sediments behaved very much like non-cohesive material.

-------
    •   Ristenpart and Uhl (1993) found in field tests that during dry weather an average  bed
       shear stress of 0.7 N/m2 was required to initiate erosion, increasing to  an average of
       about 2.3 N/m2 during wet weather, or to 3.3 N/m2 after a prolonged period of dry weather
       and presumably, consolidation of the deposited bed.

    •   Ashley  (1993)  has suggested that the bonds  between particles at the surface  of a
       deposited bed are weakened by the presence of the water, so that surface layers can be
       successively stripped away by the flow. Measurements in the Dundee, Scotland sewers
       indicated  that it began  to move at  a fluid shear stress  of about 1 N/m2, with significant
       erosion of a  deposited  bed occurring at bed shear of 2 to 3 N/m2. Taking account of a
       review of work by other researchers, Ashley concluded that  most deposits  should be
       eroded at a shear stress exceeding  6 to 7 N/m2.

Desktop Procedure
A desktop procedure, developed for a recent sediment deposition investigation of the sediment
accumulation problems in the South  Ottawa Tunnel, Ottawa, Canada  (Montgomery  Watson,
1998) was used.  The entire conduit is considered as a single "tank" with no differentiation of
heavy particles settling at the front end of the tunnel in contrast to finer particles settling in mid-
sections. The desktop procedure is a single  cell mass balance model for large diameter sewer
lines. Inputs are: daily flow rates; average daily minimum hourly, and maximum hourly discharge.
A calendar year of flow data is used.

The desktop procedure analyzes deposition on a daily basis noting accumulations of inorganic
and organic deposits as well as scour and  erosion of prior deposits  over the course of the input
time series. Inorganic and organic solids are  input on a daily basis as an  invariant concentration
basis, i.e., and independent of flow quantity.

The procedure investigates the settling and scouring behavior of material loosely  categorized as
inorganic "grit" and or large organic particles having fall settling velocities ranging between 0.1  and
30 cm/sec.
Table 3-3. Assumed Inorganic Material Composition
Sieve
Size#

4
6
10
16
20
30
40
50
70
100
200
Sum
Mesh Relative Assumed Composition By Sum
Opening Mass Specific Gravity
Fraction
(mm)
4.76
3.36
2.00
1.25
0.84
0.60
0.42
0.30
0.20
0.15
0.025

(%)
1
2
11
10
15
10
12
12
16
8
3
100
1.7
40
35
35
30
30
30
20
20
15
10
5

1.9
40
35
35
30
30
30
20
20
15
10
5

2.1
10
15
15
20
20
20
30
25
30
30
40

2.5
10
15
15
20
20
20
30
35
40
50
50


100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

As presented in Table 3-3, material is noted by sieve size varying from # 4 sieve size (3/8" gravel)
to #200 sieve (0.075 mm- fine sand). Relative fractions per sieve size are noted along with density

-------
breakdown per sieve ranging from 1.7 (soil)  to 2.5 (sand ). The inorganic material distribution
shown in Table 3-3 represents average value conditions.

Table 3-4  notes fall velocities for each of the  sieve sizes and specific gravity subcategories. Fall
velocities are computed  using the worn angular assumption and sewage temperature of 10ฐC,
which is very common. Table 3-5 depicts a similar assumed distribution of organic particles and
estimated  fall velocities. This data was developed by US EPA in the early 1980's to establish the
basis of design for the hydraulic model studies leading to the design of the Swirl Concentrator
(EPA, 1982).
Table 3-4. Distribution of Inorganic Material Settling Velocities

           Sieve   Mesh        Fall Velocity* (cm/s)
           Size    Opening
           #       (mm)
                                density=1.7   Density=1.9    density=2.1    density=2.5
4
6
10
16
20
30
40
50
70
100
200
4.76
3.36
2.00
1.25
0.84
0.60
0.42
0.30
0.20
0.15
0.075
15.5
9.4
7.0
5.6
4.7
3.3
2.5
1.8
1.0
0.61
0.24
20.0
12.0
9.0
7.2
6.0
4.9
3.2
2.3
1.3
0.78
0.30
24.0
14.6
11.0
8.8
7.3
5.9
4.0
2.8
1.5
0.95
0.37
33.0
20.0
15.0
12.0
10.0
8.1
5.4
3.8
2.1
1.3
0.5
               *Worn Angular Particles, Temperature = 10ฐC


Table 3-5. Assumed Organic Material Size, Composition and Settling Velocities
Sieve #


4
6
10
20
30
40
50
70
Mesh
Opening
(mm)
4.76
3.36
2.00
0.84
0.60
0.42
0.30
0.20
Mass
Fraction
(%)
0.5
25
23
21
14
3
4
9.5
Fall Velocity*
(cm/s)

9.0
7.5
6.0
3.3
1.5
0.9
0.5
0.1
               * Temperature = 10ฐC
                Specific Gravity = 1.1


The daily mass input into the desktop procedure is assumed to be in the range of 3 to 15 mg/l
inorganic and 5 to 15 mg/l organic. The desktop procedure uses flow inputs to develop daily flow
velocities  (average,  maximum, and  minimum) and  shear stress (average,  maximum, and
minimum). The shears are  used to determine deposition and  erosion potential. If the average
shear stress is smaller than the critical shear stress for that sieve size and density, as determined
by Macke (1982) and Brombach (1993), deposition will occur.

-------
Erosion of the bed load is based on  maximum hourly shear stress. Maximum shear stress is
compared to 2 N/m2 as determined by CIRIA standards. When the shear stress is above 2 N/m2,
erosion of the bed load occurs.

The degree of erosion, as a function of average fluid shear stress, used in the Desktop procedure
generally follows the empirical work of Nalluri and Avarez (1992), Ristenpart and Uhl (1993), and
Ashley (1993) noted above.  Table 3-6 demonstrates the full range of deposition and erosion
potential  as a function of discharge, velocity, and shear stress  for a 3.05 meter tunnel.  These
results were  prepared using the full annual range of expected flows into the new 7km Interlsland
Tunnel connecting the Nut Island Headworks  Facility with the new Deer  Island Wastewater
Treatment Plant in Boston.
Table 3-6. Assessment of 3.05 Meter Tunnel
Discharge
(m 3/sec)
2.6
3.5
4.4
5.3
6.1
7.0
8.8

10.5
13.2

15.8
17.5
Note: Kb=1 .2
Velocity
(mis)
0.36
0.47
0.60
0.72
0.84
1.06
1.20

1.44
1.80

2.17
2.41
millimeters = ro
Fluid Shear
(N/m2)
0.27
0.48
0.74
1.04
1.43
1.86
2.85

4.15
6.47

9.3
11.5
ugh concrete
Deposition or Erosion Potential

Severe deposition
Moderate to severe deposition
Mild to moderate deposition
Slight to mild deposition
Skims juvenile sediments
None to slight erosion top layer
Slight to mild erosion of consolidated beds
(2-5%)
Mild erosion of consolidated beds (5-15%)
Moderate erosion of consolidated beds (15-
25%)
Substantial erosion (25-35%)
Substantial erosion (35-50%)


-------
                                     Chapter 4
                    Hydrogen Sulfide and  Sulfuric Acid
                            Estimation Techniques
SULFIDE GENERATION IN SEWERS
Sulfide generation  is a  bacterially mediated process occurring  in the submerged  portion of
sanitary sewers and force mains. Fresh domestic sewage entering a wastewater collection system
is usually free  of sulfide. However , a dissolved form of sulfide soon appears as a result of the
following conditions:

    •   Low dissolved oxygen content
    •   Long detention time in the collection system
    •   Elevated wastewater temperature

The root  cause of  odor  and  corrosion in collection systems  is sulfide, which is produced  from
sulfate by bacteria residing  in a slime  layer on the submerged portion of sewer  pipes  and
structures. Once released from the wastewater as hydrogen sulfide gas, odor and corrosion
problems begin. Another type of bacteria  utilizes hydrogen sulfide gas to produce sulfuric acid that
causes  the  destruction  of  wastewater  piping  and facilities.  Operation  and  maintenance
expenditures are required to correct the  resulting damage caused by this sulfuric acid. In severe
instances, pipe failure, disruption of service and uncontrolled releases of sewage can occur.

Fresh domestic sewage  entering a wastewater collection system is usually free of sulfide. When
certain conditions exist within the collection system, dissolved sulfide soon begins to  appear.
These sulfide producing  conditions are low dissolved oxygen content,  high-strength wastewater,
long detention times, extensive pumping  and high wastewater temperatures. The first step in this
bacterially mediated process is the establishment of a slime layer below the water level in  a sewer
pipe or force main. This  slime layer is composed of bacteria  and inert solids held  together by a
biologically secreted protein "glue" called zooglea.  When this biofilm  becomes thick enough to
prevent dissolved oxygen from penetrating it, an anoxic zone develops within it. Approximately two
weeks is required to establish a fully productive slime layer in pipes. Within this slime layer, sulfate
reducing bacteria use the sulfate ion (SO4~), a common component of wastewater, as an oxygen
source for the assimilation of organic matter in the same way dissolved  oxygen is used by aerobic
bacteria. Sulfate concentrations are almost never limiting  in normal domestic wastewaters. When
sulfate is utilized by these bacteria,  sulfide (S=)  is the  by-product. The rate at which sulfide is
produced  by the slime  layer depends on  a variety  of environmental conditions  including the
concentration  of organic food source  (BOD),  dissolved oxygen concentration, temperature,
wastewater velocity, and  the area of the normally wetted surface of the pipe.

As sulfate is consumed, the sulfide by-product is released back into the wastewater stream where
it immediately  establishes  a  dynamic chemical equilibrium  between  four  forms  of sulfide; the
sulfide ion (S=), the bisulfide or hydrosulfide ion (HS-), aqueous hydrogen sulfide (H2S(aq)), and
hydrogen sulfide gas (H2S(g)).


Sulfide Ion (S=)
The sulfide ion carries a double negative  charge indicating that it reacts primarily by giving up two
electrons in the outer shell. It is a colorless ion in solution and cannot leave wastewater in this
form.  It does not contribute to odors in the ionic form.

-------
Bisulfide Ion (HS-)
The bisulfide (or hydrosulfide) ion carries a single negative charge.  This is because one of the
negative  charges of the sulfide ion  is taken up by a positively charged  hydrogen ion.  It is a
colorless, odorless ion which can only exist in solution.  It also does not contribute to odors.

Hydrogen Sulfide (Aqueous)
Hydrogen sulfide can exist as a gas  dissolved in water. The polar nature of the hydrogen sulfide
molecule makes it soluble  in water. In the aqueous form,  hydrogen sulfide does not cause odor;
however, this is the only sulfide specie that can leave the aqueous phase to exist as a  free gas.
The rate  at which hydrogen sulfide leaves the aqueous phase is governed by  Henry's  Law, the
amount of turbulence of the wastewater and the pH of the solution.

Hydrogen Sulfide (Gaseous)
Once hydrogen sulfide leaves the dissolved phase and enters the gas phase it can cause  odor
and corrosion.   Hydrogen sulfide gas  is a colorless but extremely odorous  gas that can be
detected  by the human sense of smell in very low concentrations. In high concentrations, it is also
very hazardous to humans. In concentrations as low as 10 ppm it can cause nausea, headache
and conjunctivitis of the eyes. Above 100 ppm it can cause serious breathing problems and loss
of the sense of smell along with burning of the eyes and respiratory tract. Above 300 ppm death
can occur  within a  few  minutes.  For these  reasons,  the  Occupational Safety and  Health
Administration (OSHA) has established  an  8-hour, time-weighted, personal exposure limit of 10
ppm (U.S. EPA, 1985).

Due to the continuous production of sulfide in wastewater, hydrogen sulfide gas  rarely, if ever, re-
enters the liquid  phase.  Sulfide continuously produced by the slime layer replaces that which is
lost to the atmosphere as hydrogen sulfide gas in the collection  system. In addition,  once the
hydrogen sulfide gas is released it usually disperses throughout the sewer environment and never
reaches a high enough concentration to be forced back into solution.

The four sulfide chemical species are related according to the following equilibrium:

                                        pKa = 6.9              pKa = 14

        H2s(g)       **      H2S(aq)       **      HS~        **        S~
    hydrogen sulfide      hydrogen sulfide         bisulfide            sulfide
         gas              (dissolved)               ion                ion

As indicated by the equilibrium equations, once hydrogen sulfide is released into the gas phase,
bisulfide ion is immediately transformed into more aqueous hydrogen sulfide to replace that which
is lost. Concurrently,  sulfide ion  is transformed into  bisulfide to  replace that lost to  aqueous
hydrogen sulfide. Through this type  of continuously shifting equilibrium  it would  be  possible to
completely remove all sulfide from wastewater as hydrogen sulfide gas through stripping. This is
generally not recommended or advantageous due to odor releases and the accelerated  corrosion
which can take place.

The quantitative relationship between the  four sulfide species is controlled by  the pH of the
wastewater.  The sulfide ion (S=) does not exist below a pH of about 12 and  as indicated by the
pKa, is in a  50/50 proportional relationship with the bisulfide ion (HS-) at a pH of 14. Since the
normal pH of wastewater  is far lower, the sulfide  ion is  rarely experienced. The pKa  of much
greater importance is  the one  controlling the proportional relationship  between the bisulfide ion
and H2S(aq). Most domestic wastewater has a pH near 6.9. This means that at  the pH of normal

-------
wastewater, half of all sulfide present exists as the bisulfide  ion and  the  other half exists as
aqueous hydrogen  sulfide  (a dissolved gas).   Since the concentration of dissolved gases  in
solution are primarily controlled by the specific Henry's  Law coefficient for that gas, they can be
released from solution to exist as the free gas  form. Once subjected to turbulence or aeration,
wastewater can release the dissolved gas as free hydrogen sulfide gas,  and  more bisulfide ion is
transformed into the dissolved gas form to replace that lost to the atmosphere.

Settleable Solids
Periods of low flow in the collection system correlate to lower average wastewater velocities.  Low
flow velocities allow material, usually grit and large organics, to settle  in the collection  system
piping. This increases the mass and surface area of material  in the collection system upon which
sulfate reducing bacteria (slime layer)  can grow, and  can lead to an  increased conversion  of
sulfate to sulfide.

Collection systems  with sedimentation  problems can  experience sulfide concentration spikes
during the  historically high flow,  cool  temperature months. This  phenomenon  occurs when
significant sand or grit accumulations exist and  the  particles  are covered by an anaerobic slime
layer that contains  sulfate-reducing bacteria. Only the bacteria  on  the surface of the grit pile
receive a continuous supply of sulfate because  they are exposed to the wastewater. The buried
sulfate-reducing bacteria are not exposed to a continuous  supply of sulfate.  This forces them  to
exist in a semi-dormant, anaerobic state with very low cell activity (but they are not dead). When a
high flow event occurs, with sufficient velocity and shear force to re-suspend  the sediment, this
enormous surface area of sulfate reducing bacteria is suddenly exposed to ample sulfate and they
rapidly convert it to  dissolved sulfide. This causes a relatively short duration,  high sulfide event
with resulting hydrogen sulfide gas release, odor and  corrosion.

The grit particles  and their attached sulfate-reducing bacteria that  were semi-dormant are
suspended and exposed to a tremendous quantity of sulfate and  quickly begin producing  sulfide.
The interaction between  a large quantity of bacteria and  an almost unlimited food source will
create dissolved sulfide spikes that are subsequently released in areas of high turbulence. This
trend is common and well documented in many cities with similar grit deposition problems such as
Boston, Los Angeles, St. Louis, and Houston.

Temperature
In addition to the factors described above, summer conditions result in an increase of wastewater
temperatures. Greater wastewater temperatures  increase the metabolic activity of the sulfate
reducing organisms, causing faster conversion of sulfate to sulfide and increased dissolved
sulfide concentrations. It has been estimated that each incremental 7 degree C (12.5 degree F)
increase in  wastewater temperature doubles the  production  of sulfide.

Sulfuric Acid Production
Thiobacillus aerobic bacteria, which commonly  colonize pipe crowns, walls and  other surfaces
above the water-line in wastewater pipes and structures,  has the ability to consume hydrogen
sulfide gas and oxidize it to sulfuric acid.  This process can only take  place  where there is an
adequate supply of hydrogen  sulfide  gas (>2.0 ppm), high relative humidity and  atmospheric
oxygen. These conditions exist in the majority of wastewater collection systems for some portion
of the year. A pH of 0.5 (which is approximately equivalent to a 7 percent sulfuric acid solution)
has been measured on surfaces exposed to severe hydrogen sulfide environments (>50  ppm  in
air).

The simplified and balanced  equation for  the biological metabolic   process which converts
hydrogen sulfide to sulfuric acid is presented below:

                                             Thiobacillus Bacteria

-------
                  H2S(g)      +       2O2         ~^        H2SO4
             hydrogen sulfide       atmospheric                Sulfuric
                   gas               oxygen                     acid

Turbulence Reduction
Turbulence is a critical parameter to consider in preventing hydrogen sulfide gas release from
wastewater. The effects of sulfide odor and corrosion are increased by orders of magnitude at
points of turbulence. Henry's  law governs the concentration of gas  over a liquid containing the
dissolved form of the gas. Henry's law states in effect:

       The concentration of a gas over a liquid containing the dissolved form of the gas is
       controlled by the partial pressure of that gas and the mole fraction of the dissolved gas in
       solution.

Since this law governs the relationship between  the dissolved form and gaseous form  of sulfide
over a given surface area, any action which serves to increase the surface area of the liquid also
increases the driving force from the liquid to the gas phase.

The most common form of increased surface area is turbulence. In turbulent areas, small droplets
are temporarily formed. When this happens, the forces governing Henry's law (partial  pressure)
quickly try to reach equilibrium between the liquid and atmospheric phases of the gas. The result
is often a dramatic release of  sulfide from the dissolved to the gaseous form. Structures causing
turbulence  should  be identified and  measures  should be taken to protect and/or control the
subsequent hydrogen sulfide gas releases.  This same release mechanism is exhibited whenever
wastewater containing dissolved sulfide is aerated.

Concrete Corrosion
The  effect of sulfuric acid on  concrete surfaces exposed  to the  sewer environment can be
devastating.  Sections of collection interceptors  and entire pump stations have been  known to
collapse due to loss of structural stability from  corrosion.  The  process of concrete corrosion,
however, is a step-wise process  which can sometimes give misleading impressions. The following
briefly  describes  the  general  process  of concrete  corrosion  in  the presence  of  a  sewer
atmosphere.

Freshly placed concrete has a pH of approximately 11 or 12, depending  upon the mix design.
This  high pH is the result of the  formation of calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2] as a by-product of the
hydration of cement. Calcium  hydroxide is a very caustic crystalline compound which can occupy
as much  as 25 percent of the volume of concrete.  A surface pH of 11 or 12 will not allow the
growth of any bacteria; however, the pH of the concrete is slowly lowered over time by  the effect
of carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrogen sulfide gas (H2S).  These gases are both known as "acid"
gases because they form relatively weak acid solutions when dissolved in water.  CO2  produces
carbonic acid and H2S produces thiosulfuric and polythionic acid.  These gases dissolve into the
water on the moist surfaces  above the sewage flow and  react with the calcium  hydroxide to
reduce the pH of the surface. Eventually the surface pH is reduced to a level that can support the
growth of bacteria (pH 9 to 9.5).

The  time  it takes to reduce the pH  is a function of the concentration of carbon dioxide  and
hydrogen  sulfide in the sewer  atmosphere.  It can sometimes take years to  lower the  pH of
concrete  from 12 to 9,  however, in some severe situations it can be  accomplished  in  a few
months.

Once the pH of the concrete is reduced to around pH 9, biological  colonization can occur. Over 60
different species of bacteria are known to regularly colonize wastewater pipelines and structures
above the water line. Most species of bacteria in  the genus Thiobacillus have the unique ability to

-------
convert hydrogen sulfide gas to sulfuric acid in the presence of oxygen. Because each species of
bacteria can only survive under a specific set of environmental conditions, the particular species
inhabiting the colonies  changes with time. Since the  production of sulfuric acid from hydrogen
sulfide is an aerobic biological process,  it can  only occur on surfaces exposed to atmospheric
oxygen.

As a  simplified example, one  species of Thiobacillus only grows well on  surfaces with a pH
between 9 and 6.5. However, when the sulfuric acid waste product they excrete decreases the pH
of the surface below 6.5, they die off and another species takes up residence which  can withstand
lower pH ranges. The succeeding species grows well on surfaces with a pH between 6.5 and 4.
When the acid produced by these species drops the pH below 4, a new species takes over. The
process of successive colonization continues until species, which can survive in extremely low pH
conditions, take over. One such specie is Thiobacillus thiooxidans, which is sometimes known by
its common name, Thiobacillus concretivorous,  which is Latin for "eats concrete". This organism
has been known to grow well in the  laboratory  while exposed to a  7  percent solution of sulfuric
acid. This is equivalent to a pH of approximately  0.5.

Sulfuric acid attacks the matrix of the concrete,  which is commonly composed of calcium silicate
hydrate gel (CSHG), calcium carbonate from aggregates (when present), and un-reacted calcium
hydroxide. Although  the reaction  products are complex and  result  in the formation of many
different compounds, the process can be generally illustrated by the following  reactions:
H2SO4     +    CaSi        ^      CaS04   + Si + 2 H+


H2SO4     +    CaCO3      ^     CaS04   + H2CO3


H2SO4     +    Ca(OH)2     ^      CaS04   +2 H2O

The primary product of concrete decomposition by sulfuric acid is calcium sulfate (CaS04), more
commonly known by it's mineral name, gypsum. From experience with this material in its more
common form of drywall  board, we know that it does not provide  much structural support,
especially when  wet. It is usually  present  in sewers and  structures as a  pasty white mass on
concrete surfaces above the water line. In  areas where diurnal or other high flows intermittently
scour the walls above  the water line, concrete  loss can occur rapidly. The surface coating of
gypsum paste can protect underlying sound concrete by providing  a buffer zone through which
freshly produced sulfuric  acid must penetrate.  Because Thiobacillus bacteria are aerobic, they
require  free atmospheric oxygen  to survive.  Therefore, they can  only live on the thin outer
covering of any surface. This means that acid produced on the surface  must migrate through any
existing gypsum  paste to  reach sound concrete. When the gypsum is washed off fresh surfaces
are exposed to acid attack and this accelerates the corrosion.

The color of corroded concrete surfaces can be various shades of yellow caused by the direct
oxidation of hydrogen  sulfide to elemental sulfur.  This only occurs where a continuous high
concentration supply of atmospheric oxygen or other oxidants are available.  The upper portions of
manholes and junction  boxes exposed to high hydrogen sulfide concentrations are often yellow
because of the higher oxygen content there. This same phenomena can be observed around the
outlets of odor scrubbers using hypochlorite solutions to treat high concentrations of hydrogen
sulfide gas.

Another damaging effect of sulfuric acid corrosion of concrete  is the formation of a mineral called
"ettringite". The chemical name for ettringite is calcium sulfbaluminate hydrate. It is produced by a
reaction between calcium sulfate and alumina, which is found in virtually all cements. It forms at
the boundary line between the soft calcium sulfate layer and the  sound,  uncorroded concrete

-------
surface. Ettringite is damaging because it is an expansive compound which occupies more space
that it's constituents. When ettringite forms, it lifts the corroded concrete away from the sound
concrete and causes a faster corrosion by continually exposing new surfaces  to acid attack.
Although the rate of concrete  loss is dependent upon  a number of factors including ettringite
formation,  it is  not uncommon to see  concrete  loss of I  inch  per year  in  heavy sulfide
environments.

Metal Corrosion
Concrete is not the only material that can be affected by the corrosive action of hydrogen sulfide
gas.  Most metals, including stainless steel, can also be attacked and destroyed  by exposure to
the strong mineral acid, sulfuric acid.  Metals can be corroded by two means, acid decomposition
by exposure to sulfuric acid produced by Thiobacillus bacteria,  and direct molecular attack. Most
free metals are bi-valent cations, meaning that they carry two positive charges and react primarily
by gaining two electrons in their outer shell (M++). The sulfide component of hydrogen sulfide gas
supplies these two electrons resulting in a metal sulfide and two free hydrogen ions.
M++      +       H2S         ^     MS       +        2H+

The metal has a much stronger affinity for the sulfide than hydrogen causing the release of two
free hydrogen ions. In this  manner, the metal is converted from a strong metal-metal bonding
arrangement  into a much weaker metal sulfide product. At the same time metals are exposed to
the acidic effect of the  free hydrogen  ions. This  condition results in missing rungs  of former
manhole steps, the corroded and weakened manhole covers and rings, and brass and copper
fittings turned dark bluish-black, the color of nickel and copper sulfide.

Trends in Sulfide Production
Hydrogen sulfide has always  existed  in wastewater.  Recent trends  of water conservation,
industrial pretreatment, and  design deficiencies can significantly increase  sulfide generation.  This
increase in sulfide generation leads to additional odor and corrosion problems.

Water Conservation Practices
Utilities  and  water  purveyors  have  recognized the  benefit  of promoting  water  conservation
practices. Prompted by water shortages around the  country, water conservation  practices  were
shown to not  only preserve a precious resource but also  save utilities money by delaying planned
expenditures  for plant upgrades, system capacity increases, and storage  facilities. Although  cost-
efficient and  practical for the  water industry, water conservation  has  caused an increase in
dissolved sulfide concentrations in wastewater systems.

Reduced wastewater flows  from water conservation practices can  cause reduced velocities and
longer residence time in the collection and  transmission systems.  These conditions allow  more
time for the reduction of sulfate, creating higher dissolved sulfide  concentrations and they also
increase the  general septicity of the wastewater.  Since less water is entering the wastewater
collection  system while the organic load remains  the same,  the strength of the wastewater in
terms of BOD5 also increases. This increases the biological activity of the slime layer and causes
the faster consumption of dissolved oxygen and the  creation of anaerobic conditions. Anaerobic
conditions also cause the production of organic acids, which drop the pH of the wastewater. Since
a small  shift downward in the pH of the wastewater can cause a dramatic increase in hydrogen
sulfide gas release, the anaerobic drop in pH  can  also  increase the release of  odor-causing
hydrogen sulfide gas.

Although water conservation has increased the dissolved sulfide concentration of wastewater, little
evidence suggests a general increase in total sulfide mass. However, the Henry's Law coefficient
governing the release of hydrogen sulfide gas from  wastewater is dependent  only upon sulfide
concentration in the  liquid  phase,  not  mass. Therefore,  any increase  in the  dissolved sulfide
concentration of wastewater will increase the release of hydrogen sulfide gas.

-------
Industrial Pretreatment
Perhaps  the  greatest  contributor to increased dissolved sulfide concentrations  in  municipal
wastewater is industrial pretreatment (Public Law 92-500). The Clean Water Act, mandated that
the nation's water supplies be protected through a variety of mechanisms. One such mechanism
is to require cleaner wastewater discharges from our Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW).
One concern with treated wastewater discharges was the bio-accumulation of heavy metals in the
environment.  High concentrations of certain metals, such as lead, copper, mercury, chromium,
and zinc were shown to have toxic effects on animals and plants.  Some of these metals can pass
through a wastewater treatment plants and enter the receiving stream or water body where  they
could be bio-accumulated to dangerous concentrations.  As a  result, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)  required municipalities to  implement industrial  pretreatment programs,
under which heavy metals and  other contaminants from  industrial sources were identified  and
treated. Removing heavy metals removed  a potential sulfide  removal mechanism.  Dissolved
forms of  sulfide (bisulfide ion and sulfide ion) have  a strong affinity for metals. One of the most
common  methods  used to remove sulfide from wastewater is to  add metal salts, usually ferrous
iron  compounds.  Metal salts combine  with sulfide and  precipitate an  insoluble metal  sulfide.
Before 1980,  a common  source of heavy metals in wastewater was industrial discharges from
steel mills, electro-plating operations, photo-finishing, and electronics manufacturing. As of 1995,
all such operations pre-treat their wastewater to remove metals prior to discharge to a POTW.

The targeted  heavy metals also exhibit  a toxic effect on bacteria in the slime layer that produce
sulfide. Toxicity or inhibition of  the sulfate-reducing bacteria  in the slime  layer by the targeted
heavy  metals  naturally reduced  their  health and  activity, which reduced  sulfide production.
Removing the source of the toxicity allowed the slime layer bacteria to flourish and produce even
more sulfide.  In 1989, the United  States Congress  ordered a study to assess the impact of the
industrial pretreatment program  on sulfide generation. The study  indicated that both of the above
mechanisms were responsible for a general increase in  sulfide in domestic wastewater.

Over a period of several years,  influent wastewater  at the  Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant
in Los Angeles, California, was analyzed for several constituents including sulfide and total metals
concentrations. As the data  in Table  4-1  dramatically indicate,  influent sulfide  to  the  plant
increased at the same time that total metals concentrations decreased. This trend has continued
since 1980 and is considered  a  direct effect  of industrial pre-treatment. Therefore, industrial
pretreatment has resulted in an increase in sulfide in wastewater.

Design Deficiencies
Wastewater and collection  system facility designers often under state  the  increasing trend  in
sulfide odor and corrosion related problems and neglect to incorporate controls into their designs.
Often the  relatively complex   relationships  between  wastewater characteristics,  slime  layer
formation, sulfide production bio-kinetics, sulfide chemistry, corrosion  biology, gas release,  and
ventilation dynamics are not fully understood are not  fully understood.

-------
Tabe 4-1. Dissolved Sulfide and Total Metals Concentration Trends at Hyperion WWTP.Los
Angeles, CA (Joyce, 1998)
Year
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
Total Metals
Concentration (mg/l)
19.0
17.0
16.0
14.0
13.0
12.5
11.0
10.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
3.5
3.0
Dissolved Sulfide
Concentration (mg/l)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
7.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
15.0
The following examples should be noted as potential odor and corrosion catastrophes and should
be avoided:

        force mains routed on a downhill gradient can experience premature crown failure

        drop manholes with 4.5 to 6 meter (15 to 20 foot) hydraulic freefalls causing extreme
        turbulence and hydrogen sulfide release

        unlined, unprotected pipe conveying wastewater for distances up to 48 kilometers (30
    miles)

        manifolded force main systems for distances up to 24 kilometers (15 miles), detention
        times of two or three days, and 360-degree slime layers producing dissolved sulfide with
        no chance of reaeration
Flushing Relationship to Hydrogen Sulfide Generation

Description of the Process
Wastewater, stormwater or riverwater can be collected and stored in chambers or upstream
sewers for release as a flush wave.  As the flush wave travels down the sewer, the shear forces
applied to the upper layer of the sediments exceeds the bonding strength of the solids, and
eroded particles are moved downstream with the flow. In the process of traveling down the sewer,
the upper layer of solids are removed and moved downstream with the flush water.

Odor Producing Conditions
The following scenarios illustrate how flushing may produce odor conditions.

       •   Remaining water in the pipe can contain high concentrations of dissolved sulfide. The
           turbulence associated with the flush wave may release peak concentrations of
           hydrogen sulfide gas  at the downstream flushing terminus.

-------
       •   Decomposing and hydrolyzing organic solids in the sewer materials can produce
           locally high soluble BOD concentrations in the matrix of the solids. Due to the
           presence of sulfate and sulfate reducing organisms in the matrix of the solids, it can
           be expected that high dissolved sulfide concentrations can exist in the upper layer of
           solids (approximately 2 to 6 centimeters). When this layer of solids is removed by a
           flush event, the dissolved sulfide present inside the matrix of the solids will be
           released into the flush water. Turbulence associated with the flush water will then
           cause release of the dissolved sulfide as hydrogen sulfide gas. This  may cause odor
           and corrosion producing conditions.

       •   When flushing deep deposits, once a fresh layer of solids is scoured away the new
           surface  of the solids will  presumably  be the solids  previously buried deeper within the
           solids mass. The biological population in this freshly exposed layer of solids will likely
           be strict anaerobes. This class of bacteria also contains  species that can reduce
           sulfate.  Prior to being exposed to the flush event, these solids received very little flux
           of sulfate,  since most sulfate was reduced to sulfide  by the previous  layer. Since the
           now exposed solids have been buried for some time, the anaerobic decomposition of
           organic  matter can produce a rich mixture  of organic acids and other short-chain
           carbon compounds. These organic acids and other anaerobic products make the
           soluble BOD of the mixture very high. Now that the freshly exposed layer is subjected
           to ample sulfate in the flush water flow, the metabolism of the sulfate reducing
           organisms is greatly accelerated and significant quantities of dissolved sulfide will
           again be formed. This newly formed sulfide is therefore available for release as
           hydrogen sulfide during the next flushing event.

       •   As the flush wave moves down the sewer at significant velocities, friction between the
           air and water creates a very large bowlus of air traveling down the pipe with very high
           concentrations of hydrogen sulfide present. When  this air arrives at the downstream
           flushing terminus, a peak spike of hydrogen sulfide odor may need controlling.

Invert Erosion
It is important to consider the effect of flushing on the condition of the partially corroded pipe. Will
the high velocity water cause erosion of the partially corroded and pasty pipe walls? This may be a
concern when flushing older pipe systems or new systems recently impacted by corrosion. The
basis of this concern is a series of observations noted in 1997  in  Phoenix, Arizona. The following
is an excerpt from a  recent investigation in Phoenix,  Arizona noting the erosion of stones and
aggregates on a downstream new interceptor system from upstream  piping areas (OCTC, 1997).

Example of Invert Erosion: Phoenix, Arizona

During an investigation of the twin  1.8 meter (72 inch) diameter sewers entering the 91st Avenue
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on June 18, 1997, the flow in the pipe was approximately
0.9 meters (3 feet) deep at the invert and moving at an estimated 1.5 m/s (5 fps). This was a
reduced flow condition from previous inspections in this sewer, and it allowed the inspector to
physically make contact with the invert of the sewer.  As the inspector stood on the bottom of the
pipe, a groove, approximately 8 to  10 centimeters (3 to 4 inches) wide and 10 centimeters (3
inches) deep, was detected in the sewer invert. As the  inspector  probed the  length and depth of
the groove with his boot to determine the  dimensions, a rock approximately 4 centimeters (1.5
inches) in diameter struck the toe of his boot with considerable force. The rock was retrieved,
examined, and found to be a semi-round, river-gravel type silica rock with one fracture plane.  The
rock was relatively clean and did not have a slime layer attached. The rock resembled what could
be used as concrete aggregate in upstream piping. The precise source of the rock could not be
determined. During the 15 minutes that the  inspector was in the pipe more than two dozen rocks
were noted to travel  down the pipe inside the groove in single-file fashion.

-------
The groove was probed further and found to extend as far as the inspector could reach both in an
upstream and downstream direction from the manhole. It is believed that the groove extends the
entire length of the sewer in this reach. It was concluded that the groove is caused by the impacts
caused by stones, rocks, and other hard debris traveling down the pipe with the flow. Because of
the high wastewater velocity and hydraulic shear forces developed in the fast-flowing Salt River
Outfall (SRO), it is suspected that all hard debris and rocks which enter the SRO (and pipes of
similar hydraulic characteristics) produce invert erosion until they reach the 91st Avenue WWTP.

It could not be determined with certainty that the reinforcing steel has been severed by the groove;
however, estimating from the depth of the groove and the normal reinforcing mesh coverage in
reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), the steel reinforcing in the bottom of the pipe has most likely
been compromised.

The source of the debris that is causing the invert corrosion cannot be definitely determined,
although the type and size of the rocks are very similar to what would normally be used as
concrete pipe aggregate. The pure silica, acid-proof, river-gravel stone aggregate historically used
as concrete aggregate in the Phoenix area comes from the Salt River basin. The stones are
crushed and screened to produce the proper gradation for concrete mix designs. The crushing
operation produces very hard, sharp, angular pieces ideal for concrete aggregate. It is this type of
aggregate that has been noticed during these inspections to be protruding from the surface of
corroded pipes. The aggregate protrudes from the concrete matrix because silicate stones are
inert to strong reducing acids such as the sulfuric acid produced by Thiobacillus bacteria from
hydrogen sulfide gas. The concrete matrix (predominantly calcium silicate, calcium carbonate,
and calcium hydroxide), however, is easily dissolved by sulfuric acid leaving the inert silicate
stones protruding from the corroded concrete surface.

The older, shallow surface sewers of all SRO member communities are most likely the source of
the rocks. The rocks move slowly or intermittently in these shallow sewers due to the lack of
sustained flushing velocities. When moving slowly or intermittently the rocks do not tumble with
great force and their impact locations are scattered across a large area of the bottom of the pipe.
When these rocks enter the fast-flowing SRO or other large diameter sewers with sustained high
velocities, the rocks are overwhelmed by the hydraulic forces and align themselves in single-file
fashion as they move quickly down the pipe. This causes the impacts from all these stones to be
concentrated in a very narrow band directly in the invert of the pipe. The combination of the mass
(weight) of the stones, their velocity, tumbling action caused by asymmetrical shapes and the
concentration of all impact sites directly at the invert of the pipe is causing the groove. If not
addressed or corrected the erosion of the invert will continue to the point of pipe breach. Once this
happens, the pipe bedding and surrounding soils will likely be liquefied and either moved or
transported downstream. This will leave portions of the bottom of the pipe unsupported and
promote pipe settlement, fracture, and  eventual destruction of the pipe requiring replacement.

From a brief study of the physics of this erosion phenomenon,  it can be determined that the
greatest damage is caused by those stones and rocks having sufficient mass to impart a
significant impact under the acceleration of gravity. As the stones tumble within the pipe they are
continuously striking the bottom of the pipe, rebounding, being launched briefly a few inches
above the invert, and then strike the invert again a short distance downstream. It can be
determined that the larger stones and rocks cause the greatest damage; however, it can certainly
be argued that the smaller stones also  contribute to the phenomenon (less than #4 sieve) but to a
much less degree.
                                           10

-------
Dissolved Sulfide Prediction Procedure
The dissolved sulfide estimation procedure used in the desktop analyses was developed by
Montgomery Watson to estimate the amount of dissolved sulfide which can be produced by
wastewater under a variety of gravity and force main situations and the corrosion which results
from the release of dissolved sulfide to hydrogen sulfide gas. This procedure is used in
conjunction with the solids deposition and erosion procedure noted earlier in this chapter. This
procedure uses the classical Pomeroy/Parkhurst dissolved sulfide generation equations, with the
exception that additional logic have been added to account for variables not anticipated in the
original equations. The procedure consists of two parts:  one for dissolved sulfide generation
based on the Pomeroy equations, and a second part to estimate corrosion rates in wastewater
collection systems. This second part estimates the corrosion rate of concrete, steel, brick, mortar
and other materials subjected to hydrogen sulfide environments. This procedure is for use in
gravity sewers, wet wells, junction boxes, siphons and force main discharge manholes
downstream of sulfide producing sewers and force mains.

Sulfide Model Development
The dissolved sulfide generation rate is most affected by BOD and temperature. An increase  in
temperature increases the metabolic rate of the bacteria  and the rate of sulfide production. The
term "effective  BOD" has been used as a convenient way to combine the temperature and BOD
effects. The equation for this relationship is as follows:

                             (EBOD) = (BOD) x (1.07)  (T'2ฐ)

Where:

EBOD = effective BOD, mg/l
BOD = standard BOD5, mg/l
T = temperature, deg C
1.07 = empirical factor

The  Pomeroy and Parkhurst equation noted below is used  to predict dissolved sulfide buildup.
This equation accounts for the various factors affecting sulfide buildup in typical municipal
wastewater applications (Pomeroy, 1985).  A common form of the equation is presented below
(where D/4 represents the hydraulic radius):

                           S2 = S,| +  (M) (t)  [EBOD (D/4 + 1.57)]

Where:

82 = predicted  sulfide concentration at time t^. mg/l
S^ = sulfide concentration at time t^. mg/l
t = \2 -1-| = flฐw time in a given sewer reach with constant slope, diameter, and flow; hr
M = specific sulfide flux coefficient;  m/hr
D = pipe diameter; ft

An M factor of 1 x 10 "^ m/hr is generally reasonable for force mains in which conditions are
favorable for sulfide buildup (ie:  infrequent flow, low velocities, high temperatures, long retention
times, very low dissolved oxygen, and moderate to high BOD).  The default value for M in the
sulfide generation procedure  is 3 x 10 -4 m/hr and has been found to be a good approximate
value when all force  mains and gravity sewers are considered.  This value can be adjusted up or
down to account for the specifics of each system to be modeled.
                                           11

-------
Dissolved Oxygen Effects
The Pomeroy/Parkhurst equations for prediction of sulfide buildup assume that little or no
dissolved oxygen is present. One of the requirements for use of the equations is that less than 0.5
mg/l dissolved oxygen be present for the equations to be accurate.  This is due to the sulfide
oxidation effects of the aerobic zone on top of the slime layer.  Typically, wastewater contains
more than 0.5 mg/l dissolved oxygen.  If the effect of this oxygen is ignored,  the model will over-
estimate sulfide production. Facultative bacteria are a type of common sewer bacteria that utilize
dissolved oxygen, when available, but can also respire in its absence. These bacteria will utilize
the available dissolved oxygen (D.O.) until it is depleted. Then, in the absence of dissolved
oxygen, the  bacteria will begin utilizing first nitrate and then sulfate as their oxygen source.
Unprocessed municipal wastewater typically has a limited nitrate concentration. Once oxygen and
any nitrate is depleted, the bacteria will begin to utilize sulfate as an oxygen source and produce
sulfide.  The time required for depletion of the DO should be accounted for in the determination of
sulfide buildup so that the most accurate results are obtained.

To account for dissolved oxygen concentrations higher than 0.5 mg/l, the Pomeroy/Parkhurst
equations have been modified to include logic which estimates the time for oxygen depletion. The
time required for depletion of the dissolved oxygen  is calculated with the following equation:

                                 tDO=  	DO	
                                           SOUR(1/103)(VSS)

Where:

t   = time required for bacterial dissolved oxygen depletion, hr
DO
DO =  initial dissolved oxygen concentration, mg/l
SOUR = specific oxygen uptake rate, mg O2/g VSS-hr
VSS = volatile suspended solids concentration, mg/l (represents bacterial concentration)

Subtracting the time required for oxygen depletion from the detention time yields the time
remaining for sulfide production. This assumes that sulfide accumulation does not occur during
periods when dissolved oxygen concentrations are  greater than 0.5 mg/l. Substituting the time
remaining for bacterial sulfide production into the equation for  prediction of sulfide buildup results
in an equation which accounts for the presence of DO.  The equation is expressed as follows for a
force main or full flowing pipe:

                            S2 = S,| + (M) ts [EBOD (D/4 +  1.57)]

Where:

S2 = predicted sulfide concentration at time t^; mg/l
S^ = sulfide concentration at time t^; mg/l
M = specific sulfide flux coefficient; m/hr
ts  =t-  tDO  = time remaining for sulfide accumulation; hr
D = pipe diameter; ft

If enough dissolved oxygen is present, many bacteria will not utilize sulfate as an oxygen source
and therefore not produce sulfide,  and other bacteria in the aerobic zone on the slime layer will
oxidize sulfide produced in the anoxic zone and suppress sulfide release back into the
wastewater.
                                            12

-------
                                        Chapter 5
                            Overview of Sewer Cleaning
          Flushing Systems and  CSO Tank Cleaning Technology


The deposition of sewage solids during dry weather in combined sewers has long been recognized as a
major contributor to "first-flush" phenomena. Another manifestation of first-flush, in addition to the scouring
of materials already deposited in the lines, is the first flush of loose solid particles on the urban ground
surface that are transported into the sewerage system and not trapped by catch basins or inlets. These
particulates may settle out in the system and be scoured and resuspended during wet periods. Such
materials also create first flush loading from storm drainage  systems. Deposition of heavy solids is also a
problem in separate sanitary systems.

One of the underlying reasons for considerable sewage solids deposition in combined sewers is the
hydraulic design. Combined sewers are sized to  convey many times the anticipated peak dry weather
sewage flow. Combined sewer laterals can carry up to 1000 times the expected background sewage flow.
Ratios of peak to average dry weather flow usually range from 2 to 10 for interceptor sewers. The
oversized combined sewer pipes possess substantial sedimentation potential during dry weather periods.
Dry weather flow velocities are typically inadequate to maintain settleable solids in suspension which tend
to accumulate in the pipes. During rainstorms, the accumulated solids can re-suspend and overflow to
receiving waters.


Generally if sediments are left to accumulate in pipes, hydraulic restrictions can result in blockages in
flowline discontinuities. Otherwise, the bed level reaches an  equilibrium level. A number of conventional
cleaning techniques are described below, followed by a  discussion of various manual and automated
flushing methods.

Over the  past 50 years nearly  15,000 CSO tanks have been constructed world-wide. In the US there are
approximately  300 facilities mostly off line at the end of collection systems. The balance are mostly in
Europe with nearly 14,000 constructed in Germany.  Tank cleaning methods are reviewed.


Conventional Sewer Cleaning Techniques

Conventional sewer cleaning techniques include rodding, balling, flushing, poly pigs and bucket machines.
These methods are used to clear blockages once they have formed, but also serve as preventative
maintenance tools to minimize future problems. With the exception of flushing these methods are
generally used in a "reactive" mode to prevent or clear up hydraulic restrictions. As a control concept,
flushing of sewers is viewed as a means to reduce hydraulic restriction problems as well as a pollution
prevention approach.


Power Rodding
Power rodding includes an engine and drive unit, steel rods  and a variety of cleaning and driving units.
The power equipment applies  torque to the rod as it is pushed through the line, rotating the cleaning
device attached to the lead end. Power rodders can be  used for routine preventative maintenance, cutting
roots and breaking up grease deposits. Power rodders are efficient in lines up to 0.30 meters (12 inches).


Balling

Balling is a hydraulic cleaning  method in which the pressure of a water head creates high velocity water
flow around an inflated rubber cleaning ball. The ball has an outside spiral thread and swivel connection
that causes it to spin, resulting in a scrubbing action of the water along the pipe. Balls remove settled grit
and grease buildup inside the  line. This technique is useful for sewers up to 0.60 meters (24 inches).

-------
Jetting
Jetting is a hydraulic cleaning method that removes grease buildup and debris by directing high velocities
of water against the pipe walls at various angles. The basic jetting machine equipment is usually mounted
on a truck or trailer. It consists of water supply tank of at least 3.8 cubic meters (1,000 gallons), a high
pressure water pump, an auxiliary engine, a powered drum reel holding at least 152 meters (500 feet) of
one inch  hose on a reel having speed and direction controls and a variety of nozzles. Jetting is efficient for
routine cleaning of small diameter, low flow sewers.


Pigging
Poly pigs, kites, and bags are used in a similar manner as balls. The rigid rims of bags and kites cause the
scouring  action. Water pressure moves these devices against the tension of restraining  lines. The shape
of the devices creates a forward jet of water. The poly pig is used for large sanitary sewers and is not
restrained by a line, but moves through the pipe segment with water pressure buildup behind it.
Power Bucket
The power bucket machine is a mechanical cleaning device effective in partially removing large deposits
of silt, sand, gravel, and grit. These machines are used mainly to remove debris from a break or an
accumulation that cannot be cleared by hydraulic methods. In cases where the line is so completely
plugged that a cable cannot be threaded between manholes, the bucket machine cannot be used. The
bucket machine is usually trailer or truck mounted and consists mainly a cable storage drum coupled with
an engine with controllable drive train, up to 300 meters (1000 feet) of 1.3 centimeter (1/2-inch) steel cable
and various sized buckets and tools ranging up to in diameter. The cable drum and engine are mounted
on a framework that includes a 0.9 meter (36 inch) vertical A-frame high enough to permit lifting the
cleaning bucket above ground level. Typically two machines of same design are required. One machine at
the upstream manhole is used to thread the cable from manhole to manhole. The other machine  is used
at the downstream manhole has a small swing boom or arm attached to the top of the A-frame for
emptying buckets. The bucket is cylindrical. The bottom of the bucket has two opposing  hinged jaws.
When the bucket is plugged through the material obstructing the line, these jaws are open and dig into
and scrape off the material  and fill the bucket. When the bucket is pulled in the reverse direction,  the jaws
are forced closed by a slide action. Any material in the bucket is retained as the bucket is pulled out
through the manhole.

S/7f Traps
Silt traps  (or grit sumps) have successfully been used to collect sewer sediments at convenient locations
within the system with the traps being periodically emptied as part of a planned maintenance program.
The design and  operational performance of two experimental rectangular (plan) shaped  silt traps in
French sewer systems was reported (Bertrand-Krajewsk, Madiec, and Moine, 1996). Information  on
design procedures and methodology for silt traps is scarce.


Sewer Flushing
Flushing of sewers has been a concern dating back to the Romans. Ogden (1892) described early
historical efforts for cleaning sewers in Syracuse, New York at the turn of the century. The concept of
sewer flushing is to induce an unsteady wave by either rapidly adding external water or creating a
"dambreak" effect by quick  opening a restraining gate. This aim is to re-suspend, scour and transport
deposited pollutants to the sewage treatment facility during dry weather and/or to displace solids deposited
in the upper reaches of large collection systems closer to the system outlet. The control  idea is either to
reduce depositing pollutants that may be resuspended and overflow during wet events and/or to decrease
the time of concentration of the solids transport within the collection system. During wet weather events
these accumulated loads may then be more quickly displaced to the treatment headworks before
overflows occur or be more efficiently captured  by wet weather first flush capture storage facilities.

-------
Recently, Gatke and Borcherding (1996) investigated the effectiveness of long distance flushing of a 4.5
meter (14.8 feet) diameter CSO tunnel 360 meters (1180 feet) in length using a physical (1:24 scale)
hydraulic model coupled with numerical simulation techniques. The work showed that a reservoir 15.5
meters (50.8 feet) high with about a release volume of 360 cubic meters (95,100 gallons) would be
adequate for cleansing sediments.

Manual flushing methods usually involve discharge from a fire hydrant or quick opening valve from tank
truck to introduce a heavy flow of water into the line at a manhole. Flushing removes floatables and some
sand and grit, but is not very effective for removing heavy solids. In recent years, automated flushing
equipment has emerged in France and Germany.


Hydrass ฎ
The Hydrass flushing system developed in France, and shown in Figure 5-1, is comprised of a balanced
hinged gate with the same shape as the cross section as the sewer. At low flows the self-weight of the
gate holds the gate in the vertical position and the sewer flow builds up behind the gate. The depth of flow
continues to build up behind the gate until the force created by the retained water becomes sufficient to tilt
the gate. As the gate pivots about the hinge to a near horizontal position, the sewer flow is released and
this creates a flush wave which travels downstream and subsequently cleans any deposited sediment
from the invert of the sewer. The gate then returns to the vertical position and the cyclic process is
repeated, thus maintaining the sewer free of sediment.  Gates are positioned in series at intervals dictated
by the nature, magnitude and  location of the sedimentation problem. Chebbo, Laplace, Bachoc, Sanchez
and LeGuennec (1995) reported the effective operation of the Hydrass system. This system has been
installed on  a segment of the Marseilles  Number 13 trunk. A 100 meter (328 feet) stretch required about
700 flushes to clean an initial deposit of about 100 millimeters (4 inches). Flushing frequency can be
reduced if the upstream  head  can be increased, i.e., the number of flushes with a 0.5 meter (1.6 feet)
head is 24 times that required for a  1.5 meter (4.9 feet) head.
               Diagram showing how the HYDRASS gate operates

-------
Figure 5-1. Hydrassฎ

Hydroselfฎ
In recent years pollution caused by CSO has become a serious environmental concern. Over 13,000 CSO
tanks have been constructed with over 500 being in-line pipe storage tanks 1.8 to 2.1 meter (6 to 7 feet)
diameter with lengths 125 to 180 meters (400 to 600 feet). Discharge throttles control the outlet discharge
to about twice average dry weather flow plus infiltration. Many different methods for cleaning these pipes
were tried over the years. The most popular has been the HYDROSELFฎ system developed by Steinhardt
Wassertechnik, Taunusstein  about 11 years ago.

The HYDROSELFฎ system is a simple method that uses a wash water storage area and hydraulically
operated flap gates to create  a cleaning wave to scour inverts of sewers. This system consists of a
hydraulically operated flap gate, a flush water storage area created by the erection  of a concrete wall
section, a float or pump to supply hydraulic pressure and valves controlled by either a float system or an
electronic control panel. The water level in the sewer is used to activate the release and/or closure of the
gate using a permanently sealed float controlled hydraulic system. The flushing system is designed to
operate automatically whenever the in-system water level reached a pre-determined level, thereby
releasing the gate and causing a "dambreak" flushing wave to occur. Activation by  remote control is also
possible. This technology does not require an outside water supply, can be easily retrofitted in existing
installations with a minimal loss of storage space, and may operate without any external energy source.
The system consists of a hydraulically operated flap gate, a flush  water storage area created by the
erection of a concrete wall section, a float or pump to supply hydraulic pressure and valves controlled by
either a float system or an electronic control panel. See Figure 5-2. The actual arrangement for a given
installation is site dependent. The flushing length, slope and width determine the flush water volume
needed for an effective single flush of the system.

-------
                                                           FLUSHING LENGTH = 770m
                    PLAN VIEW
ENLARGED SECTION  A-A
            (Q) MAX. WATER SURFACE
                                    -FLUSHING GATE
                                          SECTION B-B
                FLUSHING STORAGE CONFIGURATION  (Whitten, Germany)
Figure 5-2. Flushing Gate

-------
The HYDROSELFฎ system has been used to clean settled debris in sewers, interceptors, tunnels,
retention and detention tanks in Germany and Switzerland. This technology was first used in 1986 for
cleaning a tank in Bad Marienberg (a small town with a population less than 10,000 people, about 100
kilometers northeast of Frankfurt). In that same year the first two pipe storage projects using the flushing
gate technology were implemented. This system has been used extensively in Europe with 284
installations with over 600 units in operation. Approximately 37 percent of the projects are designed to
flush sewers, interceptors and tunnels ranging from 0.25 meters to 4.3 meters (0.8 to 14 feet) in diameter
and flushing lengths of up to 340 meters (1100 feet) for large diameter pipes and up to 1000 meters
(3300 feet) for small diameter pipes. The balance of flushing gate installations is for cleaning sediments
from CSO tanks. The largest project in Paris, France cleans an underground 120,000 cubic meter (31.6
million gallons) tank beneath a soccer field using 43 flushing gates.


For large diameter sewers greater than 2 meters (78 inches) the flushing system may be installed in the
sewer pipe itself. The required  storage volume for the flush water is created by erecting two walls in the
sewer pipe to form a flush water storage area in between the two walls. For the area to remain free of
debris, a reasonable floor slope (5 to 20 percent) must be provided in the storage area. The requirements
for the storage area slope will determine, in most instances, the maximum flushing length possible for a
single flush gate. Should the actual flushing length be longer than this value, then additional flushing gates
must be installed to operate in  series with the first one. In order to increase the maximum flushing length it
is also possible to build additional flush water storage area by creating a rectangular chamber in-line or
adjacent to the sewer line itself.

BIOGESTฎ Vacuum Flushing System
A variation of the HYDROSELFฎ is the BIOGESTฎ, which is a system comprised of a concrete storage
vault and a vacuum pump system to create a cleaning wave to scour the inverts of sewers. The system
consists of a flush water storage area, diaphragm valve, vacuum pump, level switches,  and a control
panel for automatic operation of the system. The water level in the sewer is used to activate the vacuum
pump. The vacuum pump evacuates the air volume from the flush chamber and as the  air is evacuated
the water is drawn in from the sewer and rises in the chamber. The vacuum pumps shuts off when a
predetermined level in the flushing vault is reached. A second level sensor detects the water level in the
sewer and activates the flush wave. The flush wave is initiated by opening the diaphragm valve above the
flush chamber and subsequently releasing the vacuum and vault contents.
Storage Tank Cleaning Alternatives


Introduction

There are many ways to clean debris and sediment in storage tanks. The most simple and primitive
cleaning methods include hand labor with shovels, brooms and high-pressure hoses for small tanks, or
small bulldozers and clamshells for larger tanks. The most modern and sophisticated technologies include
tipping flushers and flushing gates and are often self-actuating.

Originally tanks were cleaned utilizing automated cleaning options such as traveling bridges, fixed spray
headers and nozzles and submerged mixers. These types of automated cleaning options are primary
cleaning operations. Ineffective primary cleaning options often required manual cleaning such as water
cannons or high pressure hoses to be an integral part of the overall tank cleaning procedure.  Manual
cleaning procedures such as water cannons or high pressure hoses are secondary cleaning options.
However, as technology and personnel confidence has evolved many tanks now incorporate only a
primary source of cleaning because it operates efficiently (i.e., tipping flushers and flush gates).  From a

-------
functional perspective a primary method of cleaning is considered highly effective if little "mop-up"
cleaning is required. Often the "mop-up" incorporates visual tank inspection and periodic washdown of
debris in tank corners and other locations that were bypassed by the primary flushing operation. Some
flushing methods are nearly self sufficient and require little or no personnel interaction other than starting
the system (tipping flushers and flush gates), while others need operators to guide the cleaning operation
(water cannons and traveling bridge). In Germany, over 13,000 CSO tanks (mostly rectangular)  have been
constructed, and two premier technologies  have evolved: tipping flushers and flush gates.
It is important to note that the method of flushing also impacts the configuration of the tank's bottom.
Bottom sloping enhances the removal of settled solids during tank draining and cleaning operations. If
header nozzle systems are used for washdown  the tank is typically configured with a center trough,
traversing the length of the tank, and sloping towards the effluent end and the tank bottom slopes from the
side walls to the trough at 3-10 percent. Where tipping flushers or "flush" gates are used the channel
bottom slopes at 2-3 percent from the flusher end toward a large, wide collecting trough at the opposite
end of the tank.
The floor design should consider the maximum  admissible slopes to ensure high scouring velocities
during drainage and cleaning operations, while  optimizing the depth, area and overall storage tank
volume. Tank bottom design should incorporate input from the flushing equipment supplier to assure
proper operation and sizing. The design of the  end trough for tipping flusher and flush gate installation is
as critical as the tank design and must be sufficiently wide in its cross section to prevent "splash back"
from occurring. Peculiarities in terms of special  side sloping are discussed with each method.
There are five practical methods that are feasible from an operational standpoint for cleaning the
accumulated sludge and debris in storage tanks. Two of the methods are similar and include wash down
nozzles attached to a moveable bridge and fixed headers and jetting nozzles. The three remaining
cleaning methods  are mixers, tipping flushers and flushing gates.
Primary Flushing Systems
Traveling Bridge
There are three general types of traveling bridges that have been used to clean CSO storage tanks.
Discussions specific to each of the three are provided below.
Traveling Bridge - Scraper
The Ruhrverbund  Sewage Authority in Essen, Germany maintains 93 WWTP's,  several hundred CSO
tanks and a number of multi-purpose water resource reservoirs, water treatment plants and groundwater
recharge systems. In the last 50 years the Ruhrverbund has tried and discarded many types of cleaning
equipment and dozens of different types of channels on the tank floor to increase tractive shear on
draindown. One fairly common method  developed 10-15 years ago (but not having any other installations
since) was a traveling bridge with a hard rubber blade or "squeegee" that moved sludge on the tank
bottom to a side channel. From the side channel sludge was pumped vertically to a channel trough at top
of the tank wall, then drained to a local sewer. Montgomery Watson personnel visited Germany in April
1994 to inspect various tank cleaning systems.  Visual inspection of the traveling bridge scraper operation
at several facilities showed poor scraper performance (it was impossible to get the floor cleaned and
odors were a problem). However, the side channel sludge pickup system worked satisfactorily.

-------
Traveling Bridge - Suction Pickup
The Ruhrverbund maintains about 6 tanks with traveling bridges having pumped suction manifolds that
"suck" up sludge to a discharge channel at the top of the tanks and ultimately drain to WWTP's. Such
arrangements are commonly used in secondary clarifiers in Europe and the Ruhrverbund tried this idea on
CSO tank sludge. Visual inspection of the latest constructed facility indicated that small "wind rows" of
sludge remained, and additional, extensive secondary washdown was necessary to supplement the bridge
performance.

Traveling Bridge with Washdown Nozzles
There are only two known traveling bridges with washdown nozzles installed in the United States,
Worcester, Massachusetts and Spring Creek, New York. The Worcester tank will be discussed for the
purpose of this report.
Figure 5-3(a) depicts the traveling bridge arrangement installed at this facility. The storage tank has a
volume of 5700  cubic meters (1.5 million gallons) with two  cells 57 meters by 15.3 meters by 5.8 meters
(187 feet by 50 feet and 19 feet) deep. The slope from the  sidewalls to the center of the cell is 4 percent
and a sloped sump is located at the center of each cell. Each cell is equipped with a moveable bridge
which is operated by a two-speed chain drive at 1.5 and 2.5 meters (5 and 8 feet) per minute. The bridge
is equipped with a traveling pump (95 liters/second, 1500 gpm), a ductile iron pipe system with 52  spray
nozzles spaced  0.3 meters (1 foot) on center for the horizontal bottom and 3 nozzles on each of the
vertical pipe assemblies, and a water cannon. On the outside of each basin  is a 1.35 meter (4.5 feet) wide
water trough that runs the entire length of the tank, and supplies water for the washdown system. Two
passes are generally sufficient to clean the tank. Visual inspection indicates that the side vertical nozzles
are not required to clean the tank walls because nothing adheres to them.
This  system has been in operation for five years and has performed very efficiently although it requires
significant operation and maintenance and is costly. One advantage of this system is that the primary and
secondary modes of cleaning are located in a central location, the bridge. The disadvantages of this
system include:
       •   Significant water consumption during the cleaning operation;
       •   The traveling bridge mechanism requires frequent maintenance;
       •   The initial installation requires extensive alignment of the bridge mechanism;
       •   Many mechanical components;
       •   The system requires a secondary mode of cleaning (i.e., water cannons);
       •   High structural costs associated with the water supply reservoir for each basin; and
       •   Since the traveling bridge is located above the high water elevation in the storage tank, it must
           be used with an open tank concept.

Mechanical Mixers and Submerged Jets
The basic principle involved with this technique is different  from washdown systems that aim to clean
sediments from  empty tanks. Mechanical mixers and water jets operate on  the premise of resuspending
settled debris before drawdown begins and maintaining all  materials  in suspension until the tank is

-------
completely drained.  Re-suspension of solids requires an introduction of energy to create necessary
turbulence. This method is very popular for small tanks in central Germany. The actual placement of the
mixers requires considerable adjustment to optimize mixing and establish proper mixing currents and flow
directions
Estimates of required mixing energy could be assumed using criteria established for aerobic digesters
depending on inorganic solids concentration. As the water depth in a tank decreases during the drawdown
procedure, the mixing power must increase proportionally to properly maintain solids suspension.
Although capital cost data is not available for installations of this type, it is clear that this system requires a
considerable amount of energy in addition to equipment and operational costs similar to those for header
and nozzle systems. A serious disadvantage of this system is the requirement to manually clean the
residual inorganic solids  on the tank floor following draindown, consequently requiring extensive
secondary cleaning operations. Since a secondary cleaning operation must be utilized in conjunction with
this technology, an open tank layout must  be employed. Advantages of this system are that the captured
solids are more uniformly returned to WWTP via the pumpback operation and that little additional water is
used.
This technology is most appropriate for circular tanks because circulation can easily be accomplished with
few dead spots. Designers are constantly experimenting with fillets and baffles in rectangular tanks
because flow currents are extremely complicated to predict when using mixers.  A submerged jet is
depicted in Figure 5-3(b).

-------
                                 TRAVELING BRIDGE

                                  HEADER
                          SUMP
                   HEADER PIPE
Figure 5-3     (a) Traveling Bridge (Adapted City of Worcester, 1998)
              (b) Submerged Jet
                                              10

-------
Fixed Spray Nozzles and Headers
Fixed spray nozzle and header systems are generally comprised of an extensive piping network with
multiple valves, booster pumps and controls and a washdown wet well. The spray headers and nozzles
are generally suspended inside the tanks. This alternative requires secondary cleaning operations,
typically with water cannons, because of the inefficiency of the spray nozzles to clean the entire tank. A
dedicated secondary cleaning  system must be used in conjunction with this technology, and thereby
necessitates an open tank concept be incorporated. The tank bottom required for this system slopes
steeply (approximately 10 percent) from the sidewalls to a center trough, and the center trough slopes at 2
- 3 percent toward an effluent trough. Disadvantages associated with this alternative include:
        •   Significant water consumption during the cleaning operation;
        •   The system requires a secondary mode of cleaning (i.e., water cannons);
        •   Floatables get caught on the header system; and
        •   Excessive sediment and  debris can accumulate in areas where the nozzles do not reach.
Experience has shown that fixed spray headers and nozzles have been somewhat effective at some
installations but do have some limitations. The Toronto Easterly Beaches Phase 1 tank (3800 cubic
meters, 1 million gallons) could not be washed all at once because the washdown system demand, both
pressure and flowrate, depleted the city supply system. Ultimately the tank was washed in quadrants to
relieve the strain on the city system. The Saginaw, Michigan Weiss Street Facility 36,100 cubic meters
(9.5 million gallons) tank had 1830 meters (6000 feet) of 0.41 meter (16 inch) diameter pipe with nozzles
spaced 1.2 meters (4 feet) on-center and 24 water cannons to perform the cleaning operations. Since this
system was installed four other tanks have been built by the city and  all have incorporated tipping flushers
as the  primary cleaning technology. The cost and disadvantages associated with this alternative do not
make it a feasible  option for this installation. A typical spray header and nozzle arrangement is depicted in
Figure 5-4.
                                               11

-------
                             TANK OVERFLOW
                                                                   ACCESS OPENING
                                                                             INFLOW PIPE
       FLOWPIPI
                                                                             STORM INTERCEPTOR
                                                                             SEWER
                                                                             CONTROLLED
                                                                             OUTFLOW
                                   A - TANK CROSSECTION
                               --
                                  SPRAY NOZZLES
                                                   WASH WATER

	 1 	 _J
1 	 *-
H"/'
m _^ _/ 	
! \
^ \
~*~"1 ' \

"^r*
_ฃ 	 IS.,- 	
	 	 ^?L~
/
H< 	
\
\
^.
— :==4
f

L--— ^I
/
ฃ 	 „
\
\
\
	 i.
—:="il
;

— ป-—- '*---' '^—" /^-
/ / / /
(. — ^ — .f — ^ —
\ \ \ \
\ \ \ \
\ Y \ \
;-:==^_:=--4":-:==-E:_-;==J
7 / 7 7
	 1?

/?"
/ 	 |
\ j
\L

	 ^-^

                                 B - CLEANING NOZZLE ARRANGEMENT
Figure 5-4. Fixed Spray Header and Nozzle Arrangement
Tipping Flushers
Tipping flushers (TF) systems have been used in North America for three years (about 15 tanks with
flushers in the US, with most located in Michigan area), and have been operational in Germany and
Switzerland for over 9 years. Tipping flushers are extremely effective for subsequent cleansing of debris
from the floors of all types of urban runoff tanks. These devices were initially developed in Switzerland.
The system generally include filling pipes and valves, a pumping system and wet well (where restricted by
the site conditions), and the tipping flusher vessels. The TF is a cylindrical stainless steel vessel that is
ideally suspended above the maximum water level on the back wall of the storage tank. The units can be
filled with river water; ground water or potable water, but require a filling system consisting of 5 to 7.6
centimeters (2 to 3 inches) headers with appropriate controls. Just prior to overtopping the vessel with
water, the center of gravity shifts and causes the unit to rotate and discharge its contents down the back
wall of the tank. A curved fillet at the intersection of the wall and tank floor redirects the flushwater (with
minimum energy loss) horizontally across the floor of the tank. The fillet size depends on the size of the
flusher. The flushing force removes the sedimented debris from the tank floor and transports it to a
collection sump located at the opposite end of the tank.
                                               12

-------
The experience with US TF systems to date indicates that dedicated secondary cleaning operations, using
concurrently operated water cannons or high pressure hoses, are not needed. If the first flush of the basin
does not remove all of the sediment, the basin can be  re-flushed or "mopped-up" by fire hoses.  In
Germany and in Switzerland, tank sidewalls are generally hand trowelled to a very smooth finish to
prevent buildup from occurring, and consequently don't require frequent washdown. "Mop-up" cleaning of
the influent and washdown channels has been done utilizing small tipping flushers in large German tanks
and in Saginaw, Michigan. See Figure 5-5 for an example of a tipping flusher installation.
                                         TYPICAL TIPPING
                                      FLUSHER INSTALLATION
Figure 5-5. Tipping Flusher (adapted from LIFT, 1998)
                                              13

-------
Flushing Gates
The flushing gate was originally developed in Germany (1985) as a method for flushing sediments in pipe segments
(in-line storage or troublesome flat trunk and interceptor sewers), and has evolved for use in CSO tanks. As
described earlier in this chapter, flushing gates have been used as the means to flush and cleanse deposits and debris
from CSO tanks in about 350 German installations. In concept this scheme is depicted in Figure 5-6 and 5-7 from a
recent design in Cincinnati, Ohio.


24"x24" SLUICE-
GATE





^m
V>
[—
TJ
m
s

1

f
s
LJJ
Q_
o
_l
OT
^m




f





SLOPE 2% SLOPE2 %
LTRAINING WALL TYPE "A"
ITRAINING WALL TYPE "B"
"PIPEOYP) l-TRAININGWALLTYPE-A" 60"x36" SLUICE ^
GATE AT SUMP
-TRAINING WALL TYPE "A"
-TRAINING WALL TYPE "B"
-TRAINING WALL TYPE "A"
SLOPE 2 % SLOPE 2 %
• ซ.*. ซ _ • • • • •" . • ซ . - ซ • • • • - •
CO
n
T)
m
to
^
1
^

f
^
CM
HI
D_
y
ro

r— DE
• \ ST

P fl

/ '



                                                                                     -DEWATERING PUMP
                                                                                      STATION SUMP
Figure 5-6. Plan View, Clough Creek CSO Treatment Facility, Cincinnati, Ohio
 FIN. GRADE
                                                                                       GRADE.
                                                                                    ^4" FLUSH WATER
                                                                                      ADJUSTMENT PIPE
                                                                                   FLUSHING GATE (TYP.)
Figure 5-7. Section View, Clough Creek CSO Treatment Facility, Cincinnati, Ohio
The system is comprised of two basic elements, a gate and a closed circuit hydraulic actuation system
utilizing a float control mechanism. A low-level wall is constructed across the short axis of the influent end
of the tank approximately 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) high. The wall is located on the influent end of the
tank to guarantee filling the space behind the wall prior to filling the rest of the tank. The instantaneous
opening of a stainless steel gate that is mounted on the face of the wall activates the system. The release
of the gate creates a "dam break" scenario, which generates a high velocity flush wave (generally trying to
                                                 14

-------
maintain a velocity in excess of 1.8 meters/second (6 feet/second). Normally the width of the flushing gate
is approximately 0.7 the effective flushing lane width. The volume retained behind the wall required for
proper cleaning is a function of flushing length and floor slope. The "nominal" design volume can be
adjusted by changing the height of a level standpipe on the backside of wall. The hydraulic system can
also be connected to central control system (on or off-site) with auto or manual override.
These systems have tank floors that slope from the flush gate location to the collection trough at 1 - 3
percent. The flush gates require training walls on the tank bottom that are about 0.4 to 0.5 meters (15
inches to 18 inches) high, and run the full length of the tank to control the flow direction of the wave. All
walls parallel to the path of flushing flow should be perpendicular to the tank bottom, with no fillets, to
ensure the lower wall edges are cleaned.
In function, this technology is similar in concept to tipping flushers. One main difference between the two
technologies is that the tipping flushers are suspended  above the tank floor and flush down sidewall,
thereby taking  advantage of the energy conversion from potential to kinetic.  In practice, this means that
the flushing gate needs about 20 percent  more flushing volume than tipping flushers for comparable tank
floor slope and tank  lengths. However, since the flush volume consists of stored CSO, there is no
additional cost associated with this volume. The experience with flush gate systems to date indicates that
dedicated concurrent secondary cleaning  operations, using water cannons or high pressure hoses, are not
needed. If the flush of the basin using tank contents does not remove all of the sediment, the basin can
either be re-flushed (requiring and external water source for filling), or "mopped-up" using fire hoses.  To
date flushing basins with tank contents  has not required mop-up in German tanks.  The largest length
flushed with flushing gates is 90 meters (295 feet) while flushing lengths of 70 meters (230 feet) are fairly
common.
Secondary Flushing Systems
Water Cannons
Water cannons are typically used to washdown corners, areas around piping, and other hard to reach
places.  They are typically used in conjunction with spray header systems (both fixed and traveling bridge)
and mechanical mixers and submerged jets. These systems require extensive piping and valve networks,
booster  pumps, a supply wet well and are strictly operated manually. The use of water cannons requires
an open storage tank configuration.
Water cannons typically have a maximum discharge rate of 25 liters/second (400 gpm) each at a working
pressure of 2.8 to 5 cm/m2 (40 to 70 psi) and have a useful working spray radius of 20 to 30 meters (70 to
100 feet). Cannons can rotate 360 degrees horizontally and have about 100 to 120  degrees range of
motion in the vertical direction. Water cannons should be provided with shut-off/isolation valves and 2.5
centimeter (1 inch) nozzles. Spray down and cleanup times required per cannon vary depending on the
facility, type of solids loading, and time of solids exposure (open tanks). However, cleanup times of 5 to 15
minutes per water cannon are common.
High Pressure Hoses
Most CSO facilities have washdown high pressure hose systems on-site for miscellaneous cleanup
operations. This system can often be utilized for secondary cleaning operations by providing hose gates
where required. This system requires a piping and valve network, booster pumps and a supply wet well.
Hose gate connections are provided throughout the facility to accommodate cleaning operations. If this
technology is used as a true secondary flushing system it will require an open tank layout. Hose
                                               15

-------
connections are typically 3 centimeters (1-1/4 inch) and utilize similar water usage and pressure
requirements to a water cannon system. Hoses allow the flexibility to move the discharge point around
because the hose is not fixed like water cannons.
Novel Approach For Cleaning Circular Tanks
The Lincoln Park facility in Decatur, Illinois consists of two mechanical screening facilities, a 7500 cubic
meter (2 million gallons) open circular "first flush" storage tank, a 11 meter (36 feet) diameter vortex flow
dividing chamber (two asymmetric flow inputs of 11,000 l/s and 7200 l/s (176,000 gpm and 114,000 gpm)
are divided into four 4550 l/s (72,000 gpm)) waste streams, four 13.6 meter (45 feet) diameter vortex
solids separators, and a treated effluent to the Sagamon River. Figure 5-8 presents on overall schematic
for the facility.
                               Inlet =12,000 l/s
                                                                              Influent flow meter
                                                                           2)  Influent sampler

                                                                              Effluent flow meter
                                                                           4) Effluent sampler
                                                                           5) Underflow Sampler
             Dortex Separator
             istribution Struc
                I
          Effluent to
        Sangamon River
                         Inlet =3150 l/s
                  Lincoln  Park Facility  Monitoring  Locations
Figure 5-8. Lincoln Park Schematic
Diverted wet-weather flows (WWF) (two inputs) are first passed through mechanically cleaned,
automatically controlled, catenary screens. A manually cleaned bar screen is provided for emergency
bypass. Downstream of each screen chamber are two liquid-level actuated, motorized sluice gates
                                              16

-------
directing flow into the "first flush" retention tank. The tank diameter is 36 meters (118 feet) with a side
water depth of 8.5 meters (28 feet). The tank is equipped with mixers and aerators and the tank floor
slopes to a circular gutter draining to a pumping station. When the tank level rises to a pre-set level,
control gates  direct any additional inflows to the vortex flow divider with outputs into the four vortex solids
separators. Foul underflows from the bottom of the four separators are pumped into the "first flush" tank.
The pumping station also dewaters the tank and the separators after an event.
Cleanout of the circular "first flush" tank includes several novel design and operational concepts. First, the
two main gravity feeds to the tank are tangentially fed during an event. Secondary flow currents are
established moving most of the solids to the center zone of the tank, a common design attribute on
hundreds of circular tanks in Germany. After an event the cleaning operation involves two steps. The
contents of the tank are kept in motion while being slowly pumped to the interceptor. This circulation
feature is accomplished by a feed from the center of the tank with a separate recirculation loop and a
tangential return.  When the tank is fully drained, no sediment is typically observed from the perimeter
tank walls inward for about 4.5 to 6 meters (15 to 20 feet). From there the sediments grade from about 1
cm in depth to about 15 centimeters (6 inches) in the center region of the tank. Two high-pressure water
monitors on opposite sides of the tank are then used to cleanse the remaining sediments to the center
well in about six minutes.
                                               17

-------
                                               Chapter 6
                                         Case Evaluations
     This chapter presents facility evaluation data of combined sewer in-line and CSO storage tank flushing
     systems. The objectives of these evaluations included the following:

             •    Collect dimensional and operational data of combined sewer in-line and CSO storage tank
                 facilities that utilize flushing gates or tipping flushers for cleaning;

             •    Evaluate the effectiveness of the system design in terms of sediment removal;

             •    Compare capital  and  operation and maintenance costs of flushing gate and tipping flusher
                 facilities with other cleaning methods.

     Table 6-1 presents a guide outlining the major features  of the  18 case studies. Contents of the table
     include  location; flushing function, i.e.  flushing  of storage pipe, conveyance pipe or  tank; tank geometry
     (rectangular or circular); flushing method, i.e. flushing gate, tipping flusher or other;  flushing volumes for
     pipe configurations, either by generated off-line or  in-line compartments; flushing volumes for tanks are
     noted as in line.   Information for other miscellaneous tank reviews are provided following the 18 case
     studies.
Table 6-1. Overview of Case Studies
Case
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Location
Marht Wiesentheid, Germany
Gemeinde Schauenburg, GER
Stadt Kirchhain, GER
Stadt Heidenheim, GER
Markt Grossostheim, GER
Osterbruch-Opperhausen,
GER
Gemeinde Hettstadt, GER
Filterstadt-Bernhausen, GER
Stadt-Essen, GER
Markt- Wiesentheid, GER
Stuttgart- Wangen, GER
Heidenheim-Kleiner-Buhl,
GER
Cheboygan, Michigan
Sarnia, Ontario, Canada
Port Colborne, Ontario,
Canada
Wheeler Avenue, Kentucky
14tn Street Pumping Station,
Ml
Saginaw Township, Ml
Flushing Function
Pipe
Storage
X
X
X



X











Pipe
Convey.



X
X
X












Tank
Rect.







X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
Circular












X





Flushing Method
Flush Gate
In-line
X
X

X



X
X
X
X
X
X
X




Off-line


X

X
X
X











Tipping
Flusher















X
X
X
X
     A standard evaluation form was prepared and distributed to operators at several facilities in Germany and
     in North America. In-line versus  off-line  refers to the relative  location of the flushing volume.  Due to

-------
space limitations, flush volumes are often generated in-line with main convergence function accomplished
by an underflow conduit or channel under the flush volume chamber.  Vaults with  large flushing volumes
are commonly provided by off-line configurations.  Average slope refers to the slope of the conduit or
section being flushed.  Slope of flush volume  refers  to the floor slope of the flush vault.  Flush  gate
activation is accomplished either by passive float operation termed "hydraulic" or by an  active  electrical
signal from an external location  termed "electrical". Water source refers to the source  of the water for
flushing, i.e. "local waste" or "external supply". Performance assessment is defined as follows: "Excellent"
- all sediments in channel or bay cleaned with flush;  "Good" - substantial removal of  sediments in
channel, i.e. 90%  of flush  lane or pipe is cleaned; "Fair" - partial removal  of sediments, i.e. 50-70% of
flush lane or channel cleaned with flush. The following case studies, consisting of tables and narratives
summarize  the findings for each site.
Case Studies: Combined Sewer Flushing Facilities using Flushing Gates

The following are summaries of the pipe flushing facilities that were evaluated in Germany.

Case No. 1- Marht Wiesentheid
Details of the Marht Wiesentheid flushing facility are noted in Table 6-2. The in-line CSO storage conduit
is a 1.8 m (6 ft diameter) circular pipe, 46.8 m (153 ft) in length.  The storage pipe is throttled at its outlet
using a flow regulator to maintain outflow equal to twice average dry weather flow (plus infiltration).  An
inline flushing vault holding 14 cubic meters (3700 gal.) is used to cleanse the storage pipe.  The flushing
gate is activated by hydraulic float control.  Operators note excellent performance in cleansing deposits
during flushing.

Table 6-2. Marht Wiesentheid, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe Material
Flush Gate
Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flush Vault Volume
Flush Vault
Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate
Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance
Assessment
Response
In-Line
1992
Combined
1800 mm circular
46.8m
1%
Concrete
2.8 mx1.31 m/
Stainless steel
14 cubic meters
2.5 mx4.84 mx
1.15m
20%
Local waste
Hydraulic
After each activation/1
person
Excellent
Case No. 2 - Gemeinde Schauenburg
The Gemeinde Schauenburg storage facility (Germany) is very similar to the facility at Marht Wiesentheid
(Case 1).  Details are noted  in Table 6-3.  This facility is a CSO storage pipe 2 m (78 inch) circular in

-------
diameter 64 m  (210 ft) in  length.  Flushing volume of 5.5 m  (1450 gal.) is used and the flushing gate
operates by hydraulic float  activation.  The gate activates when the downstream flow controller permits the
storage to drain. The operators note "fair" performance for this facility.

Table 6-3. Gemeinde Schauenburg, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe material
Flush Gate
Dimensions (I w) /
Material
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of gate
Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance
Assessment
Response
In-Line
1988
Combined
2000 mm circular
64 m
1 %
Asbestos Cement
1.2 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
5.5 cubic meters
2 mx3 mxO.91 m
20%
Local waste
Hydraulic
After each activation/2
person
Fair
Case No. 3 - Stadt Kirchhain
The  Stadt Kirchhain  facility,  listed in Table 6-4, has  an off-line flushing gate that is  used to flush the
deposited sediments in the 1600 mm pipe to a downstream regulator which empties into a downstream
300 mm sewer. Figure 6-1 depicts the plan view of one of the two off-line flushing vaults used in the Stadt
Kirchhain facility (Germany).   Figure 6-2 depicts the plan view of the downstream flow control chamber
throttling the twin storage pipes.

-------
Table 6-4. Stadt Kirchhain, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe material
Flush Gate
Dimensions
(1 w)/M ate rial
Flush Vault Volume
Flush Vault
Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of gate
Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance
Assessment
Response
Off-line
1991
Combined
1600 mm circular
115m
0.4%
Concrete
1.2 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
4 cubic meters
2 m x2.5 m x 1 m
20%
Local Waste
Electrical
Not Available
Fair
 o
 in

 cxi

1
* .



* * *
*ป •
*
t
*
* **

* * •
*


All Dimensions in Meters
•* • ••.'.*: ••* *ซ••••.•
*-• •• _/ :••'••?
^-^uLUm



ADJUSTABLE ^
VAUI T 1 FVFI
STANf) PIPF O_



,-.

^^-rTTTTTTT
*. •**.*'•••'.?
.'*'.**• •* • . • .


*
•
V






^

*




4








*




.FLUSH
/GATE
ซ * / *
//Y///
I ^S
/
J 1
f
0
0
t—
1
1
>
^
X\\\V

* '•' / * .
H
. •
. *










* •
•• •
.
cso
STORAGE
PIPE
0=1,600 mm




^
\
\


\
\
^ 250 mm
MAI P r
                         2.00
1.00
Figure 6-1. Stadt Kirchhain - Off-Line Flushing Vault Plan View

-------
                                                       INFLUENT
                                                       CSO
              STORAGE
                                                                 FLUSH VAULTS
                                                                 BOTH SIDES
STORAGE
                                                 ^THROTTLED
                                                  OUTFLOW
Figure 6-2. Stadt Kirchhain - Plan View Downstream Control Chamber
Case No. 4- Stadt Heidenheim
Details of the Stadt Heidenheim facility are noted in Table 6-5.  The Stadt Heidenheim facility has an in-
line flushing chamber that is located within the regulator structure on the dry weather conduit. Extreme
wet weather flows overtop the weir in the center of the structure into a 1200 mm bypass conduit. Plan and
section views of the overall regulator, flushing vault and bypass chamber are depicted in Figures 6-3 and
Figure 6-4.

-------
Table 6-5. Stadt Heidenheim, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe Material
Flush Gate
Dimensions
(1 w)/M ate rial
Flush Vault Volume
Flush Vault
Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate
Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance
Assessment
Response
In-Line
1993
Combined
2200 mm circular
240m
Not Available
Concrete
1.2 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
10 cubic meters
3 m x5 m xO.7 m
10%
Local Waste
Hydraulic
After each activation/2
person
Good

-------
                                                OVERFLOW
                                                WEIR
                                                            BYPASS
Figure 6-3. Stadt Heidenheim - Plan View

-------
              EXTREME FLOW
              BYPASS WEIR
   INFLUENT
                                      UNDERFLOW
Figure 6-4. Stadt Heidenheim - Section View
                                                                            FLUSH GATE
Case No. 5 - Markt Grossostheim
Details of the  Marktt Grossostheim facility are presented in Table 6-6.  The flushing vault and storage
facility involves an off-line  storage compartment created by a spill weir from the dry weather channel.
Extreme overflows can then bypass the side spill storage compartment. These bypasses are controlled
by a mechanical operated bending weir.  The downstream flow throttle is  a mechanical  knife valve
controlled by direct measurements of a magnetic meter.

Table 6-6. Markt Grossostheim, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-Line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe material
Flush Gate Dimensions(l w)
Material
Flush Vault Volume
Flush Vault Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance Assessment
Response
Off-Line
1993
Combined
2200 mm circular
190m
9.4%
Not Available
1.5 m xO.4 m
Stainless steel
15 mj
6.5 m x 2.2 m x
1.03m
15%
Local Waste
Hydraulic
After each
activation/2person
Excellent/Good

-------
Case No. 6 - Osterbruch-Opperhausen
Details of the Osterbruch-Opperhausen facility are noted in Table 6-7. Sectional views of this facility are
presented  in Figure 6-5. The flushwater chamber is filled by an upstream 100 mm pumped pipe. The
flushing gate is utilized to  clean the downstream 250 mm combined sewer conduit.  The flush vault is
placed on  the head of the  combined sewer and 1000 m  (3250 ft) of downstream conduit to a regulator
location where flushed solids are discharged into receiving sewer.

Table 6-7. Osterbruch-Opperhausen, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe material
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance Assessment
Response
Off-line
1989
Sanitary
250 mm circular
1000m
0.1%
Vetrified Clay Pipe
0.5 m xO.4 m
Stainless steel
2mJ
2.4 m x 1.6 m x
0.75m
20%
River Water
Hydraulic
After each
activation/2person
Excellent/Good

-------
                           SECTION VIEW
                                                   PUMPED
                                                   FLUSH WATER
                                                   FEED
                         All Dimensions in Meters
      i_
                                                       PLAN VIEW
             FLUSH GATE'
Figure 6-5. Osterbruch-Opperhausen - Sectional Views

Case No. 7 - Geimeide Hettstadt
Details of the Geimeide Hettstadt facility are noted in Table 6-8. The storage element is an off-line CSO
pipe conduit 1600 mm (66 inch) in diameter, 224 m (735 ft) in length. The off-line flushing chamber holds
10 m3 (2700 gal.) and is filled during overflow events.  Operators have noted good to fair performance.

Table 6-8. Gemeinde Hettstadt, Germany
Question
In-Line or Off-line
Year Constructed
Flow type
Pipe size and shape
Length
Average Slope
Pipe material
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
Performance Assessment
Response
Off-line
1992
Combined
1600 mm circular
224m
0.5%
Concrete
1.5 m xO.4 m
Stainless steel
10 cubic meters
5 m x 2.7 m x
0.75m
15%
Local Waste
Hydraulic
After each
activation/2person
Good/Fair
Hydraulic Analysis Flushing Gate Performance for Sewers
                                             10

-------
The Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) with Extended Transport Block (EXTRAN) was used to
investigate the efficiency of the German sewer pipes that use flushing technology.  Simulation output
takes  the form of water surface elevations  and discharge at selected system locations.  EXTRAN was
developed by the U.S. EPA and is described in total in the User's Manual, EPA/600/3-88/001 b.

The basic conveyance element input data required in EXTRAN are specifications for shape, size, length,
roughness,  connecting junctions and ground (rim) and  invert elevations. These data for pipe  and tank
flushing were  obtained from  the  evaluations of the  German facilities.  Pipe and  tank  lengths were
discretized into two or three equal sections. These discretizied sections varied from 15 to 30 meters (50 to
100 feet). Pipe sections were assumed to be circular (equivalent diameters  calculated) and tank sections
(flushing bays) were assumed to be rectangular. An additional 30 meter (100 feet) section was added to
the downstream tank conduit to simulate a grit pit. The  following parameters were kept constant in both
pipe and tank simulations:

•  Computation time increment = 1 second
•  Manning roughness coefficient = 0.015
•  Gate opening time in  10 seconds
•  Flow hydrographs at  the flushing gate are assumed to increase linearly from zero to a constant flow
   rate in 5 seconds and also to decrease linearly from the constant rate to  zero in 5  seconds.
•  Upstream of the conduit/tank was assumed to be the input and downstream was assumed to be a
   free overflow.

Table 6-9 summarize the hydraulic data (length, slope, size and flush volume) and results (velocity, depth,
and flush volume/length of flush) from the respective  flushing gates determined from the evaluations of
the German facilities.  The listed results are at the downstream end of the pipe or channel flushed. At the
far right hand side of Table 6-9 is listed the operator observation. Qualitative operator observations have
excellent agreement with the quantitative modeled velocity.  For example  the terminal velocity of Stadt
Kirchhain is 0.60 m/s, which is the lowest velocity, and the operator observe only "Fair" flushing results.

Table 6-9. Summary of Pipe Flushing Results
Location
Marht Wiesentheid
Stadt Heidenheim
Stadt Kirchhain
Markt Grossostheim
Length
(m)
47
241
115
191
Slope
1 .0%
1 .0%
0.4%
0.94%
Size
(m)
1.8
2.2
1.6
2.2
Velocity
(m/s)
3.1
1.0
0.60
1.2
Depth
(m)
0.40
0.09
0.07
0.11
Flush Vol.
(m3)
14
10
4
15
Operator
Observation
Excellent
Good
Fair
Excellent / Good
Case Studies: CSO Storage Tank Flushing Facilities using Flush Gates

The following are summaries of the CSO tank flushing facilities that were evaluated in Germany and North
America.
Case No. 8 - Filterstadt-Bernhausen
Details of the Filterstadt-Bernhausen CSO  tank facility  using, flush  gates  to  cleanse  the tank after
activations are noted in Table 6-10. The tank volume is 1000 m  and consists of two unequal sized bays
(5.65 m and 4.65 m).  Flushing is accomplished by two vaults with two flusher systems per  bay.  No
flushing training walls are provided. The end channel transports the flushed deposits to a central throttled
                                              11

-------
outlet.  The flush gates are activated by hydraulic float control when the tank drains after an event through
a 300 mm (12 inch) throttle.
Table 6-10. Filterstadt-Bernhausen, Germany
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number of Flushers/Bay
Training Walls per Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
Iwd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Gate Dimensions(l w)
Material
Flush Vault Volume
Flush Vault Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System Explosion
Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1990
Combined
Covered
2
2
No
36 m x 5 m x 3.5
m
8 m x 12 m x 1.2
m
2.5%
1.5/1.75 m x 0.4
m
Stainless steel
2@10mJ/
2@ 8.5 m3
2.5 m x 5.65 m x
1.0
2.5 m x 4.65 m x
1.0m
20%
Combined
Hydraulic
Underflow Throttle
(400 mm) to
WWTP
After each
activation/Not
Available
Yes/Grating
No
No
Good
Case No. 9 - Stadt-Essen
Details of the Stadt-Essen storage facility are noted in Table 6-11, has each flush vault equipped with two
gates, and training walls are not installed within individual bays. The Stadt Essen  layout is depicted  in
Figures  6-6 and 6-7. It features a unique inlet scheme where the underflow is concentrated in a vortex
chamber that discharges back  to the dry weather sewer. Once the underflow  capacity is exceeded, the
influent  channel to  the flushing  gates  fills which  in turn fills the flush vaults and tank. The flushed
sediments are collected in the mud sump for discharge back to the dry weather sewer.
Table 6-11. Stadt-Essen, Germany
                                               12

-------
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number of Flushers/Bay
Training Walls per Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
Iwd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Gate Dimensions
(1 w)/M ate rial
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System
Expolosion Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1993
Combined
Covered
3
2
Yes
55 m x 3 m x 3.4
m
5 m x 20 m x 0.5
m
0.5%
1.5/1.75 m x 0.4
m
Stainless steel
12 mj
4 m x 1.4 m x
2.85 m (2)
3.20 m (4)
20%
Combined
Electric
Underflow Sluice
Gate (200 mm) to
WWTP
Not Available
Yes/ Ventilation
Pipes - 300 mm
Intake and 450
mm Exhaust
No
No
Good
13

-------
                        FLUSH VAULTS
  .  v    .   '.•••••.''./.    .     .       *•*•ป!
                                    _   _  _  Jr
INFLUENT
       All Dimensions are in Meters

Figure 6-6. Stadt-Essen - Plan View, Tank Influent
                                           14

-------
                                                   All Dimensions are in Meters
            t
            t
                               c
                             ZN
                                 t
                                                          _i_i_
             .a.
                                                                             rsi
_n_
_n_
                                                                 3.20
                          i
             J-L
_n_
Figure 6-7. Stadt-Essen - Plan View, Tank Effluent
Case No. 10- Markt-Wiesentheid
A section view of this facility  is depicted  in Figure 6-8.  This  facility has  a  unique  flush vault filling
arrangement. Flow enters the facility at the effluent end of the tank via a dry weather conduit integral to the
tank that is regulated downstream. As flow in the dry weather conduit increases during wet weather, flow
surcharges a 300 millimeter conduit that is connected at the springline of the dry weather conduit on an
adverse slope which fills the flush vaults.
                                              15

-------
Table 6-12. Markt-Wiesentheid, Germany
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number of Flushers/Bay
Training Walls/Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
I wd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System
Expolosion Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1992
Combined
Open
5
1
Yes
41 mx4.84 m x3
m
2 m x 25 m x 0.5
m
1 .5%
2.8 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
12.7mJ
2.5 m x 4.8 m x
1.3m
20%
Combined
Electric
Underflow Flap
Gate
Not Available
No
No
No
Excellent/Good



rt
r

::

1 [—

y
rcr
? .
1 1

cc
^
^U-^
i ii i i

.
1 	 ^ 	





i i i i i i

1
	 — = 	 == 	 T~ -
'.--.-: ::-:V-----v.-;...-:-.W
r

3-
_ซ
1

I/ 1
,-vJ
1

•' •• ;. -..
ฐ'1\\\
^60U-
                                                All Dimensions are in Meters
                   •17.0
                   - 20 -
                                 -H1.50
                                                        20 •
4k ^
                                           46.80
Figure 6-8. Markt-Wiesentheid - CSO Storage Tank, Section View
                                            16

-------
Case No. 11- Stuttgart-Wangen
Details of the Stuttgart-Wangen CSO storage facility are provided in Table 6-13.  The tank consists of a
single rectangular bay 67m (220 ft) in length with rectangular cross section 3.6 m x 1.8 m (12 ft x 6 ft).
The flush gate is activated by external electric signal after the tank section has been noted by level sensor
to drain.

Table 6-13. Stuttgart-Wangen, Germany
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
I wd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System
Expolosion Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1993
Combined
Covered
1
67 m x 3.6 m x
1.8m
6.5 m x 3.6 m x
0.9 m
0.5%
2.8 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
18 mj
5 m x 3.6 m x
1.15m
14.5%
Combined
Electric
Pumps
Not Available
Yes/Ventilated
Manhole Lids
No
No
Excellent/Good
Case No. 12 - Heidenheim-Kleiner-Buhl
Details of the Heidenheim-Kleiner-Buhl CSO storage facility are provided in Table 6-14.  The flush gates
are activated in sequence by external  electric signal after the tank contents have  been noted to drain.
Level in the receiving sewer is also noted prior to activating the flush gates
                                              17

-------
Table 6-14. Heidenheim-Kleiner-Buhl, Germany
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number Flushers/Bay
Training Walls/Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
I wd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System Explosion
Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1992
Combined
Covered
6
1
Yes
30 m x 4.85 m
3.6 m
5 m x 17.5 m
1.5m
x
x
1 .0%
1.85 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
28.5 mj
5 m x 2.5 m
1.45m
x
15%
Combined
Electric
Underflow Sluice
Gate to WWTP
Not Available
Yes/Ventilation
Shafts
No
Yes
Excellent/Good
Case No.  13 - Cheboyan
Details of the circular CSO storage facility utilizing the flush gate technology in Cheboyan, Michigan are
noted in Table 6-15.  This facility features a circular tank construction with a diameter of 30.5 m (100 ft)
Seven flushing bays direct flush waves across the length of the tank to a sump channel on one side of the
tank. This flushing configuration is the first ever for circular tanks.  In Germany, there are 3 circular tanks
using flush  gate technology but the flushing arrangement features flushing vaults located at the center of
the tank with flushing lanes extending in a radial direction to the end trough at the tank perimeter. Figure
6-9 depicts plan  and section views of the CSO circular storage tank in Cheboyan, Michigan. Photos of
this facility are presented in Figure 6-10.
                                               18

-------
Table 6-15. Cheboygan, Michigan
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number Flushers/Bay
Training Walls/Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
I wd
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flush Channel Slope
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions (I w h)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System Explosion
Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1997
Combined
Open
7
1
Yes
See Figure 6-9
See Figure 6-9
2.8 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
2.0%
13-16mJ
See Figure 6-9
20%
WWTP Effluent
Hydraulic
Underflow Pipe to
WWTP
Not Available
No
No
No
Excellent/Good
                                           19

-------
             Storage Volume
            Adjustment Pipe
Flushwater
Storage Area
   Flushwater
   Supply Pipe
Training Wall
                                                                 s— Flushing Gate (typ.)
                                Plan View
                               Section "A"

Figure 6-9. Cheboygan - Circular CSO Storage Tank, Plan and Section Views
                                          20

-------
Figure 6-10. Cheboygan - Photograhs of Circular CSO Storage Tank
                                          21

-------
Case No.  14 - Sarnia
Details of the  first North American CSO storage facility located in Sarnia,  Ontario, Canada utilizing the
flush gate technology are given in Table 6-16.  This facility is an underground covered tank with a storage
volume of 8400 m  (2.2 million  gallons).  Twenty flushers cleanse the tank after each event.  Plan and
sectional views of this facility are provided in Figure 6-11 and  Figure 6-12.  Photos of the hydraulic gate
opening mechanism are shown  in Figure 6-13.  The operation of this facility has been noted as excellent.

Table 6-16. Sarnia, Ontario Canada
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number of Flushers/Bay
Training Walls/Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
End Trough Dimensions
Iwd
Flush Gate Dimensions
(I w)/M ate rial
Flush Channel Slope
Flusher Volume
Flusher Dimensions
(Iwh)
Slope of flush vault
Water Source
Method of Gate Activation
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System Explosion
Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1996
Combined
Closed
10
2
Yes
38.5 m x 3.9 m
0.5 m
2 m x 79.7 m
0.7m
x
x
2.8 mxO.4 m
Stainless steel
2.0%
10 mj
2.5 m x 3.5 m
1.6m
x
20%
Combined
Hydraulic
Sluice Gate
WWTP
to
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Excellent
                                               22

-------
                                          Influent Sewer

                                          1650 mm Diameter
                                                                                   Location of float

                                                                                   ele. 175.75
       r
     15
                                                                                                LLJ

                                                                                                OL
                                                                                                O
                                                                                                I
                                                                                                w
                                                                                                w
                                                                                                z
                                                                                                O
                                                                                                w
                                                                                                z
                                                                                                LU
Figure 6-11. Sarnia - CSO Storage Tank, Plan View
                                                  23

-------
   1550  1450
            700

           T
Secondary Concrete •
                              Flushwater Storage
                              Area, VOL = 2750 l/m


                                 308-
                                1750
                                                  Flushwater Storage
                                                  Adjustment Pipe
                                                   600
                                                           405
       T
                          -2500-
                                           200
- Flushing Gate
 Gate Model HF-28
                                                       43000
                         -Training Wall


                                BENCHING
J
500
                                                                                                   I500
                                                                                              2000-
                  ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE IN mm


Figure 6-12. Sarnia - CSO Storage Tank, Section View
                                                     24

-------
Figure 6-13. Sarnia - Photographs of Hydraulic Opening Mechanism

Hydraulic Analysis of Flushing Gates for Rectangular Tanks
Summary results of SWMM EXTRAN simulations of flush gate performance for five rectangular tank for
five rectangular tanks are presented in Table 6-17. Flushing volumes computed from the construction
drawings are used as inputs into rectangualer open channels (flushing lane). Velocities shown are
computed at the end section of the flush lane, just prior to discharge into the end channel. There is good
agreement between velocity and operator observations.

Table 6-17. Summary of Tank Flushing Results
                       Length    Slope   Width  Height   Velocity   Depth   Flush
                        (m)              (m)     (m)      (m/s)     (m)    Vol.
                                                                         (m3)
Observation
Filderstadt-Berhausen
Stadt Essen
Markt Wiesentheid
Stuttgart Wangen
Heidenheim Kleiner
Buhl
36
55
41
67
30

2.5%
0.5%
1 .5%
0.5%
1 .0%

5
3
4.84
3.6
4.85

3.5
3.4
3.0
1.8
3.6

1.33
0.92
1.30
0.83
1.61

0.05
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.06

8.5
12
12.7
18
28.5

Good
Good
Excellent / Good
Excellent / Good
Excellent / Good

Evaluation of Flushing Gates for Tanks

Flushing gates use a flushing water storage compartment separated from the actual CSO tank to produce
a flushing transient wave for cleaning the tank floor and to wash the settled matter into a mud sump of
adequate volume and suitable benching at the opposite tank side.
                                            25

-------
The following design considerations are important for maximizing the effectiveness of flushing rectangular
tanks using flush gate technology:

       •   The tank inlet should  be designed such that flushing water reservoirs are filled before the
           storm tank compartments. This ensures that the necessary supply of flushing water to clean
           tanks from short storms of small volume. Filling the tank at the effluent side of the tank
           requires additional  conduits to fill the flushing water reservoirs located at the influent tank
           side.  Careful hydraulic considerations are necessary to assure adequate filling  of all  desired
           storage units.

       •   Depending on the tank filling concept, the inlet overflows should route the inflow sequentially
           into the different tank compartments. Overflow weirs of different heights can control inflow to
           individual compartments.

       •   The tank floor should  be horizontal across the direction of flushing, and sloped from 0.5 to
           2%.

       •   The flusher opening must be a minimum of 150 mm above the tank floor.

       •   Larger tanks should be compartmentalized into bays with a width  of 3 to 5 m. Training walls
           should be sized to prevent the flush wave from spilling into adjacent bays.

       •   The tank side walls should be perpendicular to tank floor with no fillets to ensure cleaning of
           side walls.

       •   The  tank side walls should be hand troweled to a smooth finish.  No sidewall spray systems
           are necessary provided a smooth finish is achieved.

       •   The "mud sump" volume depends on the flushing volume, and  hence of the width of the
           individual flushing bay as well as the possibility to flush the entire tank with multiple  cells in
           sequential mode. The mud sump generally has a central emptying  pit with a sluice  gate  or
           pump outlet.  The  bottom of the sump slopes gently towards  this outlet sump, with  a step
           between the tank bottom and the  beginning of the slope. This step is important in order to
           contain the reflected wave in the mud sump.

       •   An adjustable standpipe in the flushing water reservoir allows for "fine-tuning" of the flushing
           volume in case the  reflected wave throws water and debris back onto the tank floor.

       •   A 5% lateral slope of the mud sump is frequently used.  In case of large tanks and  one outlet
           this will result in fairly deep outlets.

       •   The flush volume depends on the  length, width and slope of the flushing bay, and is  roughly
           1m3/m width and per 10 m length at a slope of 0.5%. A slope of 1 % reduces this requirement
           by 15%, and a 2% slope reduces the requirement by 25%. A maximum flushing length  of
           105m for normal tanks is suggested.

       •   The flushing gate  mechanism  is released hydraulically,  either by  means of an autonomous
           float  mechanism,  or by means of a more sophisticated control  system that  utilizes other
           criteria such as interceptor and WWTP capacity, for flushing and emptying  (Parente et  al.,
           1995).
                                               26

-------
Case Studies: CSO Storage Tanks Utilizing Tipping Flusher Technology

The following tables summarize the evaluations of the tipping flusher rectangular tank facilities.

Case No. 15 - Port Colborne
Details of the Port Colborne, Ontario CSO storage facility utilizing tipping flushers are given in Table 6-18.
Plan and profile views of this facility are presented  in Figure 6-11.  Photos of this facility are shown in
Figure 6-12.

Table 6-18. Port Colborne, Ontario, Canada
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Flushers/Bay
Training Wall/Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
Height Off Floor
Front or Rear Tip
Fillet Radius
End Trough Dimensions
I wd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Volume
Water Source
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System Explosion
Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1996
Combined
Open
2
2
Yes
57 m x 7.2 m x
0.6 m
5.3 m
Rear
1.4m
3.4 m x 13.8 m x
0.65 m
1 .5%
8.2 mj
Fresh
Underflow Sluice
Gate
Not Available
No
No
No
Excellent
                                            27

-------
                           "A"


800








'


6782
7200 1
+/- 12 mm
I L
"inn




7200



6782

+/- 1 2 mm 1
i.L


















— 500

ty












\
s








*



— ELE. 174.500
— 	 TIPPING FLU
_1
|
600



—ELE. 174.500

800 -J L— c of Unit






SHE










800—
— 3410—

i
/
/
ELE. 172.500 — '
R ELE. 172.200 — '
200
1
f

SLUICE GATE
762x762 Opening
INV. ELE. 171.850 	

ELE. 172.500 — >


1400





SUMP





\













LXJ




                               PLAN VIEW
         ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE IN mm









7200 ._ 7200
+/- 12 mm

L- 	 6782 	 J
600—
— 800






n
+/- 12 mm

I- 	 6782 	 -I
—
800—









                                                     -ELE. 181.000
                                                     -C_ELE. 179.782

                                                      - ELE. 177.500
                                                      -ELE. 174.500
                             SECTION "A"-"A"
Figure 6-14 (alb). Port Colborne - CSO Storage Tank, Plan and Section Views
                                                                         "B"
                                    28

-------

Figure 6-15. Port Colborne - CSO Storage Tank, Plan View

Case No. 16- Wheeler Avenue
Details of the Wheeler Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky CSO storage facility are provided in Table 6-19.  Plan
view of the Wheeler Avenue facility  is presented in  Figure 6-16.  Photos of the facility are provided in
Figure 6-17.
                                             29

-------
Table 6-19. Wheeler Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky
Question
Year Constructed
Type of Flow
Covered or Open Tank
Number Of Bays
Number Flusher/Bay
Training Wall/Flusher
Flush Channel Dimensions
(Iwh)
Height Off Floor
Front or Rear Tip
Fillet Radius
End Trough Dimensions
Iwd
Flush Channel Slope
Flush Volume
Water Source
Method of Removing
Flushed Sediments
Frequency of
Inspection/Crew Size
HVAC System/Type
Odor Control System/Type
Electrical System Explosion
Proof
Performance Assessment
Response
1997
Combined
Open
1
4
Yes
38 mx4 m x 0.41
m
2.9m
Rear
1.2m
2.4 m x 19 m x
0.6 m
1 .6%
6mJ
Fresh
Underflow Sluice
Gate
Not Available
No
No
No
Excellent
                                           30

-------
         - PAVED AREA
   7
                DRIVE SLOPE
                        All Dimensions are in Meters
                                                         SLOPE 1.6%
                                                         SLOPE 1.6%
                                                                                   4m
                                                                                   Unit
4m
Unit
                                                                                   4m
                                                                                   Unit
                                                                                   4m
                                                                                   Unit
                                                                                      TIPPING FLUSHER
Figure 6-16. Wheeler Avenue - CSO Storage Tank, Plan View
                                                     31

-------
Figure 6-17a. Wheeler Avenue - Photographs of Overall CSO Storage Tank
                                          32

-------
Figure 6-17b. Wheeler Avenue - Photographs of Filling Tipping Flushers and Overall CSO Storage
Tank
Case No. 17- 14th Street Pumping Station
The 14th Street Pumping Station in Saginaw Michigan functions as a regulation facility to pass dry weather
flow to the East Side Tunnel leading to the WWTP, and as a pump station with 3 pumps, each with 2800
Ips (100 cfs) capacity, to dewater drainage from four  low-level trunk sewers discharging from the 14th
Street district 80 hectares (200 acres). Land is mostly heavy industrial car manufacturing together with
scattered residences. Pumped overflows occur about  12 times per year. The fifth main sewer to the
station drains the 16th Street district with an 340 hectares (850 acre) catchment. The 16th Street district is
long and narrow in shape, flat, and discharges into a 14-foot arch pipe with little slope. Solids deposition is
considerable. Excess wet weather flows discharge over backwater gates into  box culverts (collecting the
pumped discharge from the station),  and  then proceeds through  a 762 m  (2500 ft) open  ditch to the
Saginaw River. Overflows occur 30-40 times per year. A wet weather connection from the 16th Street
sewer into the station's wet well is used only in emergency. The total hydraulic flow capacity tributary to the
14th Street Pumping Station from both districts is about 13,000 Ips (460 cfs).
                                              33

-------
The layout of the 14th Street Pumping Station treatment complex during wet weather operation is shown
in Figures 6-18. It includes the following features:

        •   22,000 m3 (6.0 million gallons) of various storage elements consisting  of in-line, first flush
           off-line, detention sedimentation treatment storage, underflow storage from vortex separators,
           and ditch storage overflow with pump back.

        •   Outflows from all storage facilities are equipped with vortex throttles to permit continuous
           gravity drainage to WWTP.

        •   All concrete tanks use tipping bucket flushers for ease in cleanup.

        •   Vortex solids separators precede conventional sedimentation tanks to ease solids cleanup.


Initially, first flush related flow from both the 16th Street and 14th Street districts are captured by in-system
storage (2850 m3, 0.75 million gallons) and then by tanks B1  and B2 (8550 m3, 1.5 million gallons), Both
tanks have vortex  throttles to permit continuous drainage to the WWTP. This  is  the first in the United
States of this type of CSO storage.

When Tanks B1  and B2 are filled, pumped discharge occurs with initial processing by three  11 m (36 ft)
diameter reinforced concrete vortex solids separators  each with a maximum capacity of 2830 l/s (100 cfs).
Pumped underflow from the separators passes to Tank B3 (throttled outflow to WWTP). Treated overflow
from the vortex separators discharges in a channel over the top of existing box culverts and into a new
7600  m3 (2  million gallons) detention  and storage facility (Tank B4) with chlorination.  Outflow from the
separators can  also  bypass Tank B4 and discharge directly into box culverts  draining to the Saginaw
River.

Tank B4 will provide 45 minutes of detention with "one pump  on" (common event) and will  provide further
treatment of "clear water" overflow from  the vortex  solids separator.  The  overflow  from Tank B4
discharges into the box culverts draining to the ditch. New backwater gate structures were installed near
the River and the ditch rehabbed (stone lined and  reverse graded) to create 9500 cubic meters (2.5 million
gallons) of inexpensive storage. Retained ditch storage is drained after an  event to a new drop shaft
discharging to the East Side Tunnel.

Long term simulations indicate that the "continuous drain" operation for Tanks B1 and B2  permit capture
with bleedback to WWTP without disinfection of half the annual runoff volume. Although the 1 year 1 -hour
storm is the  most severe design condition,  the  more likely events of concern are  spring multiple day
intermittent rainfall events. The vortex tank throttles permits optimized overall utilization of Tank B1 and B2
and the complex of vortex separators with Tank B4 treatment.

The sum of all tank discharges (vortex throttles) plus the two dry weather underflow vortex throttles had to
equal existing wet weather discharge from  this catchment. This new requirement was  imposed  by
regulating agencies since the City was planning  to accept dry weather flows from nearby communities
deactivating  small WWTPs.

Additional estimated cost savings associated with   the sedimentation tank tipping bucket  flushers in
contrast to conventional high pressure spray systems are significant (approximately 33 percent) while the
requirement for flushing water was decreased by 25 percent (Pisano, 1985).

A total of 23 tipping flushers are used to clean tanks B1  (4 tipping flushers), B2  (2 tipping flushers), B3 (6
tipping flushers), and B4 (10 tipping  flushers). The performance of this cleansing system has been noted
by the maintenance staff to be very satisfactory. Only one flush per lane is required.  Figure 6-20 depicts
a photo of tanks B1 through B3.  Figure 6-22 depicts a  photo of tank B4 after overflow activation. Since
the facility is very close to the WWTP, draindown of all tanks is typically accomplished  in  6-12 hours.
Photos depicting a cleaning sequence for Tank B4 are depicted in Figures 6-23 (a to d).
                                               34

-------
             jth
Figure 6-18.  14  Street Pumping Station - Tanks B1, B2 and B3
            jth
Figure 6-19.14  Street Pumping Station - Tank B4

-------
             jth
Figure 6-20a. 14  Street Pumping Station - Flushing and Sequence for Tank B4
             jth
Figure 6-20b. 14  Street Pumping Station - Flushing and Sequence for Tank B4
                                          36

-------

              jth
Figure 6-20c. 14  Street Pumping Station - Flushing and Sequence for Tank B4
Case No. 18- Saginaw Township Center Road Storage Tank
The first operational tipping flusher sedimentation tank installation within the United States, the Center
Road Storage Tank, is located in Saginaw Township, Michigan. The tank was constructed in  1989 and
handles overflows from a catchment of 514 hectares (1270 acres) with a design peak flow of 5943 Ips
(210cfs).

The tank has no odor control provisions,  and contains multiple bays  with a total volume of 19000 m3 (5
million gallons).  In the first third of the tank which is utilized as first-flush storage, three tipping flushers are
used to  clean heavy sediments and sand. Water cannons and fire hoses are used to clean the remainder
of the tank.

The tipping flushers cleanse a length  of approximately 55 m (180 ft). Generally the performance of the
tipping  flushers has  been satisfactory.  However, two  flushes are necessary after  major  storms as
sediments contain some inorganic material. Flush waves have been observed to break up into rivulets
near the end of the flushing lane.

Evaluation of Tipping Flushers
The following design considerations are important for maximizing the effectiveness of flushing rectangular
tanks using tipper flusher technology:
•  The size of a tipping flusher (TF) required to clean a given tank depends on the flushing distance, the
   height the unit is suspended above the tank invert, and the slope of tank floor in the flushing direction.
   The TF's vary in size from 0.02 - 2 m3/ m (12 to 160 gal/foot) of flusher length, with a maximum
   length/span  of approximately 11 m (35 feet).
•  The maximum effective flushing length is between 160-175 ft because the wave  cannot be sustained
   and tends to break up into rivulets  beyond this distance. Experience with flushing in the 55 to 60
                                              37

-------
    meters (180 to 200 ft) range is mixed, and it has been observed that often 2 flushes are necessary to
    achieve adequate cleaning.
•   Tank floors should slope from the flusher location to the collection trough at 1 - 3 % (2 % is desirable
    because quality control is difficult for flatter slopes).
•   Tipping flushers require flushing lanes that are about equal to the width of the flusher to control the
    flow direction of the flush wave. This is accomplished by training  walls that are about 0.4 to 0.6 m (15
    to 18 inches) high, and run the full length of the tank terminating at the collection trough.
•   All walls parallel to the path of flushing flow should be perpendicular to the tank bottom, with no fillets,
    to ensure the lower wall edges are cleaned.
•   There is an upper effective height limit for placement of the tipping flusher where additional height
    does not enhance the flusher's performance further, (approximately 5.5 m,  or 18 ft).
•   The wall beneath the flushers must be continuous (i.e., contain no openings, penetrations or
    obstructions), to assure wave continuity.
•   Side walls should be hand troweled to ensure smooth surface.  No sidewall spray systems are
    necessary.
•   Tanks with shallow sidewater depth of sidewater depth of long length are a concern using tipping
    flusher technology as the gate will tip near floor level.

Other Flushing Case Studies
Other researchers  (Parente  et. al., 1995)  have  collected  survey data  for several  European CSO
rectangular tank facilities using flush gates.  The following are brief summaries  of the findings.

City of Essen, Germany
The City of Essen has two CSO tanks utilizing flushing gates. One facility, in operation since 1991, has a
volume of 1500 m3 (395,000 gallons). The tank is divided into 3 bays  with each bay approximately 5 m (16
ft) wide and 34 m  (112 ft) long. The cleaning effectiveness was reported as very good without a need for
any manual cleaning.

The second facility, in operation since 1993, has  a volume of 2700 m3 (710,000 gallons). The tank is
divided into 6 bays with  each bay approximately 2.5 m  (8 ft) wide and 46  meters (151 ft) long. The
cleaning effectiveness was reported as very good with  a need to clean walls  once a year due to the
heavily polluted corrosive wastewater handled by the tank.

City of Konstanz, Germany
The City of Konstanz has a CSO tank utilizing flushing gates.  The facility,  in operation since 1992,  hs a
volume of 2000 m3. The tank is divided into 3 bays with each bay approximately 7 m (23 ft) wide and 18
m (59 ft) long. The cleaning  effectiveness was  reported  as generally good.  Konstanz is located on  a
lakeshore with minimal slopes and heavy accumulation  of sediment inside  the sewer system during dry
weather.  During rain events,  excess water is  pumped to storm overflow tanks, with  heavy first-flush
concentration. The filling of the tank is from flushing water reservoir side, with heavy matter spilling  into
the flushing vaults. These materials clutters the flusher gate and mechanism, which occasionally fails to
close  properly because  of  debris and clogging. His preference was  to use pre-clarified water for the
flushing reservoirs to reduce  potential for clogging the gate.  The tank is  drained by gravity through  a
regulator back to the pump station. The tank control system is programmable,  allowing for  adjustments in
accordance with operation experience.

City of Augsburg, Germany
The City of Augsburg has a  covered CSO tank utilizing  flushing gates. The facility, in operation since
1994, has a  volume of 4900 m3  (1.3 million gallons).  The tank is divided into 9 bays  with each  bay
approximately 5 m (16 ft) wide and 50 m (164 ft) long. The cleaning effectiveness was  reported as very
good without a need for any manual cleaning. The flushing reservoirs are filled first and no problems with
solids accumulating/clogging the gate have been reported. Some sediments deposit on wall crowns  and
weir sills and  require occasional hosing down were reported.  The tank floor was clean, with no deposition


                                               38

-------
in the corners. In order to prevent clogging of the sludge pumps when emptying the mud sump, the owner
installed  mixing  equipment to keep  heavy sludge concentrations and  debris  in suspension  during
operation.  The  City has found stainless  steel conduits to be more  dependable then copper for the
hydraulic flushing gate actuators.

City of Elizabeth, New Jersey - Mechanical Flap Gate Flusher
Flushing  of large diameter combined  sewers was  investigated during the City of Elizabeth Combined
Sewer Pollution Abatement Program completed in  1986. The program concluded that daily flushing  of
sewers particulary prone to solids deposition in seven subsections of the City by constructing 12 flushing
modules would reduce the first flush  overflow pollution by approximately 28%.

A total of 12 flushing modules were installed in  sewers ranging in size from 0.45 to 1.4 m (18 to 54 inches)
with slopes as low as 0.02%  and were designed to produce sewer flushing in pipe runs up to 305  m
(1000ft) long.  Figure 6-22 presents plan and section views for a typical Elizabeth flushing system.

The flushing modules are underground structures with above ground control cabinets. Each module has a
dry and a wet chamber.  The wet  chamber  is constructed around the existing  sewer  and  houses a
hydraulically operated flap gate mounted on a shaft across the sewer supported on two bearings. The flap
gate is sized to match the dimension of the sewer in which  it is installed. The flap gate is normally open
but closes at a controlled time (usually at night, during  periods of low flow). The gate  is designed  to
automatically open  when the  stored sewage volume rises to a preset  level needed to create a flushing
wave  adequate to resuspend  and transport the deposited sewage solids to the interceptor at a flow rate
which will not  cause overflow at the downstream regulators.   The wet chamber also contains level
switches  and  ultrasonic level sensors to provide signals for opening and  closing of the gate. The dry
chamber is adjacent to the wet chamber and houses the mechanical and electrical equipment such as the
flap gate actuator, the hydraulic power unit as well as auxiliary equipment.  A number of facilities are still in
operation. No performance evaluations of these facilities have been conducted. This facility is unique in
the United States and another such facility has  yet to be installed.


Case Studies: Cost Effectiveness  Studies of CSO Tank Cleaning Methods
The following two case studies present cost effectiveness evaluations that were prepared for CSO storage
tanks in North America. The Eastern Beaches study compares cost effectiveness of tipping flushers with
other  methods. The Sarnia study compares cost effectiveness of flushing gates and tipping flushers with
other  methods.

Case Study: Eastern Beaches,  Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Environment Canada in conjunction with the International Joint Commission  has designated the City  of
Toronto Waterfront as one of the 42 Remedial Action Plan (RAP) areas within the Great Lakes drainage
basin. The City of Toronto has been carrying  out an extensive program of pollution abatement over the
past 30 years to meet the RAP objectives. The City has prepared a pollution abatement program for CSO
and stormwater runoff and has developed a  Sewer System Master Plan  for the combined and storm
sewers. As a component of the Master Plan, the Eastern Beaches, located within the City of Toronto, were
determined to have first priority in pollution abatement to ensure that the beaches remain open for body
contact  water  recreational purposes.  Environmental Assessment studies analyzed various  pollution
abatement strategies and determined that detention tanks would be  the  most feasible alternative for
controlling pollution originating from  CSO and  stormwater runoff entering the nearshore waters along the
Eastern Beaches (Parente et.  al., 1994).

The first of two tanks, located  at Kennilworth Avenue, was put into service in July 1990 to intercept 1 CSO
and 5 storm sewer outfalls. High volume spray nozzle cleaning system was used to  cleanse sediments
from the tank after activations.  This tank has been in  operation for the past 4 years  and  has been
monitored  with   respect  to  pollution   abatement   efficiency,   beach   closure   impacts   and
operation/maintenance impacts. Monitored data from this  tank indicated that the  seasonal  pollutant
removal from the beach area has averaged approximately 2,800 kilograms (6160 pounds) of sediments
and 130 kilograms (286 pounds) of BOD. The  resultant beach closures  has been reduced from 35% prior
to tank installation down to 4% of the swimming season.

                                             39

-------
Based on the encouraging monitoring  results from the first installation, the City has proceeded with the
installation of a second tank at Maclean Avenue to remove all other CSO within the immediate area. This
second tank, approximately 3.5 times  larger than the first tank, has a storage  volume of 8,000 m3 (2.1
million gallons) and is located approximately 1 kilometer (0.62 miles) east of the first tank.

Design criteria for the Maclean Avenue detention tank included the following:

       •   Provide 8,000 m3  ( 2.1 million gallons) of storage (4,000 m3 for CSO and 4000 m3 for
           stormwater runoff) to eliminate untreated CSO and stormwater discharge to beach area;

       •   Operation and maintenance concerns to address the most efficient cleaning  system, water
           conservation considerations, minimal entry requirements, and control of possible odors.

       •   Due to the  site  constraints, the detention  tank dimensions were finalized having a length of
           100 m (330 ft), a width of 15 m (49 ft) and average depth of 6 m (20 ft).

Operation and  Maintenance
During the design phase of the Maclean  Avenue tank, discussions were held with the operating staff
regarding  their experience in operating the first tank for the past 4 years and  also their experience in
operating  a combined sewage  balancing tank further up the system which was constructed in  1914. In
addition to this transfer of operating  experience, contact was made with several  other municipalities
designing   or   operating   combined   sewage  tanks   to   obtain   their   experience.  The   main
comments/requirements from the  various sources identified the following operating features related to
tank flushing and odor control:

       •   Efficient method of cleaning is essential to minimize manned entry requirements and to
           ensure deposition of sediments does not occur;

       •   An odor control system is essential to prevent public complaints during tank operation.

During the process  of detaining the flows, settlement of suspended solids will  occur.  To minimize and
facilitate removal of the  settled solids, the detention tank will be cleaned after every usage. Three methods
for  removal  of the  sediments were investigated:  tipping flushers, flushing spray, and  manual cleaning.
Flushing spray and  manual cleaning systems are described below.

Flushing Spray
A spray flushing system utilizes spray nozzles oriented in such a manner that the spray from the nozzles
covers the entire floor  area and  the floor  has sufficient grade to  ensure effective  sediment transport.
These nozzles generally require water at  a relatively high pressure  and  large volumes to provide the
scouring of the sediments. The  tank floor requires a longitudinal slope of 2% and lateral slope of 10%. The
floor is graded to divert the wash water  to a sump where it is pumped to the sanitary sewer.

The spray nozzles  are  selected to provide sufficient wash water volume and  pressure that the settled
sludge is  re-suspended. From experience at the Kennilworth detention  tank, selected  nozzles with a
capacity of 3.85 Ips  (50.8 gpm) at  a pressure of 415  kPa (60 psi) are required,  Because of the high flow
and pressure demands, cleaning of the first tank is carried out in sections.

Manual Cleaning
This method requires manned entry to  the tank during the cleaning process and the use of hoses to flush
the  tank floor. Manual cleaning ensures a high level of effectiveness  because the operators  can be flexible
with the usage of time and water based on the level of sediments to  be  removed. This method is the most
labor  intensive  and  most hazardous  due to the requirement of working in  a  confined  space.  The
equipment cost  of this alternative is minimal, but the operational cost is higher due to the longer time the
maintenance crews have to remain on site.  This does not  include cost  of mobile  equipment  such as
hoses, safety equipment, etc.  The volume of flushing water required will vary due to personnel work
                                               40

-------
practices, but is anticipated to be equal to or greater than that required by the flushing spray method. This
method is being applied for cleaning the High Park tank constructed in 1914.

The cost comparison of the three cleaning systems is shown in Table 6-20.

Table 6-20. Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cost Comparison

Type of Cleaning System  Storage Volume     Floor Area        Unit Construction      UnitO&M
                              (m3)              (m2)                Cost               Cost
                                                                   ($/m2)             ($/m2)
Tipping Flusher                8000              1360                141              0.075
(Maclean Avenue)
Flushing  Spray                 2250              660                 290               0.30
(Kennilworth Avenue)
Manual Cleaning               2400              790                  2                1.77
(High Park)	
 *Excludes water and electrical costs.

In  evaluating these tank flushing alternatives and evaluating experiences with all three practices, it was
determined that the tipping flusher alternative was the most effective and economical. The flushing system
for each compartment consists of a TF at each end of the tank compartment with the tank floor sloped at
a grade of 2% to a central channel designed to intercept the flush wave and its re-suspended sediments.
To incorporate water conservation practices in this design  and since the flush water supply is not required
to  be at a high operating pressure, a small pump has been installed to pump lake water through the outfall
force main and  into the TF. A valve system has been installed such that the force main may be operated
both as a discharge  main and also as an intake main.

Odor Control
The odor control for the venting system of the second  tank is similar to the first tank. The venting system
is  designed to convey the displaced air during the tank filling process by means of an underground pipe
system to the surface control structure where the air is passed through an air filter system consisting of
activated carbon. The treated air is then expelled to  the atmosphere approximately 6 m (20 ft) above
ground surface. A similar system has  been in operation  at the first tank with the filter media requiring
replacement after 3 years of operation.

The housing for the filter system is  located approximately 130 m (426  ft) west of the tank. The structure
also houses the main control center for all the mechanical equipment and monitoring system.

Case Study: Sarnia Ontario
The pollutant loadings from combined sewer overflows (CSO's) and storm water outfall discharges to  the
Sarnia  waterfront and the St. Clair River have resulted in beach postings, reduced waterfront recreational
activities and degradation of aquatic habitat. The  City of Sarnia carried out a Pollution Control Planning
(PCP)  Study to  develop  a master plan  in reducing the pollution loadings to the Sarnia waterfront. One of
the recommendations of the PCP study is to construct four CSO tanks that would intercept and retain
CSO during storm events. The first of the recommended CSO tanks is located at the Devine Street outfall,
which has a contributory area equivalent to 40 percent of the combined sewer area within the City of
Sarnia. The  required size of the tank was determined  to be 10,700 m3 (2.8 million  gallons) such that  the
tank would reduce CSO discharge events to the St. Clair River to between 3 to 5 events per year (Parente
et.al., 1995).

The purpose of this detention tank (see Case No. 14,  Table 6-16 for evaluation data of this facility) is to
detain  the overflow volume  until the conveyance capacity and/or treatment capacity  is available. During
the operation of the facility,  settlement of suspended solids will occur along the bottom of the tank.  It is
therefore necessary to remove the settled solids after each event to eliminate caking, the accumulation of
these solids, and to avoid the formation of gases and odors as a result of decaying organics.
                                               41

-------
The  design  of the tank was to incorporate the most efficient and reliable cleaning  method such  that
operation and maintenance would not impose high demands during tank operations. The detention tank is
situated within an existing residential park with an available effective hydraulic depth (outlet elevation to
overflow elevation) of 4.3 m  (14  ft).  Based  on the existing  site restrictions  and storage volume
requirements this tank requires a cleaning system to effectively clean a floor with a surface area of 3,440
m2 (37,000 ft2).

Cleaning Alternatives
The following four cleaning methods were identified for the Devine Street CSO tank:

        •   Manual Cleaning

        •   Flushing Spray

        •   Tipping Flusher, and

        •   Flushing Gate.


The estimated capital, operation and maintenance  costs for the four flushing alternatives for the tank are
provided in Table 6-21.

Table 6-21. Alternatives Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cost Assessment
Alternative
Manual
Flushing Spray
Tipping Flusher
Flushing Gate
Capital Cost
$10,000
$680,000
$525,000
350,000
Capital Cost/rn^
$2.91
$197.67
$152.62
$101.74
O & M Cost/Event
$6600
$1548
$378
$250
O & M Cost/nf
$1.92
$0.45
$0.11
$0.07
Operation and maintenance costs include labor, cost of potable water for cleaning at $0.40/m3, and cost of
sewage treatment for external flushwater at $0.45/m3.

Due to water conservation and the lower capital cost, the flushing gate system using detained sewage was
selected to be the most cost effective alternative. This system requires less mechanical equipment such
as  valves  and supply lines that  are  necessary  for an  external water source. The  operation  and
maintenance costs tend to  be marginally lower since  no additional costs are incurred for the supply of
potable water for flushing purposes and the associated treatment costs for the flush water.
                                               42

-------
                                    Chapter 7
                               Desktop Analysis

This chapter describes three  case studies aimed at assessing the cost-effectiveness of sewer
flushing technology from different performance perspectives  These performance perspectives
are minimization of maintenance costs, reduction of sediments CSO first flush, and reduction of
sediments to lower hydrogen sulfide levels.  The first  case study utilizes information developed
for Fresh Pond Parkway Sewer Separation and Surface Enhancement Project in Cambridge, MA.
A cost analysis was performed in  this  case  study to compare flushing  technologies versus
conventional sewer cleaning  methods.   The second  case  study uses the desktop procedure
described in Chapter 3 to investigate the pollution control effectiveness for a typical Northeast
combined sewer catchment.  The number of combined sewer overflows was determined using
long term flow measurements.  A cost analysis  was performed to investigate present worth costs
of satellite treatment versus  flushing technology.  The last case study investigated the cost
effectiveness of sewer flushing versus chemical addition for hydrogen sulfide control.

Case Study One:  Fresh  Pond   Parkway   Sewer  Separation and  Surface
Enhancement Project Storm  and Sanitary Sewer Flushing

In  Chapter 5, different  methods of manual  cleaning are  presented  which  are costly and
maintenance intensive.  In this  case study, the cost  effectiveness  of sewer flushing, utilizing
flushing gates, versus periodic manual cleaning and sediment removal is investigated.

Over the  last twenty years, the City of Cambridge has aggressively separated old combined and
over and  under sewerage  systems throughout the City  to enhance drainage service and to
improve the water quality in the Alewife Brook and the Charles River. Presently, the City is in the
construction phase of separating the CAM 004 area (25 hectares, 250 acres,) catchment. This
area is north and west of Harvard Square  and within dense heavily traveled urban regions.

Grit deposition within both sewerage and  storm drainage systems is a major problem because of
general flatness of the area, presence of several shallow streams that the sewerage (storm and
sanitary)  systems must cross under as siphons, and the  hydraulic level of the receiving water
body that frequently backwaters the  storm systems. To overcome this problem in the CAM 004
area,  automated  flushing systems using quick opening (hydraulic operated) flushing gates to
discharge collected stormwater will flush grit and debris to downstream collector grit pits.

Description of Piping Systems to be Flushed
The storm and sanitary sewer systems to be flushed are located within the CAM  004 catchment
area. These systems start on the Fresh Pond Parkway near the Cambridge water treatment plant,
continue east to the Concord  Circle  and then northeast to the  Fresh Pond Circle. Both  systems
then proceed down Wheeler Street  under the  MBTA/Conrail railroad tracks and  terminate near
the  Alewife Parking Garage. The piping systems consist of approximately 1400  m (4,666 ft) of
sanitary trunk sewers, ranging from 460 mm to  1.2 m (18  inch to 48 inches), and  approximately
1620 m (5,400 ft) of existing storm drains with  pipe sizes ranging from 600 mm (24 inches) to
1.2m by 1.8 m (4 ft by 6  ft). There  is a major overflow into  the Alewife Brook from the sanitary
sewer system just beyond the Alewife Parking Garage.

Two construction contracts have been prepared for the overall sewer separation and surface
enhancement project along the Fresh Pond Parkway  between Huron Avenue and Fresh Pond
Circle.  Flushing systems are  included in one  of the  two construction contracts.  Construction
startup is expected  in September 1998.   Figure 7-1 depicts the general locations of the flushing
vaults.

-------
     Fresh Pond Pkwy.
                                   1m x 1.1m CS

                         DRAIN VAULT 2
Figure 7-1. Fresh Pond Parkway - Locations of Flushing Vaults

Description of Flushing Vaults
Another alternative is to retain pipes with flat slopes, but provide periodic cleaning of these pipes
by automatic passive means to maintain hydraulic capacities. The use of flushing chambers at
specific locations,  with grit collection chambers downstream were designed for the Fresh Pond
Project. The design utilized quick opening flushing gates (hydraulically driven) that release stored
water to create a "dambreak" flush wave to cleanse and move sediments downstream to a grit pit.
Several hundred such installations have been implemented in Western Europe since 1985.

Figure  7-2 shows  a typical storm sewer flushing chamber with quick opening gate designed for
the City of Cambridge. During a rainfall event, stormwater from the incoming storm drain fills the
sump adjacent to the flush chamber. Submersible pumps then pump stormwater from the sump
into the flush chamber.  Each flush chamber volume was sized based on the roughness, slope,
size  and length of the pipe being flushed.   The "flush wave" is designed to have a depth of
approximately  100 to 150 millimeters  (4 to 6 inches) and a velocity range between 0.9 to 1.2
meters/second (3 to 4-feet/second) at the end of the pipe segment being flushed. Once filled, the
pumps shut off and a timer is initiated that automatically initiates the flushing sequence 24 hours
after the rain event.

Process water (back wash) from the new Cambridge water treatment plant will be pumped to the
new  sanitary system and  collected in  sanitary sewer flushing  vaults for periodic flushing of the
sanitary sewers.

-------
                            LEVEL PROBE -

                            (TYP. OF 2)
                                                                   FLUSHING GATE
       FLUSHWATER STORAGE AREA
                                \
                       fur)
                 45ฐ BEND, DOWN
   4" PVC-
   FLUSHWATER
MANHOLE ABOVE
    (2 TYP.)
                    DRAIN VAULT NO. 1-PLAN
 GRADE
                                                                     WEIR OPENING


                                                                     FLUSHING GATE

                                                                     FILLET (BEYOND)

                                                                         1m DRAIN
                          SECTION
Figure 7-2. Fresh Pond Parkway - Flushing Gate Chamber

This approach is intended to minimize the daily operation of the system and provide the flexibility
of cleaning the  pipes on demand.  It  would be cost-effective due to reduced initial capital costs
and minimal long term operational  and maintenance costs versus a typical pumping station that
requires daily maintenance and power.

-------
Life  Cycle  Cost  Comparison:  Automated  Flushing  versus  Periodic  Manual
Removal
This preliminary analysis presents life cycle costs for two alternative systems to clean the major
storm and sanitary systems described above over a thirty-year period. Catch basin cleaning and
cleaning of all incidental lateral lines tributary to both systems were not included. The cost of each
alternative system does  not include  estimates  of materials  to  be  removed  and disposed.
Notwithstanding this limitation, all costs necessary to remove deposits to street level  using either
scheme are included.

Details of the Automated Flushing Systems
The automated flushing scheme consists of the following three separate flushing and grit capture
systems:

    •      Near the new water treatment plant on Fresh Pond Parkway to the  Concord Circle
           (sanitary and storm) including costs of collector manholes for the storm lines. Daily
           flushing  of the sanitary system and periodic flushing of the storm system (assumed
           every two weeks; flush vaults are filled using captured stormwater);

    •      Concord  (Sozio) Circle to the  Fresh  Pond Circle (sanitary and  storm) including the
           cost of collector manholes for the storm system. Daily flushing of sanitary system and
           periodic flushing of storm system (assumed every two weeks; flush vaults are filled
           with pumped captured stormwater);

    •      Fresh Pond Circle to the south side of the B&M railroad crossing at the site of a new
           grit and sand collector area. The storm drain and both sanitary trunk sewers will be
           flushed.  Twice weekly flushing of sanitary systems and  periodic flushing of storm
           system (assumed every two weeks); flush vaults are filled with pumped captured
           stormwater);

The capital costs of the flushing systems include the flushing vaults,  the grit capture chambers
(storm only), small above ground vaults to house the  hydraulic power pack units to trigger the
flushing systems, and chambers as appropriate to pump storm water into the flushing chambers.
External flush water (stormwater runoff) will be used to flush the sanitary systems from the Fresh
Pond Circle  to the Alewife  rotary garage. The additional  cost  of sewage treatment  of  added
flushwaters  was  included  for  the two  sanitary sewer  chambers at   Fresh  Pond   Circle.
Approximately 757,060 liters (200,000 gallons) are needed  for flushing on  an  annual basis. No
such costs are included for  the storm system, as collected storm water will be used to flush the
storm lines. Incidental costs  of pumping storm water to flushing vaults are included. It is assumed
that on a quarterly basis all vaults will be  cleaned  of collected materials. Trucking and disposal
costs are not included. Police detail costs are also not included. Pertinent summary details of the
flushing systems are given in Table 7-1.

Table 7-1. Flushing System Summary
Location
   Drain Vault #1
   Drain Vault #2
   Drain Vault #3
   Drain Vault #4
   Drain Vault #5
 Sanitary Vault #1
Pipe Service
    Drain
    Drain
    Drain
    Drain
    Drain
  Sanitary
  Pipe Diameter
    (meters)
 0.91, 1.06, 1.37
      1.06
      1.37
1.22, 1.22 by 1.83
      1.83
       0.4
Flushing
Segment
Length
(meters)
    390
    235
    240
    350
    443
    215
   Flushing
Volume (liters)
    12,083
    9,725
    10,917
    12,655
    39,640
    5,845

-------
 Sanitary Vault #2      Sanitary              0.6               350           6,363
 Sanitary Vault #3      Sanitary              0.4               426           9,202
 Sanitary Vault #4      Sanitary	1.22	426	24,059
Table 7-2 summarizes the life cycle costs for sanitary and storm sewer flushing vaults for the
locations noted above. Present worth costs per gallon flushing volume averaged about $44 per
liter ($165 per gallon).

Details of the Manual Cleaning System
It is assumed that the sanitary systems will be cleaned on a three year cycle and the storm lines
cleaned on  a five-year cycle. Existing sediment  levels (about  one-third of  pipe depths)  can
reoccur in a five year period (estimated).

Unit cleaning costs were obtained from contractor  bids for the cleaning construction package of
the storm and sanitary sewers within the project area as follows:

   •       914 mm (36 inch) Storm Drain -$75.00/meter ($25.00/foot)
   •       1067 mm (42 inch) Storm Drain -$102.00/meter ($34.00/foot)
   •       1219 mm (48inch) Storm Drain -$129.00/meter ($43.00/foot)
   •       1372 mm (54 inch) Storm Drain -$163.50/meter ($54.50/foot)
   •       1829 mm (72inch) Storm Drain- $267.00/meter ($89.00/foot)
   •       1.22 m x 1.83 m (4'x 6') Storm Drain -$232.50/meter ($77.50/foot)
   •       457 mm (18inch) Sanitary -$19.50/meter ($6.50/foot)
   •       610 mm (24") Sanitary -$21.00/meter ($7.00/foot)
   •       1219 mm (48") Sanitary -$60.00/meter ($20.00/foot)

No trucking  and disposal  costs  are assumed. On a life cycle  basis, the automated flushing
scheme is about  $400,000  cheaper. The reader must also be aware  that  the avoidance of
potential real and societal costs of flooding caused by surcharged  and clogged drains and sewers
is  not reflected  in  this cost estimate. In  addition, the  nuisance level  costs associated with traffic
disruption on Fresh Pond Parkway (4 lanes with 50,000  vehicles  per day) are also not reflected.
An independent estimate of  traffic disruption places a  present value of $3 million.  Last, the
analysis does not take into account the fact that even after separation is completed,  overflows
can occur at the end of the sanitary system which is 2 kilometer (1.2  miles) downstream. Periodic
flushing of the sanitary sewer trunk lines will minimize  the amount of scoured  and suspended
solids discharged from this overflow into Alewife Brook during major wet periods.

Table No. 7- 2. Cost Effectiveness Analysis Flushing versus Manual Cleaning	
Manual Pipe Cleaning     Present Worth Flushing Chamber Sites  Present Worth Cost
                             Cost ($M)                                     ($M)

Sanitary Sewer Cleaning          0.9       Fresh Pond Circle Site              1.1


Storm Drain Cleaning            3.4       Concord Circle Site                 1.5


                                         Water Treatment Plant  Site         1.3

Total	4.3       Total	3.9	
Notes:

1.  Pipe cleaning  costs assume inflation rate of 3.12% per year.

-------
2.   Stormwater pipes are cleaned every 5 years, and sanitary pipes are cleaned every 3 years.

3.   Flushing costs are based on inflation rate of 3.12% per year and discount rate of 7.1% per
    year.

4.   Term = 30 years

5.   Flushing costs for the sanitary systems include payment to the MWRA for all external applied
    flushing water. The annual flush waters for the sanitary systems = 757,060 liters (200,000
    gallons). Current cost factor of $5.68/3,785 liters (1000 gallons) used.

6.   Maintenance labor cost = $60/hour.

7.   Sanitary systems to Fresh Pond Circle assumed to be flushed.

8.   Storm systems will be flushed approximately every two weeks depending on rainfall.

9.   Capital costs  for flushing sites include excavation and backfill,  hauling, pavement, gravel,
    dewatering, hazardous soil disposal, piping, traffic maintenance, equipment, structures and
    mobilization.

10. Operation  and maintenance costs for flushing sites include hydraulic oil, routine inspection
    and servicing, power, and removal of collected sediments. Trucking  and disposal costs are
    not included.

Case Study Two: Cost Effectiveness of Sewer Flushing versus
Conventional Treatment
Over the last two decades, numerous investigators have noted that routine flushing of flat sewers
on a continual  (i.e., one to three day interval) basis could decrease the amount of solids available
for scour,  resuspension and transport to overflows.  Until recently, flushing equipment has not
been available to accomplish this idea in practice.

This case  study investigates the cost effectiveness of utilizing the flush gate technology to flush
on  a  routine  basis sewer  deposits within  a large flat  sewer to  minimize "first  flush" at a
downstream overflow.  The  alternative conventional approach would  be to  use  a satellite
treatment facility such as a retention or detention treatment tank or vortex separator technology.
The basic  idea is to ascertain whether flushing on a routine basis can be  a cost-effective adjunct
to  other treatment schemes or even viewed as a stand-alone control.

The case  study is developed from actual data in a Northeast community.  The first step in the
investigation is to compute solids loadings in the overflow over the course of a year. Life cycle
costs to handle these loadings using satellite CSO treatment are next computed. Next, flush gate
technology is used to flush on a routine basis the same flat stretch of sewer, thereby reducing the
amount of available solids that would be scoured and carried out the downstream overflow during
high flow events.  Life  cycle costs  are computed for this alternative  "preventative" scheme and
compared  with the costs involved with satellite treatment.

Description of Area
The sewer catchment covers an area of 1600 hectares (4000 acres). The land use is mixed with
a portion of heavy industrial and food processing establishments. The sewers are old, separated
and carry  heavy inorganic and organic settleables  solids loadings. Inorganic loadings generally
inflow from cracks in sewer and manholes. Organic loadings derive from food processing wastes,
average about 15  mg/l, and are generally large rapidly settling particles.

-------
Flow monitoring data collected at the end of the catchment prior to entry into a 1.8 m (72 inch)
line were used as input to the desktop procedure. A summary of the input flow data is presented
below Statistics of the average daily velocity, average,  maximum hourly velocity, average daily
and average peak hourly shear stress levels within the 1.8 meter (72 inch) sewer are presented in
Table 7-3.

Overflow at the downstream regulator occurs when hourly flow levels exceed 2632 Ips (60 MGD).
The desktop procedure notes events occurred when the average daily flow rate exceeded 2632
Ips (60 MGD) or when the peak hourly flow rate was less then 2632 Ips (60 MGD). A summary of
the events including number of activation's, peak overflow rate and total volume of overflow are
listed  below in Table 7-4. There are 21  events with a total annual overflow volume of 676,400
cubic  meters (178 million gallons). Overflow peaks range up to 877 Ips (20 MGD). The organic
settleable solids input to the outfall line from the catchment is 879 metric tons (970 tons). During
the  21 overflow  events,  about 230 metric  tons (256 tons)  of  organic solids  discharge to the
receiving water (average concentration equals 290 mg/L.)

Table 7-3. Average Daily and Average Maximum Hourly Velocity and Shear Stress
Average Daily Velocity:
Average Maximum Hourly Velocity:
Average Daily Shear Stress:
Average Maximum Hourly Shear Stress:
0.70 m/s (2.3 fps)
0.85 m/s (2.8 fps)
0.84 N/m2
1 .2 N/m2
Table 7-4. Pertinent Overflow Characteristics
Number of Overflows:
Total Volume Overflow:
Range Overflow Discharges:
Total Hours Activation:
Total Organic Settleable Solids:
Total Organic Settleable Solids:
Average Concentration:
Average Daily Input:
21
676,400 m3(1 78 MG)
43 to 868 Ips (1-20 MGD)
228 hour
232,000 kg (512, 200 Ib) Loadings in Overflows
881 ,000 kg (1 ,938,000 Ib) Input to System
290 mg/l Organic Settleable Solids overflow
15 mg/l Organic Settleable Solids

-------
FLUSHING ALTERNATOR
38 m3 FLUSHING VAULT
FLUSHING EVERY 3RD DAY
 HIGH RATE TREATMENT
 ALTERNATIVE & SYSTEM
                                        DIAMETER=1.8m PIPE
                                        LENGTH= 330m
                                        SLOPE= 0.0008
 VORTEX SEPARATOR,
 UNDERFLOW TANK,
 PUMPTOWWTP
                                                •REGULATOR
                                                                 WWTP
                                   OVERFLOW TO RECEIVING WATER
                                                         CONCEPTUAL SCHEMATIC
                                                       FOR HIGH RATE TREATMENT
                                                     VERSUS FLUSHING ALTERNATIVE
Figure 7-3.  Conceptual Schematic for High Rate Treatment.

-------
A conventional satellite treatment at the overflow facility consists of a vortex separator and
underflow storage facility. A conceptual schematic of alternative controls are depicted in Figure
7-3.  A satellite treatment system to handle the 21 overflows is assumed. The facility consists of
a 9 meter (30 foot) diameter vortex separator, a 760 cubic meters (0.2 million gallon) underflow
tank (sized to retain 5% maximum overflow), headworks including course screening, dewatering
pumps (both vortex separator and underflow tank need pumping to WWTP after events),
electrical and instrumentation controls, and general site civil and yard piping. Capital and
operational costs were estimated for the facility using a procedure previously developed and used
for CSO facility planning  in Cincinnati and Toronto.

Present value costs for this configuration are shown below:
                      Capital
                      O&M
                      Present Worth Cost
$2,620,000
$49, 000 /yr
$3,150,000(1 = 9%, 30 years)
Estimated effectiveness of this satellite facility is depicted in below. It is assumed that the vortex
separator will remove 75% of the incoming organic settleable solids. The maximum influent
applied hydraulic loading is 8.5 Ips/m2 (12 gpm/ft2) during the 21 overflow periods. Average
applied loading on the separator is 6.6 Ips/m2  (9.3 gpm/ft2). Vortex separators  are typically
designed to remove heavy settleable solids with hydraulic loadings typically in the 14 to 21 Ips/m2
(20 to 30 gpm/ft2) range. High performance is  expected in this case study.

In an alternative scheme, an off-line flushing module just upstream of the 330 m (1000 ft) reach of
1.8 m (72 inch) pipe having with a flush volume of 38 cubic meters (10,000 gallons) is
programmed to flush during night hours every three days except when flows are above average
in the trunk sewer (wet overflow periods). It is  assumed that the flush wave on each day of
flushing will move 80 percent of the existing sediment build up (noted in the desktop procedure)
to the regulator and pass to the downstream WWTP.

This flushing scheme is primitive but efficient.  The summary results using the desktop  procedure
including the flushing scheme are shown below in Table 7-5. This  simple scheme reduces the
annual organic settleable solids in the overflow by 92.8%. These solids would have to otherwise
be handled during wet periods by the satellite  treatment scheme. As stated above, the fixed
interval-flushing scheme could be modified to  include more intelligent options such as more
frequent flushing during extended  dry periods  when severe deposition is occurring. Such
schemes could easily be programmed.

Table 7-5. Comparison Satellite Treatment Versus Automatic  Flushing

   Satellite Treatment Alternative
Number Overflows:
Organic Settleable Solids Overflow:
Organic Settleable Solids Removable
by Satellite Treatment :
Residual Organic Settleable Solids:
21
232,700 kg/yr (512,200 Ib./yr)
1 74,600 kg/yr (384,1 50 Ib/yr)
(Assume 75 % Capture)
58,200 kg/yr (128, 050 Ib/yr) out to
receiving water

-------
    Automatic Flushing Alternative
Residual Organic Settleable Solids
overflow:
Organic Settleable Solids to WWTP:
Percent Reduction of Organic
Settleable Solids loadings Attributable
to flushing:
1 6,490 kg/yr (36,280 Ib/yr)
216,300 kg/yr (475,920 Ib/yr) instead
of overflow (i.e., attributable to
flushing)
92.8%
As noted in the Case 1 Study examining flushing vaults in the Fresh Pond Parkway project in
Cambridge, the average present worth per gallon of flushing vaults equals $44 per liter ($165 per
gallon) The largest flush scheme proposed in the Fresh Pond Project was an 42 m3 (11,000
gallons) vault flushing 427 m (1400 ft) of 1.8 m (72 inch) storm drain.

Using this estimate the present worth cost for the 42 m3 (11,000 gallon) flushing scheme
assumed in this case study is $1,760,000. The summary cost effectiveness comparison of the
two technologies are noted below in Table 7-6.
    Table 7-6 - Present Worth Cost Comparison - Flushing Gate vs. Satellite Treatment
    Satellite Treatment
    Flush Gate Technology
Effectiveness
 (% Capture)
    75%
   92.8%
Present Worth
  $3,150,00
 $1,760,000
It is evident that the flushing scheme utilizing the flush technology appears to be more cost
effective than conventional high rate satellite treatment.
Case Study Three: Cost Effectiveness of Sewer Flushing versus Chemical
Addition for Hydrogen Sulfide Control

General
Hydrogen sulfide will be produced as previously discussed in Chapter 3 in sewers with an
anaerobic environment and an active slime layer. Sediment accumulations can further increase
the generation of dissolved hydrogen sulfide. Hydrogen sulfide can be treated in a dissolved state
or as a gas once it is stripped from wastewater. The analysis in this section will focus on treating
dissolved sulfide because dissolved sulfide treatment will ultimately reduce the quantity of
hydrogen sulfide that is stripped from solution. This section presents a cost analysis of chemically
treating dissolved sulfide within a long, flat depositing sewer for a city in the southern United
States with high BOD, high volatile solids, and elevated wastewater temperature. Flush gate
technology will be used to minimize sediments, thereby reducing hydrogen sulfide contributions
generated from the deposited solids.

The sewer solids deposition and erosion procedure described in Chapter 4  is used to compute
daily solids  deposition  levels.  Once the annual history of deposition and erosion of solids has
been computed using this procedure,  dissolved hydrogen sulfide levels are next computed. First,
                                          10

-------
dissolved hydrogen sulfide levels are computed for the slime layer covering the perimeter of the
pipe. Pomeroy's method is used and is described in Chapter 5. Next, dissolved hydrogen levels
are computed attributable  to  accumulated sediments.  In the  initial  deposition and  erosion
calculations, surface area for  each sediment size  remaining on a given day is tallied.  Total
sediment surface  area is computed on  a daily basis. In the dissolved sulfide calculations, a
portion of the surface area of sediments  is used within the Pomeroy formulation to calculate the
incremental  gain  of dissolved  hydrogen sulfide  attributable to  the sediment layer. The  total
dissolved hydrogen sulfide levels at the end of the pipe segment is the sum of the initial levels
entering the pipe segment,  the increment attributable to the slime layer,  and if present, the
additional increment associated with the sediments.
Chemical Treatment of Dissolved Sulfide
Numerous chemicals can be used to treat dissolved sulfide through oxidation, precipitation, or
preventing sulfide formation. These chemicals include pure oxygen injection, hydrogen peroxide,
chlorine, potassium permanganate, nitrate solutions, and iron salts. Chemicals must provide
sulfide treatment from the point of application to the WWTP for this case study comparison.
Following are descriptions of each of the potential chemicals and their potential application for
this case study.

Pure Oxygen
Pure oxygen or air can be added to sewers to oxidize dissolved sulfide. However, more than one
injection point is required for prolonged treatment of dissolved sulfide because of the tremendous
oxygen uptake demand of the wastewater and slime layer. This option is not considered for the
case study comparison because more than one injection point is required to treat dissolved
sulfide along the  length of sewer.

Hydrogen Peroxide
Hydrogen peroxide can oxidize hydrogen sulfide very quickly but it is a non-specific oxidant and
will oxidize other compounds beside sulfide. However, peroxide is  only effective up to 45 minutes
after application before it decomposes to water and oxygen. Hydrogen peroxide is dangerous to
handle in high concentrations and hazardous to humans. It would  require specific chemical
storage and handling equipment procedures, as do most of the oxidizing odor control chemicals.
Hydrogen peroxide is not recommended for this case study because of its quick decomposition
after application.

Chlorine
Chlorine could also oxidize  the same compounds as peroxide but the longer half-life and toxic
nature of chlorine would prohibit dosing large slugs of the chemical required to be effective.
Chlorine would also react with  organics to produce a variety of chlorinated organic compounds
(chloroform, formaldehyde and other mono and polysubstituted chlorinated  organic compounds of
indeterminable chemical composition). These compounds could  then, depending upon the
physical and chemical properties, be released at downstream processes. Chlorine is also
hazardous to  handle and requires strict adherence to health and safety procedures and is not
considered the most desirable alternative for this case study.

Potassium Permanganate
Potassium permanganate could be used but the  production of manganese dioxide from its use
and the batch nature of the chemical mixing process would make it a difficult system to operate.
Potassium permanganate is also a hazardous chemical to handle and has explosion precautions
for contact with dry powder. Permanganate application would require particulate control during
mixing and personnel respirators must be worn during mixing. This is also the most expensive
chemical (on a per pound of sulfide removal basis) to use for sulfide removal and is not
considered appropriate for this
                                           11

-------
Nitrate Solution
Nitrate, if provided in sufficiently high concentrations directly onto the solids in the siphon, would
have the effect of suppressing or stopping sulfide production in the upper layers of the sediments.
Bacteria will use free oxygen first, then reduce nitrate before reducing sulfate. Therefore, if nitrate
is present the bacteria will not reduce sulfate to sulfide. This would reduce, although not
eliminate, the evolution and release of hydrogen sulfide at the treatment plant. Nitrate can not act
quickly enough to be of much use over the entire length of the siphon and an overdose could
violate discharge requirements or cause bulking in the secondary clarifiers at the WWTP
However, the massive logistical effort and cost of applying that much nitrate uniformly to the
siphon is impractical.

Iron Salts
Iron salts will react with dissolved sulfide to form metal-sulfide precipitates. The metal-sulfide floe
typically does not settle in the collection system because  of its characteristics and is often
removed in the secondary treatment stage of a WWTP. A metal salt residual can be maintained in
the collection system and effective sulfide control can be  accomplished up to 40 kilometers from
an application point with the proper environment. Because of these reasons the case study cost
analysis was performed using iron salts to treat the anticipated dissolved sulfide loading.

Flushing Gates for Sulfide Reduction
As discussed in Chapter 4, flushing gates are used to periodically clean pipes that can
accumulate sediment.  However, sediment in collection systems can also contribute and actually
increase hydrogen sulfide production. Therefore, if a flushing gate is installed on a segment of a
collection system to  keep the pipes relatively free of debris then the corresponding sulfide
generation should decrease.

Case Study Description
The case study in this  section represents a city located in the southern part of the United States.
Cities in this part of the country typically have wastewater characteristics with high BOD
concentrations and elevated temperatures that can lead to substantial  hydrogen sulfide
concentrations (when compared with locations in cooler climates). The specific mean and
maximum wastewater  characteristics for this case are contained in Table 7-7.

Table 7-7.  Wastewater Characteristics

       Parameter             Average Daily        Average  Daily         Average Daily
                                                   Maximum              Minimum
Discharge (Ips)                   3468                6571                 2707
BOD5(mg/l)                      570                  928                   197
VSS(mg/l)                       376                  760                   39
TSS(mg/l)                        464                  913                   272
Temperature (deg. C)	29	32	16	
The desktop procedure described in Case Study 2 was used to analyze a 1.8 m diameter sewer.
This  procedure  calculated  sediment and erosion  behavior,  calculated  dissolved  sulfide
concentrations using the Pomeroy method described in the Chapter 4, and calculated dissolved
sulfide attributed to the accumulated sediments. The sewer is 915 meters long and has a slope of
0.0007. The dissolved sulfide concentration entering the pipe was assumed to be 0.25 mg/l. It is
assumed that  the allowable dissolved sulfide concentration  entering the WWTP is  0.75  mg/l.
Three 50 m3 gallon flush gates must be installed to clean the 915 m long conduit (flush gates are
spaced equally along the pipe length to clean 305 meters each). The flush gates are programmed
to flush every third day during low flow conditions.

Based on the above information  the  desk-top  procedure  revealed  that 383,750 kilograms of
sulfide was produced in this segment of the sewer per year. Approximately 208,200 kilograms of
                                           12

-------
 sulfide was produced in the sediment layer of the siphon and the remainder was attributed to the
 slime layer on the pipe walls.

 Cost Analysis
 Two conditions were analyzed for this  case study; 1) treating the  yearly hydrogen sulfide  mass
 with chemicals and 2)  using a combination of flushing gates and chemicals to treat the total
 sulfide mass. Present worth calculations will be estimated for both scenarios.

 Iron salts  are  assumed to treat the dissolved sulfide  concentration  for this sewer segment.
 Specifically,  ferrous  chloride  will be  used  for  the  analysis.  Ferrous chloride  solution has
 approximately 0.12 kilograms of iron per liter of solution and a capital cost of $0.16/liter. Field
 experience indicates that approximately 0.82 kilograms of iron is required to treat 0.45 kilograms
 of sulfide. Therefore, the general cost of treatment per kilogram of sulfide is approximately $2.42.
 The capital cost for the chemical addition equipment is approximately $50,000 (installed) and the
 yearly operation  and maintenance cost is $10,000. The flushing gate systems are based on a
 flushing vault volume of 50 m3 and a  present value cost of $35,200/m3. Costs assume an inflation
 rate of 3.12% per year, discount rate  of 7.1%, and  a 30-year term.

 Condition 1  - Sulfide Treatment with Ferrous Chloride
 The estimated present worth cost for treatment of 383,750 kilograms of dissolved sulfide per year
 (assuming that sediment contributes to the total sulfide mass) is $15.5 million.

 Condition 2 - Sulfide Treatment with Ferrous Chloride and Flushing Gates
 This condition assumes that the total sulfide mass contribution from the sediment ( 208,200 kg)
 bed is eliminated by using the flushing gates to minimize sediment accumulation in the pipe. The
 estimated  present worth cost for treatment of 175,900 kilograms of dissolved sulfide per year
 using ferrous chloride to treat the dissolved sulfide and plus the present worth cost of the flushing
 gate system  to minimize the sulfide formation is $12.5 million.

 Summary of chemical treatment costs  and flushing gate costs for both conditions are shown in
 Table 5-10.
	Table 5-10. Chemical Treatment Costs	
                        Chemical Cost ($)        Flushing Cost  ($)         Total Cost ($)
 Condition 1                15,500,00                  N/A                15,500,00
 Condition 2	7,200,000	5,200,000	12,500,000

 It appears that the overall system of employing flushing in combination with chemical treatment of
 residual unacceptable dissolved hydrogen sulfide levels is cheaper  than only chemical treatment.
                                            13

-------
                                    References
Ackers, J.C., D. Butler and R.W.P. May, Design of Sewers to Control Sediment Problems,
Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA), Report 141, 1996.

Ashley, R.M. and R.W. Crabtree, Sediment Origins, deposition and build-up in combined sewer
systems, Water Science Technology, Vol. 25, No. 8, 1992.

American Society of Civil Engineers/Water Pollution Control Federation, Design and Construction
of Sanitary and Storm Sewers, ASCE manuals and reports on engineering practice, No. 37, 1970.

Bertrand-Krajewski J-L, H. Madiec and O. Moine, Two Experimental Sediment Traps: Operation
and Solids Characteristics, Water Science and Technology, Volume 33, No.9, pp. 155-162, 1996.

British Standard Institution, Sewerage - Guide to New Sewerage Construction BS 8005:Part 1.

Brombach, H. S. Michelbach, and C. Wohrle, Sedimentations- und Remobilisierungsvorgange im
Abwasserkanal, Schlubericht des Teilprojektes 3 im BMFT-Verbundprojekt NIEDERSCHLAG,
Eigenverlag Umwelt- und  Fluid-Technik GmbH, Bad Mergentheim, 1992.

Chebb, G., Laplace, Bachoc, Sanchez and LeGuennec, Technical Solutions Envisaged in
Managing Solids in Combined Sewer Networks, International Conference on  Sewer Solids-
Characteristics, Movement, Effects and Control, Dundee, Scotland, 1995.

Clinton Bogert Associates, "CSO Control Facility Plan", Elizabeth, N.J., 1981

Environmental Design & Planning, Inc., Section 208 Areawide Wastewater Management Plan for
City of Fitchburg, Montachusett Reg. Plann. Comm., Fitchburg, MA, 1978.

Field, R., and Struzeski, E.J., Jr., Management and Control of CSOs, Journal of Water Pollution
Control Federation, 44, 1393, 1972.

FMC Corporation Central  Engineering Laboratory, "Feasibility of a Period Flushing System for
Combined Sewer Cleansing"" EPA/11020DN08/67, U.S.EPA, Washington D.C., 1966.

FMC Corporation, "A Flushing System for Combined Sewer Cleansing", EPA/11020DN03/72,
U.S.  EPA, Washington D.C.,  1972.

Gameson, A.L.H., and Davidson,  R., Stormwater Investigation at Nothhampton, Annual
Conference of Institute of Sewage Purification, Llandudno, U.K., 1962.
Gatke, D. and H. Borcherding, CSO-Tunnel Cleaning by Long Distance Flushing Wave:
Simulation and E
Germany, 1996.
Simulation and Experiments, 7th International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, Hannover,
Grande, N. et al., New Innovation for Cleaning Sediments in Sewers and in Storage Tanks, WEF
Specialty Conference-Sewers of the Future, Houston, Texas 1995.

Hunsinger et al., "CSO, Operational Study", C.Bainbridge, Gee, Milanski, Associates and
Crawford, Murphy & Tully Inc., Sanitation District Decatur, IL.

Kaufman, H.L., "Review of Alternatives for Evaluation of Sewer Flushing Dorcester Area -
Boston", EPA/600/2-80-118, U.S. EPA, Washington D.C., 1980.

-------
Kaufman, H.L., and Lai, D., "Conventional and Advanced Sewerage Design Concepts for Dual
Flood and Pollution Control",EPA/600/2-78-090, U.S. EPA, Washington D.C., 1978.

Lysnse, O.K., Hydraulic Design of Self-Cleaning Sewage Tunnels, Journal of Sanitary
Engineering Division of ASCE, Vol. 95, 1969.

Macke, E., Uberden Feststofftransport bei niedrigen Konzentrationen in teilgefullten
Rohrleitungen (Diss.), Mitteilungsheft 76 des Leichtweiss-lnstituts fur Wasserbau der TU
Braunschweig, 1982.

May, R.W.P., Sediment Transport in Pipes and Sewers with Deposited Beds, HR Wallingford
Ltd., Wallingford, Report SR320, 1993.

Montgomery Watson, South Ottawa Tunnel Operational Requirements Study, Regional
Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, September 1998.

Nalluri, C.  and E.M.Alvarez, The Influence of Cohesion on Sediment Behavior Water Science
Technology,  Vol. 25, No.8, 1992.

Nalluri, C. and A. AB-Ghani, Bed Load Transport without Deposition in Channels of Circular
Cross Section, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage,
Niagara Falls, Canada, 1993.

Ogden, H.N.  Transactions, American Soceity ofn Civil Engineers, 10, 1898.

Parente, Mario, Kenneth E. Stevens and Christian Eicher, Evaluation of New Technology in the
Flushing of Detention Facilities, Proceedings of the 68fh Annual Conference and Exposition,
Water Environment Federation, Volume 3,  Part I: Collection Systems, 1995.

Parente, Mario, W. Green and A. Ashamalla, Tank Design Based on Operation Experience,
Proceedings of the 67th Annual Conference and Exposition,  Water Environment Federation,
Collection Systems, Residuals and Biosolids Management, 1994.

Pisano, William C., George Zukovs, Gabriel Novae and Nick Grande, Review of Storage Methods
To Prevent CSOs, Stormwater Management Technology Transfer Conference, 1993.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Stadt Kirchhain, Germany, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Stadt Heidenheim, Germany, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Osterbruch-Opperhausen, Germany, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Stadt Essen, Germany, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Cheboygan, Michigan, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Sarnia, Ontario, Canada 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Port Colborne, Ontario, Canada, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Louisville, Kentucky,  1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Saginaw, Michigan, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Worcester, Massachusetts, 1998.

-------
Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, City of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1998.

Pisano William C., Personnal Communication, Hans Brombach, Umwelt-und Fluid-Technik, (UFT)
Bad Mergentheim, Germany ,  1998.

Pisano, William C., Case Study: Best Management Practice Solution fora Combined Sewer
Program, EPA 600/9-78-017, U.S. EPA, 1978.

Pisano, W., "CSO Case Study: Reduction of Pollutant Loadings to Saginaw River", Conference
on Water Quality, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 1987.

Pisano, W.C. et al., "Dry Weather Deposition and Flushing for CSO Pollution Control",
EPA/600/2-79-133, U.S. EPA, Washington D.C., 1979.

Process Research, Inc., "A Study of Pollution Control Alternatives for Dorcester Bay, Metropolitan
District Commision, Boston, MA, 1976.

Pistenpart, E.  and M.Uhl, Behavior and Pollution of Sewer Sediments,  Proceedings of the Sixth
International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, Niagara Falls, Canada, 1993.

Sullivan, R. et al., "Design Manual: Swirl and Helical Bend Pollution Control Devices", EPA/600/8-
82-013, U.S. EPA, Washington D.C., 1982.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Design Manual: Swirl and Helical Bend Pollution Control
Devices, EPA/600/8-82/013, 1982.

U.S. Environmental Proteciton Agency, Design Manual Odor and Corrosion Control in Sanitary
Sewerage Systems and Treatment Plants, EPA/625/1-85/018, October 1985.

Yao, K.M., Sewer line design based on critical shear stress, Journal Environmental Engineering
Division of ASCE, Vol. 100, 1974.

-------