-------






Inf
luent
•










Effluent
0




-
•
•
•
•
•

••
•
•
•
•
• •
• •
•

•

O
O

On
0 0
0
O
ft°
0 0
c

•











-

•
• •
•

• •
•
•
•
•
• •
• •
•

r>
n n

O

O r>
0 0
Q
O
0°
0
0
c





Plant












Species

•





m
•



Adjustment









•
•
••
•

• •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
m






0
O
O
0
°o

•
0
O O
O
O
O

0
O
0


0

0







•







•

•

•
•
•


•
••
•









•



-

I00
0
1
O
, L_
0
0
1
0
O
O
O
0
° Q
1
0
13 20	30 1 5 13 23 lb	1c	2o 1
March	April ••'lay	June
19°1
risr:re ".4c. Example	of chronological data development for domestic sewage
testing with the :IFT at Hanover, "lev Hampshire.
lUo

-------
loading rates. Subsequent data presentation will examine the relationship
between loading and hydraulic retention time and effluent quality. It Is
Important to note that the Influent sewage temperature In these systems dur-
ing the winter often was 7° to 8°C, thus causing problems In achieving
efficient pollutant removal.
The large number of uncontrolled variables caused analysis of the results of
this study to be a difficult problem. The process efficiencies must be a
function of temperature, light period and radiation Intensity. However, the
effect of light period and radiation intensity did not appear to be a major
variable for BOD and suspended solids removal when the plants were in a
healthy condition. This most likely is related to the fact that the removal
of these constituents is a biological/physical/chemical phenomenon not
related to plant uptake. Of course, it was anticipated that nutrient uptake
would probably be a function of the plant productivity and microbial acti-
vity in the root zone. Figure 7.5 is a data summary of the productivity of
reed canary grass grown for long periods of time under limited light and
nutrient conditions.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NFT IN TREATING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER AND DOMESTIC
SEWAGE
Long-term operation of pilot scale NFT models with synthetic wastewater and
actual domestic sewage enabled the parametric evaluation of the process.
Tables 6.12 and 6.13 present a summary of the steady state conditions for
these continuously fed pilot units operating on synthetic and domestic
wastewater, respectively. Between November of 1979 and August of 1981 a
total of 16 steady state conditions were observed with synthetic wastewater
and 13 conditions were examined with domestic sewage in Hanover. Twenty-two
pollutant variables were examined in the synthetic wastewater, and seventeen
variables were tested in the domestic sewage units. Each steady state con-
dition is an average of a number of analyses, between four to fifty-five,
depending on the analysis. Results with each of the major variables will be
discussed briefly In the following section. Examination of the relation-
ships of loading rates and mechanisms responsible for the following observa-
tions will be discussed in subsequent sections.
The variables that are compared in this study are listed in Table 7.1.
B.l. pH
The wastewater in both the synthetic and domestic studies varied only
several tenths of a pH unit and remained slightly on the alkaline side of
neutral. Synthetic wastewater was usually Introduced around a pH of 7.0 and
through the first unit varied approximately 0.2 to 0.3 of a pH unit in the
first unit. A variation of approximately one pH unit occurred in the 36.6
meter unit with an effluent of 7.7 to 8.0. The domestic sewage unit varied
less, with an Influent pH o? around 7.3 and an effluent slightly lower than
the influent values, with a value of 6.9 to 7.0 quite common. The limited
variation in both synthetic and sewage units suggests that microalgae growth
was not a significant factor affecting pH in the mature steady conditions.
147

-------
1 11 2.1 31
Octobe r
1979
10 20 30 10 ?0 30
November December
9 19 29
January
19^0
8 18 28
February
9 19 29
March
8 10 20 8
April	May
''if/.ure 7 .'ja. Incident ra.d in I. iori and yield oi' reed canary |.<;ra::;s grown in continuing Nl'T
culture in the Cornell liraeehouse over' the course of exper i. merit at. Ion. The
un.it was used as a synthetic sewage test unit from October 1979 to November
198(1, after which it was used as a biomass and evapotranspirat.ion control
unit for larger systems.

-------

7 17 27 7 IT ?7 6 16 26
^ 1U 2U U 1^4 2k
r
15 ^5
i:
M:i.y	Juno	July	August	September October November	December
.1960
Kigure '(. "?b. [ncident radiation and yield of reed canary ^rass grown iri continuing
culture in the Corne.l 1 Hmeehouae over the eourue of experimentation. 'l'he
unit was uued asi a tjynfchctie sewa;;;e teat unit from October 1979 to November
1980, after which it wan used as a biomasa and evapotranspiration control
unit for 'harder systems.

-------
lit 2h
1?
February
J ariuu ry
March
April
J une
Figure
Incident, radiation and yield of reed canary ^rana ^rown in continuing
Nl'T culture in the Cornt* Li Bracehouse over the course of experimentation.
The unit was used as a synthetic sewage teat unit from October 3 979 to
November 1980, after which it wtiii used as a biomar.::. and evapotraruspi ra-
tion control unit for larmier systems.

-------
Table 7.1. VARIABLES MEASURED IN TESTING PILOT SCALE NFT SYSTEMS WITH
SYNTHETIC AND DOMESTIC SEWAGE.
Synthetic Sewage Variables
Flow
pH
Dissolved Oxygen
Air Temperature
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand
Ammonia Nitrogen
Soluble Ammonia Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Soluble Nitrate Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Soluble Organic Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Total Solids
Total Volatile Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Zinc
Cadmium
Solar Radiation
Relative Humidity
Domestic Sewage Variables
Flow
pH
Dissolved Oxygen
Air Temperature
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand
Ammonia Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Suspended Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Solar Radiation
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Organic Carbon
Sewage Temperature
The microalgae was a problem in the early stages of operation and testing
(before plants developed a dense canopy), but it was not a variable in the
steady state values.
B.2. Dissolved Oxygen
The dissolved oxygen around the roots in an NFT system is a critical para-
meter for plant production and pollutant removal. Typical dissolved oxygen
profiles in the unit are presented In Figures 7.6 and 7.7. Figure 7.6 com-
pares the effect of loading rate and continuous application to the inter-
mittent applications during much of the synthetic sewage study. This infor-
mation indicates that intermittent application provides some control over
the dissolved oxygen in the wastewater. Figure 7.7 compares the dissolved
oxygen in the continuously operated synthetic wastewater unit with domestic
sewage applied intermittently. Although intermittent application enabled
the dissolved oxygen concentrations to be maintained at an average value of
2 to 3 mg/£ at loading rates of 10 cm/day, it is clear that dissolved oxygen
at high loading could be a problem. Low dissolved oxygen at high loading
rates is likely. These values will be useful in interpreting the subsequent
lack of nitrification that is presented in the nitrogen removal information.
151

-------
.tinuou
cntmuous

-------
Synthetic, continuous
S ewage , i n L e rrn i I, t. e n t,
15 on/15 off
Sewage, intermittent,
30 on/30 off
Loading Rate
em/d rn 3 / m—ci
6.9
10.? 3.71*
Dat t?
2/13/81-3/l^/Bl
'1/13/81-5/ 8/81
5/ 7/81-6/ 3/8L
12 1>I 16 18 20 22 2h 26
Sample Locat j on , rn Downstream
K Lguro 7.7.
Die;l'.o I veil oxygen concentration in multispecies NI'T unit treating primary
oeltLcd domestic :.;ewage at Hanover, New Hampshire.

-------
B.3. Temperature
No attempt was made to control the wastewater temperature In any system, so
the influent temperatures In the wintertime varied with the domestic sewage-
studies. The low temperature in January averaged 7.6°C with a standard
deviation of 2.4°. The effluent during this month was 12.8°C, with a stan-
dard deviation of 0.5°. At other times of the year, common values of sewage
in New Hampshire was 9 or 10°C. This temperature would increase by an
average of 3° or 4°C going through a 12-meter long unit. Increases in sew-
age temperature during the summertime ranged from 14°C to as high as 24.8°C,
with a standard deviation of 6°C. A potential increase in temperature as
sewage moves through the system needs to be taken into account in evaluating
the applications of the technology.
While few synthetic sewage temperature measurements were made, some genera-
lities can be made. In the Cornell Bracehouse air temperature is quite sen-
sitive to solar radiation; and since a large volume of synthetic sewage was
prepared in the greenhouse, the Influent temperature of this sewage
approached the average air temperature in the greenhouse. This Influent
temperature ranged from about 12°C in winter to about 17°C In summer. Simi-
lar small rises in temperature were measured in synthetic sewage as it
passed through the units, although only a small number of these measurements
were made.
B.4. Suspended Solids
The suspended solids data generated from the synthetic wastewater system are
of limited value since the influent feed had few solids. The suspended
solids reported in Table C.21 in the appendix for synthetic wastewater
represents microbial growth in the feed at the room temperature. This
varied from 2 to 8 mg/£. However, the concentration of effluent suspended
solids from the unit is a function of the large accumulation of microbial
solids in the root system that are continuously lost as the microbes grow
and slough from the root mass. At a loading rate of 10 cm/day, the typical
effluent solids from the synthetic wastewater was approximately 7 mg/£.
Suspended solids concentrations in the effluent from the synthetic studies
seldom exceeded 20 mg/£.
The effluent suspended solids with the sewage studies represent some of the
more important information from this study. Influent total suspended solids
concentration varied widely from a dilute 35 mg/£ in the wintertime to a
high of 140 mg/A. Effluent solids were usually less than 30 mg/£ and in the
36-meter long unit varied between 4 and 16 mg/£ up to a loading rate of 20
cm/day which was the highest loading tested. A typical effluent solids pro-
file through the NFT unit with reed canary grass and in a multiple species
unit is shown in Figure 7.8. An analysis of the influence of various para-
meters on effluent solids concentration will be given in a subsequent sec-
tion.
An important observation related to suspended solids was the nature of the
suspended solids within the system. It had been envisioned that much of the
solids would become entrapped in the root mass and that this material would
154

-------
DISTANCE FP.GM INFLUENT, n
Figure 7-3- Mean suspended solids concentrations in
KFT systems treating domestic wastewater
at 10.2 cm/d. Curve A shows a 12 m canary
grass system with a relatively high SS
influent. Curve 5-C-D shows a three-part
N7T system consisting of phragr.ites ,
cucumbers, and canary grass (ir. order from
influent).
155

-------
remain In the unit. Observations of the Hanover domestic sewage Indicated
that the suspended solids were rapidly flocculated Into relatively large
clumps of material. These materials settled rapidly but also moved around
within the system on an Intermittent basis. This observation leads to the
possibility of flushing the system with rapid additions of the wastewater.
B.5. Turbidity
As Indicated In the suspended solids removal section, the NFT produced a
relatively clear effluent. Turbidity measurements with the NFT system
treating domestic sewage indicated a reduction in a 12-meter length from
around 50 JTU to less than 20 in almost all cases. At a loading rate of
20 cm/day during June on reed canary grass a typical decrease from 29 to
6 JTU was recorded.
B.6. Chemical Oxygen Demand
A comparison of changes in total and soluble COD for the synthetic waste-
water is shown in Figure 7.9. In most cases the COD was rapidly removed,
and at 5 cm/day decreased from 250 mg/i to 60 mg/Z in a 12-meter section.
Since the influent organics were mainly soluble, the total COD closely fol-
lowed the soluble COD in the synthetic wastewater. Figure 7.10 compares the
influence of temperature and maturity on similar systems at the higher load-
ing rate of 10 cm/day. As the system became more mature, it was clear that
loadings of 20 cm with a 12-meter system were effective in removing COD down
to low levels. The influence of the length of the system on soluble COD is
shown in Figure 7.11 where two single species units of different lengths
were compared with a multiple species units of a longer length. These data
clearly indicate that the process is highly efficient in removing organics
and that there appears to be a relationship between loading rates and the
length of the unit. This will be examined in subsequent sections.
A comparison of the total COD removal profile to soluble COD with domestic
sewage is shown in Figure 7.12. Because of the influence of suspended
solids there is a larger difference between these two parameters than was
present in synthetic sewage. Total COD removal appears to be similar to
synthetic wastewater. A larger fraction of soluble COD appears to be
nonbiodegradable in domestic sewage. This is indicated by lower percentage
reductions of soluble COD in domestic sewage; also all COD in synthetic sew-
age originated as sucrose.
Organic removals are examined in Figure 7.13 by comparing the total BOD to
the soluble BOD in domestic sewage. At a loading rate of around 7 cm/day
the effluent from the second section approached 30 mg/I of BOD, and the
effluent from the third section averaged 10 mg/il in most runs. Doubling
that application rate increased the effluent concentration from the second
unit to 50 mg/i BOD and 33 mg/£ from the third unit. At a 20 cm/day loading
rate this increased to an average of 41 mg/I from the effluent from the
third unit.
A comparison of the winter operation to the summer operation with respect to
the total COD removal efficiencies is shown in Figure 7.14. In addition to
156

-------
30C
SOLUBLE
20C
CK
ICO
12
m system
m system
TOTAL
x
200
100
2C
10
30
0
AREA LOADING RATi, cm/d
Figure T-9* Reductions of total and soluble
chemical oxygen demand concentrations
in synthetic wastewater through 12 m
and 36 m systems. Note similarity
between total ar.d soluble COD for
both influent (solid symbols) and
effluent (open symbols) synthetic
wastewater.

-------
100
¦>.n
CO
¦fc'?.
w
I H
H
•'<
§
s
U
>-•
0
w
! <
C_>
1	I
(ii
Ci.
M
, 1
:5
o
w
Average Air Temperature
Hirfi
1/ ?/80
3/1Y/80
6/17/80
O 12/ 6/79
4 2/21/80
-------
3CQ
9.3 iTi2 Canary Grass
13.6 m2 Canary Grass
2T.9 e2 Multi-species

a
o
:>->
X
<
o
M
o
100

from iriri/j:
DI3TA
Figure 7.11. Influence of system length on soluble
CCD removal from synthetic sewage at
an area loading rate of 20.3 cm/d.
Systems A and B contain reed canary
grass only, while System C consists
of cattails and bulrushes, pnragnites,
and canary grass (in order from influent}.
-------
33C
SOLUBLE
200
100
Influent
Ef fluent
'OT.
200
—13
ICO
20
10
o
AREA _,CADING RATt, cir./d
Figure 7-12. Reductions of total and soluble
chemical oxygen demand concentra-
tions in domestic sewage in 36 m
multiple species N7T units, which
were tested at three different
loading rates.
-------
100
SOLUBLE
40
20
TOTAL
3
s
I 120
<
10.2 cm/d
100
i—
s
Q
I
20.3 cm/d
UO
20
n
12
DISTANCE FROM INFLUENTS, m
Figure 7.13. Total and soluble oxygen demand concentra-
tions at various biochemical points in 36 m
multiple species unit treating domestic
vastsvater. Three loading rates are shown.
lol
-------
Uoc
A. warm Temperatures
a ?4n
20	3C
DAY 35" OPERATIC1!-.
to
w
Q
a
>¦
x.
o
400
320
240
loO
80
s:
3
la Temperatures
12	2b
DAY OF OPERATION
"igure T . iL . Comparison of COD removal from
domestic savage during relatively
varm (A) and cola {2) temperatures
O	= Influent
^	= Effluent from first unit
¦+	= Effluent from second unit
~	= Effluent from third unit
-------
the effect of temperature this figure shows a significant influence on BOD
removal with length. This is most likely related to the hydraulic retention
time in the channel.
B.7. Nitrogen
In general, the nutrient removal for continuous flowing units was low. This
was primarily related to the fact that most of the tests conducted were at
high loadings to achieve high BOD and suspended solids removal rates.
Therefore, the nutrient loadings on these plant systems at high organic
loading rates should not be expected to result in efficient nutrient manage-
ment. Example reduction of total nitrogen with the synthetic wastewater
shows effects of the length of the units in Figure 7.15. Maximum reduction
of nitrogen in these units occurred at the lower loading rates of 5 cm/day
and achieved a maximum of 12 to 15 mg/£. of nitrogen removed from the sys-
tem. Figure 7.16 compares total Kjeldahl nitrogen removal at varying load-
ing rates. The relationship of plant yield and other nitrogen removal
processes will be discussed later.
Since the influent synthetic sewage contained urea nitrogen, hydrolysis of
urea to ammonia occurs rapidly in the synthetic wastewater. The ammonia
concentration in the sewage represented a major change in nitrogen species
as shown in Figure 7.17. Approximately 10 mg/fc of ammonia nitrogen was
removed in these systems at the lower loadings, and at high loading rates
the removals were less.
The intent of testing the nitrogen cycle was to define conditions under
which nitrification could be achieved so that a denitrification system could
be added as one means of removing nitrogen from the system. However,
throughout the study there was nearly a complete absence of nitrification.
Although numerous analyses were done for nitrate nitrogen for both synthetic
wastewater and the domestic sewage, the highest concentration of nitrate
observed in the effluent was 4 mg/Jl in one early spring operation at a low
loading rate of 5 cm/day. At higher loading rates almost no nitrates were
observed. Although this was a surprising observation, it is most likely
related to low hydraulic retention times that were observed under most test-
ing conditions and the higher organic loading rates that were used to define
the kinetics of the organic solids removal. All of the loading rates tested
resulted in low dissolved oxygen values that could inhibit nitrification.
Additional analysis of this lack of nitrification in the systems will be
reviewed under the root analysis section.
B.8. Phosphorus
The phosphorus removals were similar to the nitrogen removals in that the
total efficiencies were relatively low. A comparison of the total phospho-
rus removed from the synthetic wastewater at the 5 and 10 cm/day loading
rates is shown in Figure 7.18. Maximum removal efficiency occurred in the
early summer with the 5 cm/day loading rate, resulting in about a 50% remov-
al of total phosphorus. A similar comparison is given in Figure 7.19 for
total phosphorus concentration changes in the NFT units treating domestic
sewage. Total reductions of 2 or 3 mg/i. (amounting to about 30 percent
163
-------
A 9-3 m2
3 18.6 m2
C 27-9 m2
Canary Grass
Canary Grass
Multi-species
	I	I	
12	24
DISTANCE FROM INFLUENT, m
Figure T.15-
Total nitrogen concentration of syntheti
wastewater in three different NFT system
at an area loading rate of 10 cm/ti.
-------
2C -
Influent.
13	~
iffluent
C	10	20
ARIA LOADING RATI, crn/d
Figure 7-lS- Total K.'eldahl nitrogen concentration
reductions in 9-3 m2 reed canary
grass units using synthetic wastewater.
-------
30
20
^ Influent
_ Intermediate
Points
10
O Effluent
C
12	2k
DISTANCE FROM INFLUENT, m
Figure T.17. Ammonia nitrogen concentrations of
synthetic sewage at various sampling
points in NFT systems. Curves A and
5 show 9.3 m2 systems at 1C.2 and
5.1 cm/d loadings, respectively, while
Curves C and D show 19.5 and 27 • 9 ni2
systems, respectively, both at loadings
of 10.2 c~/d.
lot
-------
• 5-1 cm/d loading
O10.2 cm/d leading
	I	I	
0	12	2k	36
DISTANCE FRCM INFLUENT, r.
Figure 7-l3. Total phosphorus concentrations of
synthetic wastewater ir. different
length systems. Curves A and B show
the effect cf increasing loading.
Curves C and D show effect of increasing
length on canary grass [C) ar.d multi-
species (D) systems.
lb
-------
cm/d leading
O 10.2 cm/d loading
& 20.3 cm/d loading
36
0
12
DISTANCE FROM OFLUEET, n
"igure T.19. Total phosphorus concentrations of
domestic sewage at different loading
rates to two systems. Curves A and 3
show a smaller removal at a higher
loading for 12 m systems , and Curves C
and D show the same for 36 ™ systems.
-------
removal) of the phosphorus were achieved at many of the loading rates. At
increasing loadings of 10 to 20 cm/day the change in phosphorus concentra-
tions decreased to only a little more than 1 mg/£.. Figure 7.20 compares the
ortho-phospate and total phosphorus concentrations of influent and effluent
sewage. There is a consistent difference of a little less than 1 mg/£
between total and ortho-phosphorus.
B.9 Indicator Organisms
Fecal coliform analysis was conducted on several samples for the domestic
sewage studies. These data show that approximately 90% of the fecal coli-
form was reduced in one 12-meter length unit. Additional information needs
to be developed in this area.
B.10.	Zinc and Cadmium
Changes in concentration of zinc in the synthetic wastewater were studied
briefly, whereas the removal efficiency of cadmium was studied throughout
the testing period. Figure 7.21 summarizes the few observations on zinc
removal that were made and indicates an efficient removal at loadings of 5
and 10 cm/day of wastewater. The influence of the loading rate and the
length of the unit on the cadmium concentration is shown in Figure 7.22.
The influent concentration varied from 0.1 to a little more than 0.3 mg/£
and was rapidly reduced within the first few meters of length in the nutri-
ent film to less than 0.06 mg/H in most cases. It is likely that the effi-
cient removal of cadmium is a function both of the anaerobic solids in the
root zone and the plant uptake of cadmium in the initial section. The up-
take of heavy metals in the influent part of the nutrient film system would
have to be examined carefully in terms of ultimate disposal or use of the
plant products.
C.	PROCESS SENSITIVITY AND POLLUTANT REMOVAL MECHANISM DEFINITION
The data presented in the previous section indicates that the NFT is capable
of producing secondary quality or better effluent from primary settled sew-
age and a soluble synthetic wastewater. This information, however, does not
indicate the reasons or the mechanisms responsible for controlling the pol-
lutants or the limitations in the process. This section is intended to sum-
marize the data further and present information on small-scale experiments
designed to clarify several pollutant removal mechanisms.
C.l. Hydraulic Retention Time Effects
Perhaps the most critical parameter in controlling pollutant removal in any
reaction scheme is the length of time that the pollutant is exposed to the
removal mechanism. In the NFT system the hydraulic retention time indicates
the duration that the pollutant can be acted upon both by the root system as
well as by the entrapped microbial mass. Increased hydraulic retention in
the unit can also be an indication of increased depth of liquids, and this
will in turn affect the diffusions of oxygen pollutants to the bacteria and
the roots. The ability to predict the hydraulic retention time in any given
system in which the substrate removal rate is known would allow a unit to be
169
-------
INFLUENT TC NFT SYSTEM
'V
EFFLUENT FROM r.FT SYSTEM
TIME, days
Figure 7-20.
Influent ar.d effluent concentrations
of phosphorus in domestic sewage in
the Hanover NFT system, which began
operation on February lo , 1981.
G = total phosphorus
¦+ = crtho phosphorus
-------
.0
Influent
z'
. o
+ Effluent
. 2
.3
. 4
o.c
6o
3o
100
40
2C
0
TIME, days
Figure J.21. Influent and effluent zinc concen-
trations of synthetic sewage in a
reed canary grass pilot scale unit
First day of analysis was July 25,
1980.
-------
• 5.1 cm/d loading
q 10.2 cm/d leading
^ 20.3 crr./d loading
DISTAi-I
FROM EFFLUENT, m
figure 7-22.
Cadmium concentrations of synthetic
wastevater in different length systems
under several leading conditions.
Curves A and B represent 9-3 m2 units,
and Curves C and D represent lS.6 m2
units. Curve E represents a 27-0
unit.
rr.
-------
designed based on the required hydraulic retention time. Originally, It was
thought that increased microbial mass and root mass should increase the
hydraulic retention time. This increase in retention time would be a
reflection of the advantage of the nutrient film system over other biolog-
ical contacting systems.
The information shown in Figure 7.23 relates the hydraulic retention time to
the hydraulic loading rate in a 36-meter long unit and was obtained from
tracer testing with NaCl. Hydraulic retention times at loading rates of 10
cm per day in these units were 100 minutes. Although this should be suffi-
cient time for an organic carbon interaction and suspended solids removal,
it is a limited time span for nutrient interactions. This short hydraulic
retention time suggests that for specific pollutant removal, such as sus-
pended solids, operation of the unit in a manner that would increase the
hydraulic retention time would achieve better efficiency of pollutant remo-
val than was achieved by the semi-continuous operation tested. For example,
a decrease in the slope of the unit would result in increased hydraulic
retention time. Another method of changing the hydraulic retention time
would be to use an intermittently loaded and unloaded unit as if operating a
multiple batch operation. Several of these alternatives were tested in
short-term experiments with sewage at the Cayuga Heights, New York, treat-
ment facility and are discussed elsewhere.
The effect of maturation of the NFT system on the hydraulic retention time
in the system is shown in Figure 7.24. This indicates that the hydraulic
retention time may double as the root mass and the suspended solids in-
crease. Although this is valid, it has a loading rate limitation, as will
be shown In short-term studies. Application of high loading rates on mature
systems actually results in a shorter retention time, most likely because of
a short-circuiting that occurs after the suspended solids are entrapped in
complex root mass. Additional work will be needed in the area of hydraulic
retention time to define the influence of root mass and solids accumulation
on this Important parameter.
C.2. Loading Rate Effects
There are four loading rate parameters that need to be considered in defin-
ing this process. First is the hydraulic, or area, loading rate, which is
the equivalent depth of wastewater applied to the surface area of the system
over a day's time (measured as centimeters per day). Second are mass load-
ing rates of nutrients or pollutants in terms of mass of constituent added
to the reactors per unit area of the system (measured as kilograms per
square meter per day). Third is the weir loading rate, or the volume of
wastewater added to the system divided by the width or cross-sectional area
(measured as liters per meter of width per day). Fourth is the overflow
rate which is similar to upflow velocities that occur in a clarifier. (The
weir loading in terms of cubic meter per meter width of the unit results in
the average liquid velocity that would occur in a clarifier where the sur-
face area is the area of the NFT unit).
If empirical relationships could be developed between treatment performance
and loading rates, it would provide a highly simplified method of sizing NFT
173
-------
Uoc
s 300
200
C
3 ICO


• Total HRT

i
>





X Intermediate Sections




R = canary grass




C = cucumber




? = phragmites

R


B = bulrush/cattail

C





(

1



R
R (
>
P

D —




r -
"p ¦



3
D.
3



1

10
a-J
40
AREA LOADING RATE, cm/a
Figure 7.23- Hydraulic retention times of a 36 ra
ITFT system using synthetic wastewater
17-
-------
o
a
e
o
i—i
j
<
cc
c
>-
250
:0C
150
100
50


• To.al KRT

1
1


X Intermediate


Sections
(
~
^ R = canary grass


C = cucumber


P = phragir.it es

R




-

P

P

3-10-31
3-19-31
Figure J.2k. Hydraulic retention ^ime of the
3o m system using domestic waste-
water loaded at 10.2 cm/a.
lv5
-------
systems. The hydraulic retention time masks the effects of many parameters
such as pollutant concentration; however, if there is a loading rate rela-
tionship between the hydraulic addition and the effluent quality, it
provides the simplest method of sizing the system. It is more likely that
the mass loading rates will be easier to manipulate in empirical relations
since the pollutant removal mechanismswill be more closely related to the
amount of the pollutant added per system area per unit time. Other
variables such as suspended solids, may be more easily explained by weir
loading rates than mass loading rates since they are removed by the physical
process of sedimentation. The weir loading rate is directly related to the
hydraulic velocities in the system. Typical results achieved with the
steady-state conditions with the synthetic and domestic sewage systems are
presented in the following sections.
C.3. Loading Rate Relationships with Synthetic Wastewater
The ranges of pollutant mass loading rates, steady state mass removal rates
and removal efficiencies for pilot scale system tests with synthetic sewage
are summarized in Table 7.2. Hydraulic loading rates varied from 5.1 to
40.6 cm/d over the testing period, with most rates around 10 cm/d (see Table
6.12). Detailed tables showing specific loading rate data are presented
later (Table 7.22).
TABLE 7.2. RANGE OF POLLUTANT LOADING RATES TESTED WITH SYNTHETIC SEWAGE
IN PILOT NFT UNITS. TARGET HYDRAULIC LOADING RATES VARIED
FROM 5.1 to 40.6 cm/d.
Parameter
Range of Measured
Range of Observed
Range of Pollutant

Mass Loading Rate
Steady State
Removal Efficiency

kg/ha-d
Removal Rate
% of Added


kg/ha-d

COD
133-972
46-414
32-91
Soluble COD
101-903
87-461
51-88
N
13-141
5- 20
6-57
P
6- 50
0- 4
1-52
Cd
0.020-0.509
0-0.285
0-91
Chemical oxygen demand removal efficiency showed a small effect of loading
rate, but COD treatment was also affected by other factors as well. Figure
7.25 shows the relation between treatment efficiency and mass loading rate,
and it indicates that a wide range of efficiencies occurred at some rela-
tively low loading rates. Hydraulic retention time appeared important in
characterizing COD removal, and HRT relationships will be presented later.
In addition, temperature and radiation appeared important in COD removal.
Removal rates compared to^loading rates are shown in Figure 7.26, which also
shows the small effect (r ¦ .36) of loading rate.
Since the synthetic sewage was composed of soluble rather than particulate
or colloidal material, little difference was expected between total and sol-
uble COD. This was generally the case, as Figure 7.27, which describes mass
176
-------
100
Go
p
w 60
M
O
M
E*h
h,
w
Uo
" 1 c>
ft
PC
20
~
o
A
A
A
200
© ~
A
® 9.3 m2 systems
0 18.6 m2 systems
£ 27.9 in2 systems
O
> o
J-
X
uoo	600
'L'OTAl, COD MASS I.0ADTN0 KATR, kg/ha-d
800
1000
l-'itfure '(.25. Relationship between total COD removai efficiency and total COD mat-
rate for conditions Un-ited with synthetic sewage.
loading
-------
18.6 m2 system:
«
o
o
27.9
*+00
0
6oo
800
1000
TOTAL COD MASS LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure '(.26. Relationship between total COD may;.; loading rate and total COD mass removal
in the NJ'T' systems treating domestic sewage.
-------
Hoc;
c)
Synthetic Sewage
10.6 m2 system;
600
Uoo
800
1000
0
SOLUBLE COD MASS LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
figure T-?T. Relationship between soluble COD mass loading rate and soluble COD mass removal
in the Nl'T systems treating synthetic sewage.
-------
removals of soluble COD, closely parallels removals shown in Figure 7.26.
Total COD was slightly higher than soluble COD in the effluent, indicating
that some solids generation had occurred in the systems.
Total nitrogen showed an inverse relationship with nitrogen loading (r =
.24). Figure 7.28 shows removal efficiency of N as a function of N loading
for three different size systems. Soluble nitrogen showed the same trend,
with a higher correlation (r^ 3 .56) as shown in Figure 7.29. Further
analysis of N will be presented in Section 7.E.
Phosphorus efficiency was scattered in general, but followed a rough inverse
relationship also. Figure 7.30 shows total phosphorus removal as a function
of P loading rate (r2 = .30). Similarly, Figure 7.31 shows this relation-
ship for soluble P (r2 = .16). Other factors such as oxidation reduction
potential are important for P control and will be discussed later.
C.4. Primary Settled Domestic Sewage Loading Rates Effects
The range of mass loading rates, mass removal rates, and process efficien-
cies examined with sewage in the 4 to 20 cm/day loaded units are summarized
in Table 7.3. Maximum treatment efficiencies for BOD and suspended solids
exceeded 90% whereas the maximum removal of nutrients was always less than
30%. The temperature, time of year, irradiation and sewage concentration
values are significant factors in the efficiency of the process. Figure
7.32 shows the relationship between BOD treatment efficiency and loading
rate for all of the steady conditions examined in this study. This figure
indicates that there appears to be a good relationship between removal
efficiencies and loading rate. The observed BOD removal rates in relation
to the loading rate are shown in Figure 7.33. As the figure indicates, the
NFT process is quite efficient at loading rates of up to 200 kilograms per
hectare per day. Such a relationship does not follow as closely for the TOC
although there are limited data as shown in Figures 7.34 and 7.35.
Similar loading rate relationships for total and volatile suspended solids
are shown in Figures 7.36 and 7.37. High treatment efficiencies of
suspended solids were achieved at loading rates exceeding 200 kilograms per
hectare per day.
The loading rate-removal efficiency relationships of nitrogen and phosphorus
are more scattered (see Figures 7.28, 7.38 and 7.39). Although there
appears to be a relationship, it will be necessary to consider plant uptake
and other mechanisms before NFT nutrient removal can be defined.
All of the data for sewage temperature were examined to determine whether it
was a significant variable with the sewage system. The operation of the
units in the winter climate in western New Hampshire gave us an opportunity
to examine the temperature and light limitations on the NFT process. The
following figures show the effect of influent sewage temperature on BOD and
total organic carbon (Fig. 7.40), suspended solids (Fig. 7.41), and nitrogen
and phosphorus (Fig. 7.42). These data indicate that there is no influence
of temperature on these pollutant removal mechanisms, possibly because only
a small range of temperatures was experienced. Although the influent
180
-------


~













O
~
9.3
18.6
m2
m2
systems
systems


A



A
27-9
rn2
systems
—
0








-
O A
O
A

O





—


A





1

1
1
1

1

1

1
0	20	ho	60	Bo	TOO	120	lhO
TO'J'AL N MASS LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure
Relationship beLween total nitrogen removal efficiency
and total nitrogen mass loading rate for conditions
tested with synthetic sewage.
-------









A







~


©
9.3
in2
systems




~
18.6
m2
systems




a
27.9
m^
systems

0







A







G
O






&






-

A









1

1
A

• »
1
1

0	20	1|(>	60	80	100	120	lUO
SOI .IJHT.E N MASS LOADING RA'l'E, kg/ha-d
figure 7-?9- Relationship between soluble nitrogen removal
efficiency and soluble nitrogen mass loading
rate for conditions tested with synthetic sewage
-------




0
9.3
m2
3 y S "0-23LS
—
0


~
18.6
n2
systsns
-



A
27.9
m2
SjSZ 31S
-


A©




—
o
o
o
00
A
1


~
0	1C	20	SO-
TOTAL P MASS LAODING RATZ, kg/ha-d
Figure 7-30. Relationship between total phcsp.iorus
removal efficiency and total phosphorus
mass loading rate for conditions tested
with synthetic sewage.
lo3
-------

O 9-3 m2 systems

O
30
_ ~ 18.6 m2 systems

A 27-9 m2 systems
^ kr,
—


o

2

bl



o

£ 30
O
w

j
<
~
>

o

1 20

10
AO

0 A 0 o

A 0

1 A 1
o	10	20	30
SOLUBLE ? MASS LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure 7.31. Relationship between soluble phosphorus
removal efficiency and soluble phosphorus
mass loading rate-for conditions tested
with synthetic sewage.
13^
-------
ICO
80
~
~ Q
60
O
~
uo
20
100
200
;00
BOD LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure J.32.
Relationship tetveen BOD removal efficiency
ar.d BCD mass loading rate for conditions
tested with domestic sevase.
155
-------
200


1^1
100	200
BOD LOADING RATE, kg/ha-
3C0
Figure 7.33. Relationship between BOD mass loading
rate and E0D mass removal in the NFT
systems treating domestic sewage.
186
-------
130
o
w
M
o
b-
fc:
2
E-
jADII'IG RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure 7.3^.
Relationship between TOG re.-noval efficiency
ar.c. TOC xass loading rate for conditions
tested v^i-h domestic sewage.
157
-------
r}
l
t3
LOO
75
<
o 50
co
25
igurs
¦ 35 •
TOC LC
100
)ING RATI, kg/ha-d
Relationship between TCC mass loading rate
and TOC mass removal in the NFT systems
^rea'cing domestic sewage.
133
-------
200

^ 150
1—1
M
o
Q
2
.0
IOC
SUSPENDED SOLIDS LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure Too. Relationship between suspended solids mass
loading rate ar.d suspended solids mass
removal in the N7T systems treating domestic
sewage.
1S9
-------
¦C 2C0
i
c>
<
>
o
s
J
I—I
<
>
230
13C
150
0
VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS LOADING RATE, kg/ha-d
Figure 7.37. Relationship between volatile suspended
solids ir.&ss leading rate and volatile
suspended solids mass removal in the
I'FT systems treating domestic sevage.
190
-------
I6T
o
2
0 - c
_i
3 (I
h-^
Cl Cf
X
H- K
o
rr a

h. a
E
o _




h—
H-
.-~v.
C+ r
0) £
§
'J". 0
1—1
^ OS
2
a rD
a
£j 3


a)
?; =
>
t-«- p:
-3
c+ C~
re
IT

Qj
X
0 O

5 P

O 0.
rr
U H-
P

i
—• jw

NITROGEN REMOVAL RATE
Xg/ha-d
o	o
	1	
rO
O
O
o
O
O
C\
o
—3
o
-------
o
©
	I	I	I	I	I	I	
o	?	i+6	8	.10	12	i'i
PHOSPHORUS LOADING RATH, kg/ha-d
Figure Y• 39• Reiat.i on:;h L p between phosphorus mass loading rate and phosphorus mass
removal 1'or conditions tested with domestic: sewage.
-------
100
>H
o
s
a
CO
60
S3 i
<
a
4U
2C
~
O
o
~
o
0
Q
~ BOD
O TOC
_l	
10
:t?L'Jznt
o
12	^4
iMPZRATUKI, °C
16
"igure 7.40. Effect of temperature on the treatment
efficiency of E0D and TOO in N7T systems
using domestic sewage.
193
-------
IOC
INFLUENT T3-TERATURE,
igure 7-^1.
Effect of ^enroerature on the treatment
efficiency of total and volatile suspended
solids in NFT systems using domestic
sewage.
19k
-------
B
influent
12	1U
TEMPERATURE,
Figure 7.^2.
Effect of temperature cn the treatment
efficier.cy cf nitrogen and phosphorus
in N7T systems using domestic sewage.
195
-------
TABLE 7.3. RANGE OF POLLUTANT LOADING RATES TESTED WITH DOMESTIC SETTLED
SEWAGE IN PILOT NFT UNITS. TARGET HYDRAULIC LOADING RATES
VARIED FROM 5.1 to 20.3 cm/d IN PILOT UNITS, WITH INTERMEDIATE
LOADING RATES OF GREATER THAN 200 cm/d. ONLY THE TOTAL UNIT
RESULTS ARE SHOWN HERE.
Parameter
Range of Measured
Range of Observed
Range of Pollutant

Mass Loading Rate
Steady State
Removal Efficiency

kg/ha-d
Removal Rate
% of Added


kg/ha-d

BOD
58-272
44-166
61-91
TOC
42-132
26- 97
51-73
COD*
133-556
99-247
44-74
SS
20-206
17-164
59-94
N
13- 68
2.8-12.7
6-30
P
2.97-13.0
0.38-1.77
5-32
~Limited amount of data
temperature ranged to less than 7°C, the collection of solar energy in the
plastic greenhouse raised the sewage temperature to 14 to 15°C for a
significant portion of the day in all cases. Thus the temperature
differentials between summer operation and winter operation were usually
less than 10°C and often only 5° or 6°C. This effect was apparent on a cold
day. When the outside air temperature was minus 20°C, the average influent
sewage temperature to the greenhouse was 7°C; and the effluent sewage
temperature was often around 22°C.
C.5. Plant Environmental Factors
A number of factors were anticipated to influence plants in such a way that
it would make them of limited value for wastewater treatment in the NFT.
Dissolved oxygen concentrations, temperature, and light intensities all have
the capability of controlling plant health and growth rate. The dissolved
oxygen concentrations in units heavily loaded with BOD were low. Reed
canary grass grew poorly, and patches of it died when area loading rates
were significantly greater than 20 cm per day. It appeared that this load-
ing rate would eventually kill all the reed canary grass. Figures 7.43 and
7.44 show the differences between a healthy stand of reed canary grass and
the condition of reed canary grass after a long period of application at
loading rates of 20 cm per day with synthetic wastewater. Similar observa-
tions were made during domestic sewage applications. In both domestic and
synthetic sweage, when the loading rates were decreased or eliminated, the
grass recovered rapidly. In one series of experiments the reed canary grass
was allowed to turn completely brown. Subsequent additions of tap water
enabled the reed canary grass to recover over a period of several weeks.
After this period of time the grass appeared to be normal. Thus the influ-
ence of overloading has the capability to damage the grass, but it is pos-
sible for it to recover when loading rates are relaxed.
196
-------
Figure 7-^3. Healthy canary grass in Unit 3, Bracehouse.
»
Figure 7-^i+. Brown canary grass in Unit 3, Bracehouse.
197
-------
Napier grass was found to be particularly sensitive to low dissolved oxygen
levels. In one series of experiments the liquid flow was eliminated and the
napler grass was allowed to stand for about 24 hours in a non-aerated water
with the roots submerged in 20 cm of water. The apparent lack of oxygen to
the root system caused death of the napier grass. Subsequent tests where
the napier grass was Inundated with 15 cm or more of water for shorter peri-
ods did not have this effect.' Plants known to be capable of surviving an
anaerobic root zone such as cattails, bulrushes and sedges were affected
little by high organic loading rates and low D.O. when roots were completely
inundated by water and solids.
Additional information on factors affecting plants is presented in Section
7.F on plant culturlng.
C.5.a. Temperature—
The temperature of the wastewater, as indicated earlier, had a relatively
minor effect within the range tested. However, the combination of season,
light intensity and temperature did have a significant impact on one spe-
cies, phragmltes. Phragmltes has the characteristic of dying back when the
photoperlod is sufficiently shortened. During several months of the winter,
the NFT sections of phragmltes appeared to be dead; however, Inspection of
the roots showed that they were living. As soon as the daylight period
increased past the threshold for growth, the phragmltes rapidly developed
new shoots and started to grow again. The influence of this kind of plant
on a waste treatment system would need to be carefully evaluated. The BOD
and suspended solids removal might continue during the cold period as long
as the roots survived.
C.6. Root Mass Influence
The roots on many of the species tested developed into large masses on the
impermeable surfaces of the NFT units. Root depths of greater than 5 cm
with phragmltes and reed canary grass were common after several months of
growth. More dense and deeper roots were achieved with the napier grass,
where 10 cm or deeper mats were observed. Although solids were entrapped in
the root mass, the effect of root growth on entrapment of solids was not as
significant as had been anticipated. In many cases the flocculated solids
in the sewage system appeared to be "light and fluffy" and often floated to
the top of the roots rather than being entrapped within them. Due to the
destructive nature of sampling to obtain root mass determinations, little
data In this area were developed. However, a non-destructive technique to
measure entrapped solids was developed and used throughout much of the study
with the synthetic wastewater and the domestic sewage studies. Examples of
the accumulation of total and volatile solids are shown in Table 7.4. Typi-
cal entrapped mass solids equalled one thousand grams per square meter of
reactor. It is Interesting to note that at a liquid standing depth of 5 cm
this results in a concentration of entrapped mass of approximately 20 grams
per liter. Even if the liquid depth were 10 cm this would be equivalent to
10 grams per liter of entrapped solids. This high concentration of solids
indicates the potential that the system has to manipulate the pollutants if
it were possible to manage these entrapped solids efficiently.
198
-------
TABLE 7.4.
TOTAL AND VOLATILE ACCUMULATIONS OF MATERIAL IN THE ROOTS OF
PLANTS TESTED IN 27.9 m PILOT UNITS USING SYNTHETIC AND
DOMESTIC WASTEWATER. VALUES ARE g/m . VOLATILE VALUES ARE
PARENTHESIZED.
Sewage Type Species
Distance From
Influent End
of Unit
m
Area Loading Rate, cm/d
10.2
20.3
40.6
Synthetic
Cattail/
3
1113(156)
921(359)
510(372)

Bulrush
6
	
909(409)
642(411)


11
101(101)
424(305)
448(354)

Phragmltes
3
17(8)
264(203)
670(529)


6

150(78)
404(314)


11
199(76)
404(267)
624(487)

Canary
3
1057(772)
899(611)
2119(1526)

Grass
6
	
568(409)
528(370)


11
956(717)
687(467)
323(174)



Area Loading Rate,
cm/d



6.9
10.2
20.3
Domestic
Cattail/
3
		
745(477)
766(230)

Bulrush
6
824(313)
1044(73)
275(102)


11
	
562(450)
774(294)

Phragmltes
3
	
507(451)
267(174)


6
86(52)
1191(107)
90(50)


11
	
559(492)
211(137)

Canary
3
	
3705(3520)
982(638)

Grass
6
1008(625)
6423(385)
622(354)


11
	
4955(297)
998(599)
Table 7.5 converts the data for entrapped solids to an accumulation rate for
solids for the various applications and various loading rates tested with
the pilot units. There appears to be little accumulation with increased
loading rates as shown by the variability of the data. Typical accumulation
rates of 20 to 30 grains per m /day were observed in the lower loading rates.
C.7. Bench Scale Simulation
An attempt was made to develop a short term test that would simulate the NFT
and enable the kinetics of pollutant removal to be more carefully defined
with various plant species. In effect, an equivalent to the BOD bottle test
was sought to measure the pollutant removal capabilities of the NFT system.
Short term, small unit studies using two meter long by 10 cm wide units were
199
-------
TABLE 7.5. TOTAL AND VOLATILE ENTRAPPED SOLIDS IN THE ROOT ZONE OF
PLANTS TESTED IN 27.9 m2 PILOT UNITS USING SYNTHETIC AND
DOMESTIC WASTEWATER. VALUES ARE g/m2-d. VOLATILE VALUES
ARE IN PARENTHESES.
Sewage Type
Species
Distance From
Influent End
of Unit
m
Area Loading Rate,
10.2 20.3
cm/d
40.6
Synthetic
Cattail/
3
74(10)
35(14)
31(19)

Bulrush
10.7
7(3)
16(12)
22(18)

Phragmites
3
	
11(8)
34(26)


10.7
12(5)
16(11)
31(24)

Canary
3
53(39)
43(29)
106(76)

Grass
10.7
48(36)
33(22)
16(9)



Area Loading Rate,
cm/d



6.9
10.2
20.3
Domestic
Cattail/
3
	
47(30)
18(5)

Bulrush
6.1
15(6)
104(7)
11(4)


10.7
	
35(28)
18(7)

Phragmites
3
	
32(28)
7(4)


6.1
2(1)
119(11)
4(2)


10.7
	
35(31)
5(3)

Canary
3
———
154(147)
27(17)

Grass
6.1
19(12)
584(35)
22(13)


10.7

206(12)
27(16)
developed (as described in the Material and Methods section [Chapter VI,
Section A.3.6]) under the bench scale laboratory model of tests. Eight
experiments were conducted from January to July, 1981 with synthetic waste
water and five experiments were conducted with the domestic sewage in New
Hampshire. The synthetic wastewater was tested with phragmites, reed canary
grass, bulrush, soft rush, bristly sedge, and several other species; and a
control with no plants was run with all bench scale tests. The control
consisted of an empty unit which was exposed to sunlight. In most of the
experiments the wastewater was recycled continuously, and evapotransplratlon
was compensated for with distilled water. In several instances with both
sewage and the synthetic wastewater the units were tested on a one-pass, or
once-through basis to obtain removal rate information that would be similar
to the one pass systems tested at the pilot scale. These were referred to
as the varied flow experiments where a range of hydraulic rates were tested
simultaneously.
200
-------
The relationship between the hydraulic application rate and the resulting
hydraulic retention time in the varied flow experiments as measured by
tracer studies are shown in Figure 7.45. Although these reactors were
smaller, the hydraulic retention times were similar to the larger units. A
comparison of the hydraulic volume of each unit to the flow rate is shown in
Figure 7.46 indicating the dependence of the equivalent depth of liquid in
the systems at increasing flow rates. The water quality data from the units
were quite erratic since mature canary grass was taken from the operating
units tested. In these small units the entrapped mass was disturbed, and
suspended solids data were of limited value. The COD removal rates in
the first varied flow test ranged from 15 grams per m /day up to a maximum
of 104 grams per m2/day at an equivalent area loading of 147 cm per day with
a hydraulic retention time of 58 minutes as measured at the beginning of the
experiment. This changed to 28.9 minutes after six days of use. In most
cases the total suspended solids concentration in synthetic wastewater
increased in the effluent thereby indicating production of solids in these
units.
The influent phosphorus concentration varied from 15 to 21 mg/A, and the
resulting uptake was not sufficiently accurate to define removal kinetics
with a one pass small scale system. The pH was 7.5 throughout most of the
runs in the first varied flow experiment. A relationship similar to phos-
phorus was also observed with the influence of nitrogen in the single pass
systems. A comparison of the total COD removals achieved is given in Figure
7.47 comparing the influent COD at between 200 and 360 mgfl to the effluent
achieved over a period of days with reed canary grass at a loading rate of
20 cm/day. This information was developed in the first varied flow experi-
ment in June, 1981, and similar information is comparable in the second
synthetic wastewater experiment conducted in July, 1981.
The average BOD concentrations are shown for synthetic wastewater in Figure
7.48, which compares the control unit to the effluent achieved at loading
rates of 18, 38 and 74 cm per day. The decreasing efficiency of the process
is apparent in this comparison.
C.8. Experiments with recirculating Bench Scale Models
Recirculating batch experiments were conducted with all pollutant parameters
in several species to try to obtain an estimate of the removal kinetics and
the removal efficiencies that could be obtained after extended exposure in
the system. Although a great deal of- data was obtained with these experi-
ments there are many questions that remain in relation to the validity of
the small scale tests. Example information comparing several variables from
these experiments are included in the following section.
Evapotransplratlon data from the bench scale experiments showed the signifi-
cant influence of plant-water uptake over the control. Only the recirculat-
ing water was examined. Figure 7.49 compares a control in the winter where
the greenhouse temperature was approximately 15°C to the summer control and
the evapotransplratlon measured with napier grass in summer. It is surpris-
ing to note a large Increase in evapotransplratlon over the controls, since
literature values indicate that the water evaporation from water surfaces is
201
-------
lUo
IOC
li
3

50
^3
J
<
cc
G
>-
X
60
UO
d.'j
19
AREA LOADING RATE, ern/d
37	7^
1^9
T
I	I
• Experiment Start-up (7-23-Sl)
O Experiment 2nd (U-31-Sl;
1
1
20 40	80	160
HYDRAULIC LOADII'IG P.ATZ, ml/min.
lSc
20C
Figure 7.4?. Hydraulic retention times in the tench scale
varied flow experiment using synthetic waste-
water .
202
-------
AREA LOADING RATE, cm/d
HYDRAULIC LOADING PA.
Figure 7-^6. Hydraulic volume contained in bench sca_e
varied flow units ax different loading rates
of domestic sewage.
20 3
-------
~ _n:^uent
+ affluent
TutE, aavs
Figure
i?otal and soluble
concentrations
: j ¦
vastevater to a reed canary grass
"bench scale ur.it loaded at 20 cr./d.
First day of analysis vas -June 12, 19cl.
20U
-------
2l;0
22';
200
1 Y!>
150
12^
100
75
50
r- 25
w
2 0
x
o
o 200
H
@ 17',
CJ
o lr,0
M
12t)
100 Ifr
Control
38 ern/d
lb
50
J 8 cm/(1
T'l cra/d
_L
_L
J-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3 't ¦? 6 7
DAY OK EXPERIMENT
9 10 0
3 'i 5 6 7
DAY OK EXPERIMENT
10
Figure T.'iB.
Effluent biochemical oxygon demand concentrations of different units in the varied
flow experiment, which be^aii July 20, 1981.
-------
unmer, Napier Grass
Summer, Control
2
C
i—I
<£
o
>
-O.
Winter
3
0
12
20
TII-E, days
Figure 7-L9- Comparison of evapotranspiration
from bench scale units. A and B
shov the effect of a hign transpiring
plant (napier grass); B and G show
little effect from season in empty
ur.its.
-------
approximately the same as from healthy plant evapotranspiratlon. This is
perhaps an influence of the large increase in water surface area provided by
the extensive capillary action in the nutrient film root system. Evapo-
transpiration rates for the small scale experiments ranged from 1.2£/m2 for
lake sedge in February to 17.4&/m -d for cattails in April.
Uptake of phosphorus by napier grass at the lower temperature and growth
conditions shown in Figure 7.50 are compared to the higher uptakes in warmer
temperatures in Figure 7.51. Background phosphorus control concentrations
ranged from 12 to 15 mg/JI. Six mg/l were taken up by the napier grass over
a period of eight days to a solution level of about 6 mg/l in cold tempera-
tures. Higher uptake took place in warmer temperatures and phosphorus con-
centrations decreased in the napier grass unit to close to zero in a smaller
period of time under the higher growth rate conditions. It should be noted
that the uptake in the control may have been a result of the attached micro-
algae growing in the control unit.
The results for the nitrogen uptake experiments were less clear perhaps due
to nitrogen loss through other mechanisms. In several of the experiments
the pH approached 8, thus encouraging the loss of nitrogen through volatili-
zation of ammonia. Example of nitrogen uptake is shown in the nitrogen loss
in the control. This is contrasted to the nitrogen uptake in phragmites in
January, 1981.
In some cases the nitrogen uptake in these tests indicated a rapid uptake
upon initial contact with the growing plant system. Figure 7.52 compares
the control for experiments conducted in March of 1981, with initial nitro-
gen concentration of approximately 50 mg/l, and immediate uptakes (within
the first 24 hours) of 20 to 25 mg/l as shown for phragmites, bulrushes and
cattails. It would appear in many cases when the plants were healthy the
nutrient concentrations could be reduced to values approaching zero. The
long-term impact on plants of intermittently increasing the strength of the
solution (or wastewater), however, is not known. Growth characteristics
under intermittent loadings at these low nutrient concentrations are also
unknown.
In these experiments cadmium was also difficult to follow because the remo-
val rates were rapid, with effluents of approximately 0.02 resulting from an
influent concentration of 0.2 to 0.3 mg/£. The results, however, were
highly variable, and the microalgal film that grew in the controls was also
effective in removing the cadmium from some of these experiments.
C.9. Domestic Sewage, Bench Scale Test
Experiments with domestic sewage, similar to those recorded above, were con-
ducted in bench scale units in the Hanover, New Hampshire, greenhouse. A
varied flow experiment with applications ranging from 20 to 187 cm/day
resulted in the removal rates shown in Figure 7.53. This indicates that
there appears to be an optimum area loading rate for both BOD and total
suspended solids which occurs above 50 cm/day. The interpretation of this
data indicates that the removal rate is substrate limited up to the 100
cm/day loading. Above a certain maximum application rate the pollutant
207
-------
+ Control
X Napier Grass
16
DAY OF EXPERIMENT
Fi gur e 7 o 0.
Effluent phosphorus concentrations from
the control and napier grass units in an
early bench scale experiment using a
recirculating solution. The experiment
began on February 27, 1981 •
20
X Napier Grass
CT
o
6
10
u
0
o
DAY OF EXPERIMENT
Figure 7-51. Effluent phosphorus concentrations from
the control and napier grass 'units in
a later bench scale experiment using
a recirculating solution. The experiment
began on April 8, 1931.
208
-------
Bulrush
Control
Phragmite
Cattail
DAY OK EXPERIMENT
Figure	Effluent total nitrogen concentrations of synthetic sewage from bench scale units
containing .several plant species. This series of experiments began March "18, I98I.
-------
• BOD
ICO	150
AREA LOADING RATE, cm/d
20C
Figure 7-53.
Relationship between area loading
rate and removal of solids and
BOD in bench scale NFT systems
using synthetic sevrage.
21C
-------
(organic matter or the suspended solids) moves through the system so	rapidly
that there is little potential for the removal mechanisms to operate	effic-
iently. The generation of more data in small scale experiments such	as this
would be useful to support this optimization of SS and BOD removals.
A comparison of BOD concentrations in the control unit and those of applica-
tion rates of 20, 148, 187 cm/day is illustrated in Figure 7.54. This shows
that rapid, efficient BOD removal is difficult to achieve at high loading
rates.
Due to the rapid growth of the microalgae film in the sewage substrate, par-
ticularly in the control unit, the results achieved with the small-scale
experiments were of limited value. An example of the effluent BOD concen-
tration in the control as compared to those achieved in several other spe-
cies units is shown in Figure 7.55. Over 200 mg/£ of BOD were removed in
less than 24 hours from the 7.5£ reservoirs, and the residual BOD of less
than 20 mgll was obtained in all units including the control after four days
or less.
C.10. Testing of Optimized Design
Examination of the data midway through the testing program clearly indicated
that the pollutants such as BOD and suspended solids were removed by mecha-
nisms much different than the nutrient removal mechanisms. Changing the
loading rates and methods of application was one obvious way of optimizing
the NFT treatment system. It was felt that if the wastewater could be added
rapidly, a quiescent laminar condition would be created, and then unloading
could be achieved with a slow laminar flow, suspended solids removal would
be maximized and BOD removal might be enhanced. Therefore, a new experimen-
tal setup was designed and tested on domestic sewage in a community nearby
Cornell University. This unit consisted of three separate species as des-
cribed in the Materials and Methods chapter.
The batch-wise addition-removal of domestic sewage (as described in the
Materials and Methods section) experiments modification used at the Cayuga
Heights sewage treatment plant were conducted between August, 1981 and Octo-
ber, 1981. These experiments were highly successful, albeit limited in
scope due to the time required to acclimate the systems and due to adverse
weather in early winter. Note that these were the only experiments where
raw unsettled sewage was used as the feed. Steady state condition
information for the two loading rates tested, 20 cm/d and 30 cm/d, are given
in Table 7.6. The treatment efficiencies for organics and suspended solids
were surprisingly good. Effluent suspended solids were always less than 29
mg/£, and often less than 15 mgfl at the higher loading rate. Total COD
reductions averaged nearly 80 percent.
The improvement in effluent quality between the 20 cm/d and 30 cm/d tests is
most likely related to system acclimation and microbial mass accumulations.
Samples for the latter loading condition were taken after the system had
matured for several weeks of operation at the higher loading rate.
Settleable solids in the effluent, measured in the Imhoff settling cone,
were consistently negligible compared to the suspended solids.
211
-------
2")0
225
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
225
200
17';
150
12';
100
75
50
25
0
Control
i'i8 cm/d
/
20 cm/d
J	L
J	L
_L
±
187 cm/d
-L
) 2 1+
1.0 1.2 lU 16 18 0 2 h
DAY OF FXPUKJMENT
10 12
lit 16 10
"igurc 7« • blfi' lucnt biochemical oxygen demand c one ent rat ions of units at different loading
rates in the varied flow experiment using domestic sewage. The experiment
started on June 22, 1981.
-------
r\>
M
LaJ
bfi
a
Q
i'1
Q
W
O
>h
X
O
$
u
M
£3
o
o
ni
150
IK
120
]0'?
90
75
60
U5
30
15
0
135
J.20
105
90
r>
60
30
Control
Bulrush
X
Canary Grass
-O	~
Phragmi tes
-L
J	L
0 1 2 3 ii 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 U 5 6 7 8 9
DAY OF EXPERIMENT
Figure 7.55. biochemical oxyf.eti demand concentrations over time in recirculating domestic sewage
units containing riif'l'erenl plant species.
-------
TABLE 7.6. SUMMARY OF OPTIMIZED OPERATION OF THE NFT AS A PRIMARY AND
SECONDARY COMBINED TREATMENT SYSTEM USING INTERMITTENTLY
LOADED AND UNLOADED PLANTS. EXPERIMENTS WERE CONDUCTED AT
THE CAYUGA HEIGHTS VILLAGE TREATMENT FACILITY.
Area	Parameter Number	Influent Quality	Effluent Quality
Loading	of		 	
Rate	Samples	Mean High Low Mean High Low
cm/day		 mg/* 	
20
Soluble COD
12
88
124
71
83
93
62

Total COD
12
283
358
168
116
148
93

Suspended Solids
4
125
226
68
43
105
15

Total Solids
1
680
680
680
590
590
590

Settleable Solids
4
7.8
14.2
2.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1

NH^N
6
29
32
27
7
13
<1

Organic-N
6
12
16
8
4
10
<1

TKN
6
41
48
35
11
15
5
30
Soluble COD
14
107
176
45
44
59
30

Total COD
12
317
542
193
72
92
33

Suspended Solids
9
139
299
71
15
29
5

Total Solids
5
610
690
570
540
570
500

Settleable Solids
7
4.0
12.0
0.7
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1

nh4~n
4
31
32
29
12
12
11

Organic N
2
9
11
6
5
5
5

TKN
2
40
43
35
17
17
16
*A11 units are mgfl except those for settleable solids, which are
ml/1000 ml.
Based on the limited data, typical results indicated complete removal of
settleable solids, total COD conversions of approximately 75-80%, soluble
COD conversions averaging around 60%, and suspended solids removals on the
order of 90%. Further testing of this optimized treatment sequence with raw
sewage is strongly recommended.
Total nitrogen removals of 75 percent at a 20 cm/d loading rate, and nearly
60 percent at 30 cm/d, could be significant if the results could be
duplicated in larger scale tests.
As noted earlier, questions remain as to the effect of pumping on the solids
in the system. Relatively little data collection was accomplished before
the experiment terminated. There was also significant scatter in individual
data points, so questions of reliability cannot be addressed based on this
work. To be a viable option, the system would also have to be tested at
loading rates higher than 30 cm/day to insure that area requirements could
be minimized.
2\h
-------
In reviewing the three purposes of this experiment, three results are appa-
rent. First, although testing was only accomplished at a moderate flow
rate, the system did perform well in solids capture and conversion of orga-
nic solids. Second, it was established that the plants tested could cope
well with the conditions imposed upon them. Napier grass performed unex-
pectedly well; bulrush flourished as expected under alternate flooding and
drainage; cattail maintained itself but did not grow as well as the other
plants, possibly due to fluctuating water level and reducing conditions.
The most significant observation in this area was the performance of the
napier grass, which promises excellent opportunities for taking advantage of
capabilities to filter solids and convert nutrients. Third, this system
appears to have potential as a pretreatment unit due to solids treatment
capability demonstrated in the study.
Taking the average suspended solids values from Table 7.5 and daily volume-
tric wastewater loading from Table 7.4, the conversion efficiency for sus-
pended solids is computed as 38.4 gm SS treated/m -day at 30 cm/day. This
compares favorably with 16.4 gm SS treated/m^-day at 20 cm/day, the highest
loading rate tested with sewage in New Hampshire. COD conversion and nitro-
gen uptake data also point to the possible refinement of this technique to
replace some conventional primary and secondary treatment processes, but
much more data are needed to confirm system reliability. Heavier loadings
must also be treated in order to achieve an optimized process design.
D. WATER BALANCE AND ENERGY TRANSFER
This section contains empirical data on water losses in an NFT system and a
theoretical analysis of the potential for losses and the possibility for
water recovery.
Evapotranspiration data from a pilot scale control unit at Cornell are sum-
marized in Table 7.7 for the pilot scale units for applications to reed
canary grass. Mean monthly evapotranspiration in the 9.3 m size pilot
units ranged from 2 to 6 £/m2/day and had maximum values approaching
125,000 i/ha/day. Table 7.8 compares the losses in a 9.3 m pilot unit con-
taining reed canary grass to those measured in the recirculation tests
(bench scale units) with synthetic wastewater. This information illustrates
the effects of the plant NFT system on ET as compared to an open water
control where the flow rates were exactly the same and also contrasts the
larger NFT units to the smaller units. Several interesting comparisons can
be made with this information. The smaller units appeared to have
significantly higher water losses than the larger pilot scale units. The
water losses from the control were often around one tenth of that lost from
the small scale unit with mature plant systems. The differences between the
large scale unit and the bench scale units may reflect the uninhibited
movement of air around the water surface and plants. The difference between
the control unit and the NFT unit is more difficult to explain. The
significant increase in ET from the NFT units with plants over a control
unit suggests that the increased surface area available for water
evaporation in the leaf surface can increase water losses. During the
warmer periods of the year, reed canary grass had losses approaching 150,000
i./ha-day, values that appear to be higher than those reported by others.
215
-------
TABLE 7.7. EVAPOTRANSPIRATION OF THE 9.3 m2 REED CANARY GRASS UNIT OF THE
CORNELL BRACEHOUSE. DATA WERE COLLECTED DURING THE TESTING OF
THE 27.9 m2 MDLTISPECIES SYSTEM IN THE SAME GREENHOUSE IN 1981.
Dates
From
To
Average
Evapotranspiration
A/ha-d
Standard
Deviation
1/ha-d
Number of
Observations
2-19
2-28
21500
9500
12
3-1
3-31
24700
9600
30
4-1
4-30
39100
23300
28
5-1
5-31
58100
26900
25
6-1
6-30
45900
21300
28
7-1
7-31
56900
22300
31
8-1
8-16
56100
26100
15
This trend was also observed for the domestic sewage data, as shown In
Table 7.9. Average losses of water from the sewage systems approached
100,000 &/ha-day, and the difference between the controls and the various
plants was also significant, ranging from double to ten times the control
amount. Losses in these small units, however, did not approach the high
values achieved with the Cornell test units.
Although this information appears to be encouraging in terms of recovery of
high quality water in the form of evapotranspiration, it should be kept in
mind that the ET losses represent huge energy conversions. For example, the
loss of 15,000 Ifha-day, if recovered, and requiring an energy investment,
would cost approximately $400/ha-day. Reasons for this are discussed in the
following energy balance and water balance sections.
A design project was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility of recovering
water and energy from ET. This section presents a short overview of the
quantities of water vapor which are lost from NFT plant systems. Two reco-
very systems which were designed for conditions in Ithaca, New York, are
evaluated; and the technical and economic feasibility of these two recovery
systems are discussed. The material is presented in more detail in another
report (Pompe, 1983).
D.l. ET Rates
Results of experiments measuring ET rates from the NFT wastewater treatment
systems were available only at the conclusion of the design project.
Therefore ET rates were predicted based on a model developed for greenhouse
conditions by Lake et al. (1966):
ETP =¦ 0.38 R* + 0.17(* - I.) - 0.17	(7.1)
n	ad
216
-------
TABLE 7.8. COMPARISON OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION BETWEEN A CANARY GRASS PILOT SCALE UNIT AND BENCH SCALE
UNITS CONTAINING DIFFERENT PLANT SPECIES AT CORNELL USING NUTRIENT SOLUTION OR SYNTHETIC
SEWAGE. ALL ET MEASUREMENTS ARE REPORTED AS A/ha~d. ALL EXPERIMENTS WERE IN 1981.
Pilot Unit ET		Bench Scale ET	
	Unit	
1	2	3	4	5	6
Average
	 Std. Dev. 	
N
Species
2-27
3-12
22500
11600
46500
48400
101000
102000
86500


4500
9000
12900
12300
31600
21300
26500


14
14
12
12
12
12
12



Control
Millet
Lake Sedge
Canary Grass
Soft Rush
Napier Grass
3-18
4-2
30100
19400
65200
49700
115000
69700
84500


13400
20000
24500
19400
51600
29700
20600


15
16
16
16
12
16
16



Control
Cucumber
Phragmites
Canary Grass
Bulrush
Cattail
4-8
4-23
38800
20600
87700
67100
142000
76100
174000


22600
14800
31600
42600
56100
63900
72300


16
11
12
12
12
15
12



Control
Millet
Rose
Canary Grass
Phragmites
Napier Grass
4-28
5-11
45900
45200
98100
111000
38700
36100
63200


24600
30300
32300
33500
36100
9000
30300


11
13
13
13
13
13
13



Control
Cucumber
Canary Grass
Bulrush
Cattail
Phragmites
5-14
5-21
55600
31000
43900
42600
50300
43900
42600


21200
19400
4500
23900
27100
18100
13500


6
6
Control*
6
6
6
6
6



120 MEQ/*
60 MEQ/A
30 MEQ/ft
15 MEQ/£
0 MEQ/t
^This experiment tested salt concentrations; unit 1 was empty, while units 2 through 6 contained canary
grass.
Dates
From To	Average
Std. Dev.
N
-------
TABLE 7.9. COMPARISON OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION BETWEEN A 27.9 m2 PILOT SCALE SYSTEM AND BENCH SCALE UNITS
CONTAINING DIFFERENT PLANT SPECIES USING DOMESTIC SEWAGE. ALL ET MEASUREMENTS ARE REPORTED
AS £/ha~d. ALL EXPERIMENTS WERE IN 1981.
Dates
From To
Pilot System ET


Bench Scale ET


Average
Std. Dev.
N



Unit


1
2
3
4
Average
Cf/i Hdh
5
6



N
Species


3-23 4-5
83500
14800
78700
98100
32300
30300
51600

127000
21300
61300
56800
15500
31600
36800

4
13
13
12
12
13
13


Control
Cucumber
Canary Grass
Phragmltes
Bulrush
Cattail
4-17 4-30
96800
29000
54200
84500
27700
66500
44500

49800
38700
32900
41900
20600
56100
40600

11
13
13
13
11
13
11


Control
Rose
Canary Grass
Phragmltes
Bulrush
Cattail
5-8 5-21
93200
7100
26500
54200
43900
49000
95400

34100
11600
19400
39400
36800
43200
73500

14
12
13
13
13
13
13


Control
Bulrush
Canary Grass
Phragmltes
Cattail
Napier Grass
5-22 6-4
107000
32300
60000
80000
34200
66500
71000

0
16100
24500
31600
16100
41900
22600

1
13
13
13
12
7
11


Control
Tomato
Canary Grass
Bulrush
Phragmltes
Cattail
-------
where ETP = potential evapotranspiration,1 mm H20/day
1	2
Rq = net solar radiation Inside the greenhouse, mm H20/day
I ™ saturation vapor pressure, mm Hg
&
I, « actual vapor pressure at the outside air at 0900 hr, mm Hg
a
The design of the recovery systems was based on potential ET rates. Actual
rates were assumed to be close to potential rates.
ETP rates are a function of solar radiation and were predicted for January
and July conditions to be 4,100 and 26,200 £/ha-d, respectively. Total
yearly ETP losses were computed through integration after assuming a sig-
moidal shape for the ET curve over the year (which matches the solar radi-
ation variation). They were calculated to be 5.6 x 10 4/ha-yr.
The actual ET rates which were measured in the NFT wastewater treatment
units fluctuated sharply from day to day. Average rates from the large
experimental systems ranged from 21,500 to 56,000 ifha-d for February and
July, respectively. The predicted ETP rates were lower than these values,
but were In the same order of magnitude. The effect of the higher actual ET
rates In the feasibility of the recovery systems is discussed in the later
sections.
D.2. ET Recovery Systems
Various approaches can be used to remove water vapor from air. Exposure of
the air to a surface which has a temperature lower than the dewpoint temper-
ature of the air is one possibility (ASHRAE, 1981). The technical feasibil-
ities of using an air-to-air heat exchanger and that of using a refrigera-
tive dehumldification system with a compression cycle are evaluated in this
section.
The capacity of both systems is a nonlinear function of the size of the
greenhouse. The size of the greenhouse needs to be known for the design.
The systems wer| evaluated for a greenhouse with a floor area of 200 m , a
volume of 890 m and a cover area of 440 m . The total amounts of ET water
vapor for this size greenhouse were calculated to be 82 and 524 1/ day for
Potential evapotranspiration is defined as the ET from a crop which covers
the soil completely and which water supply is not limiting (Decker, 1967).
2
Solar radiation can be expressed in mm H2 0/day by multiplying the radiant
energy by its latent heat equivalent for water. The latent heat of water^at
20°C and 1 atmosphere equals 2453 kJ/kg. The evaporating power of 1 MJ/m
is then 0.408 mm H2O.
219
-------
January and July conditions. They were assumed to be produced during 12
hours per day. The instantaneous ET rates for these months were computed to
be 1.9 x 10" and 12.1 x 10" kg H20/sec, respectively.
An energy balance was constructed around the hypothetical 200 m green-
house. The results for typical January and July days in Ithaca, New York,
are show^ in Figure 7.56. A net energy loss for the whole greenhouse of
4.4 x 10 MJ/d was computed for January, while in July an excess of 433 MJ/d
of energy was calculated.
D.2.a. Necessary cooling capacity
The cooling capacity which is necessary to condense the ET water vapor was
computed based on the following two equations (ASHRAE, 1981).
Equation 2 calculates the relationship between the required humidity ratio
of air and the mass flow rate of air, while Equation 3 computes the neces-
sary rate of heat transfer:
W2 - Wi - ET/ma	(7.2)
q = m^'(h^ - h2)-(Wj - V^h^}	(7.3)
where
W = humidity ratio of air, kg H20/kg dry air
ET =• amount of evapotranspiration for the whole greenhouse, kg H2 0/sec
M = mass flow rate of air, kg/sec
a
q = rate of heat transfer, kW
h = enthalpy, kJ/kg
and the subscripts are defined as
1	= entering air
2	¦ exiting air
a = air
w2 = exiting water
The relationship between the condensation temperature and the mass flow rate
of air for January and July conditions is shown in Figure 7.57, and this
figure also shows the required cooling capacity for mass flow rates at given
temperatures. The designs for the two recovery systems were based on this
figure. The necessary rate of heat transfer at a given mass flow rate of
air would be larger in Figure 7.57 if the measured ET rates were used to
construct the figure instead of the lower computed rates.
D.2.b. Air-to-air heat exchanger—
A counterflow air-to-air heat exchanger which uses colder outside air to
condense the water vapor from the greenhouse air was evaluated. The
configuration is shown in Figure 7.58. Outside air is forced through the
inside tube into the greenhouse. The warm greenhouse air is forced between
the two tubes and is vented to the outside. The whole system would be built
220
-------
Direct, and Scattered
Had i at ion
)|020 MJ/d
Convection
r;7 MJ/d
1020 M.T/d
2U10 MJ/d
Net Energy
1+33 MJ/d
Net Energy
510 MJ/d
17.5°C
FT
H
MJ/d
20J MJ/d
Conduc-
tion
Conduction
Vent i I ation
Vorit.i I at ion
103 MJ/d
figure 7.'.36. Schematic energy balance I'or a hypothetical greenhouse in January (A) and July (ii) in Ithaca,
New York. Greenhouse measures 10 x 20 m arid in covered by a double layer of polyethylene.
-------
Jul;
<
July
<
hH
O
o
o
>-
"V
<
January
10 o
January
1C
1-5
2.0
2.5
.0
0
MASS FLOW RATE OF AIR, kg/s
Figure 7.57- Condensation tenperature and cooling capacity necessary to
recover all ET vacor as a function of mass flow rate of air.
222
-------
Insulation
reen.icuse air
igure fo
7.53.
Configuration of the air-to-air heat
exchanger used in design estimates.
-------
sloped down towards a condensate collection point. The temperature of the
outside air would increase in the direction of its flow as a result of the
absorption of both sensible and latent heat from the exiting greenhouse air.
Meteorological data were obtained from the Department of Atmospheric Sci-
ences at Cornell University, while greenhouse conditions were gathered
through actual measurements. A method which employs the heat exchanger
effectiveness approach was used to determine the dimensions of the heat ex-
changer (ASHRAE, 1981, Kreith and Black 1980). Three variations of the sys-
tem were evaluated, containing 2, 4 and 6 sets of tubes.
For January the lengths of these heat exchangers which would be necessary to
remove all ET vapor were computed to be 196, 143 and 82 m for the systems
with 2, 4 and 6 sets of tubes, respectively. These are much longer than the
20 m greenhouse for which they were designed. They were rejected since they
were not suited for January conditions. If actual measured ET rates had
been used for the design, the system would have been even larger. In July
the temperature of the outside air is equal to the dewpoint temperature of
the greenhouse air. Therefore no condensation of water vapor will occur in
an air-to-air heat exchanger using outside air. This approach was also
deemed infeasible for July condensation.
D.2.c. Refrigerative dehumidification—
A refrigerative dehumidification system with a compression cycle was evalu-
ated as an alternative approach for condensation of the water vapor. Such a
system consists of four basic components: the compressor, the condenser, an
expansion valve, and an evaporator. The energy which is absorbed by the
evaporator and that which is added by the compressor is released by the
condenser (Althouse et al., 1979).
If all water vapor lost through ET were to be recovered, the cooling capa-
city of the system needs to be at least 10.7 kW for January and 50.4 kW for
July (see Figure 7.57). The temperature of the air at the evaporator would
need to be 5°C and 12°C at mass flow rates of air of 0.4 and 1.15 kg/sec for
January and July, respectively.
Systems which can provide these capacities are commercially available. This
approach was considered to be technically feasible. The evaporator was
designed to be inside the greenhouse, while the condensing unit would remain
outside. Ducts would connect the two components. The heat which would be
released by the condensing unit could be recovered by guiding the cooled
greenhouse air (or part of it) through these ducts over the condensing unit
and back into the greenhouse. The CO2 supply necessary for photosynthesis
may be depleted in such a closed greenhouse, and artificial CO2 addition may
be necessary.
The daily energy Input requirements for this ET recovery system were
computed to be 62.4 kWh and 188.0 kWh for the 200 m design greenhouse in
January and July, respectively. The system would produce 82 and 524 Z daily
in these respective months. Some of this energy is lost due to energy
conversion inefficiencies, while some energy is recovered from the heat of
condensation. A mass and energy balance showed that in January the daily
22k
-------
energy input of 62.4 kWh into the 200 m2 greenhouse would produce 82 I/day
of condensate (see Figure 7.59). This would remove 128.4 kWh from the 200
m greenhouse dally, while 159.6 kWh would be released by the condensing
unit. If the air were guided over the condensing unit and back into the
greenhouse, a net increase of 31.2 kWh of energy would be obtained daily.
In July 188.4 kWh of daily energy input to the compressor would produce 524
Jl/day of condensate while removing 604.8 kWh of heat daily.
D.3. Economic Considerations
In the economic evaluation the net present value of the construction costs
and the operation and maintenance costs were taken into account. Only the
compression refrigerative system was evaluated since the air-to-air heat
exchanger proved to be technically infeasible.
Yearly total costs were calculated to amount to $4,615, while the yearly
benefits were estimated at $1,615. The total yearly water recovery from the
ET recovery was predicted to be 111 m^/yr. Water production costs were cal-
culated to be $27/m3. Conventional treatment of wastewater to potable
standards were reported to be $0.31/m3 at the Factory 21 sewage treatment
plant in Orange County, California (Argo and Montes, 1979). Water produc-
tion through ET recovery from NFT wastewater treatment systems would be much
more costly and was rejected as economically feasible at this time.
D.4.	Alternative Approaches for Condensation
Other media could serve as the coolant in a heat exchanger. Cold water
could be used instead of cold air. Water will transfer heat faster than air
does as a result of its much higher density. One naturally available source
for cold water is the sewage influent itself or groundwater. The wastewater
itself may have a low enough temperature to serve as the coolant. Water-
to-air heat exchangers may prove to be more feasible than the air-to-air
heat exchanger examined here. An evaluation of such a heat exchanger is
recommended.
E.	NUTRIENT UPTAKE
Tables 7.10 through 7.14 summarize the dates, yields, dry weights of plant
harvests and the composition of the material as subsampled from the harvest-
ed materials. This information is useful for illustrating the composition
of the material as well as the nutrient and heavy metal compositions that
may occur in the NFT unit treating wastewater. The control that was fed an
inorganic nutrient solution for the duration of the study from 1979 through
1980 is useful for comparing the impact of the synthetic wastewater with
cadmium addition to the reed canary grass. The nitrogen composition for
this plant for the intensive period studied ranged from a maximum of 5.28
percent nitrogen to a low of 3.62. The high concentrations of nitrogen
always occurred during lower productivity periods and low temperature
conditions, and the lower nitrogen contents occurred during higher
productivity. The phosphorus content ranged from 0.40 to 0.70. Reed canary
grass yields were plotted in Figure 7.60 and ranged from 0.36 to 9 g/m /day
of dry matter. The conversion rates of nutrients were calculated based on
the yield data and the elemental concentrations as reported in the tables.
225
-------
J anuary
V?9.6 kWh Condem?^-
Evaporator
120. U kV/h
31.2 kWh
Conversion
TjOsscg
62. U kWh
Compressor
Engine
J ul,y
Engine
Figure Y-'39. Rnergy balance I'or the rcfr iterative compression iiyotcm.
-------
ro
ro
-j
9
8
¦n
i
CM
s
150
9 f
w
Eh 1|
U J
w
i 3
1 -
MAM
HARVEST DATE
!•' i tfuro 7 • 60 • Dry weight harvest y ie.ld oi' a 9-3 m2 rood canary grass control unit.
-------
TABLE 7.10. DATES, YIELDS, DRY WEIGHTS AND NUTRIENT CONTENTS OF AGED
CANARY GRASS HARVESTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE UNIT #2.
THIS UNIT WAS GROWN FROM SEED AND USED AS A CONTROL.
Date
Yield
Dry Wt.
N
P
Cd
Dry Weight

g
%
%
%
ug/g
g/m2-d
10/18/79
1072
15.6




10/26/79
274
18.2



0.766
11/1/79
326
11.5



0.672
11/8/79
589
13.5



1.221
11/15/79
--
-



—
11/22/79
1176
14.1



2.547
11/29/79
602
14.1



1.304
12/6/79
149
14.3



0.327
12/13/79
95
13.8



0.201
12/20/79
69
18.5



0.196
1/8/80
39
16.2



0.036
1/17/80
57
19.3



0.131
1/25/80
71
23.0



0.219
1/31/80
66
7.9



0.093
2/8/80
—
—



—
2/14/80
—
—



—
2/21/80
—
—



—
2/28/80
62
24.0



0.229
3/7/80
67
7.4



0.076
3/27/80
506
17.6
5.28
.65
.35
0.479
4/10/80
2050
13.6
5.26
.61
.37
2.141
4/24/80
6850
17.0
4.74
.53
.33
8.944
5/8/80
6776
16.6
4.09
.51
.42
8.639
228
(continued)
-------
TABLE 7.10 (continued). DATES, YIELDS, DRY WEIGHTS AND NUTRIENT CONTENTS
OF AGED CANARY GRASS HARVESTS IN THE CORNELL
BRACEHOUSE UNIT #2. THIS UNIT WAS GROWN FROM
SEED AND USED AS A CONTROL.
Date
Yield
Dry Wt.
N
P
Cd
Dry W|ight

g
%
%
%
Ug/g
g/m -d
5/22/80
5630
14.2
4.74
.56
.51
7.719
6/3/80
4508
15.3
4.89
.50
.52
4.999
6/19/80
3389
16.5
5.14
.56
.38
3.592
7/13/80
1227
13.8
4.09
.50
.52
1.301
7/17/80
958
19.0
4.17
.52
.42
1.398
7/31/80
996
19.8
4.00
.40
.32
1.515
8/14/80
959
20.1
3.62
.49
.41
1.480
8/29/80
895
16.7
4.45
.65
.60
1.071
9/11/80
835
21.9
4.31
.65
.97
1.513
9/26/80
1440
15.1
4.86
.67
.66
1.670
10/9/80
1160
14.5
5.03
.70
.75
1.391
10/23/80
1067
16.3
4.27
.65
.88
1.336
11/10/80
436
17.0
5.03
.65
1.13
.443
229
-------
TABLE 7.11. DATES, YIELDS, DRY WEIGHTS AND NUTRIENTS CONTENTS OF REED
CANARY GRASS HARVESTS IN THE CORNELL BRACE HOUSE UNIT #4.
THIS UNIT WAS THE PRIMARY TEST UNIT IN EARLY EXPERIMENTS AND
SERVED AS THE ET CONTROL IN LATER EXPERIMENTS.
Date	Yield Dry Wt. N	P Cd Dry Weight
g	%	%	% ug/g	g/m2-d
10/8/79
4320



10/18/79
1615
22.4

3.890
10/25/79
440
15.1

1.021
11/1/79
156
15.1

0.362
11/8/79
235
15.1

0.545
11/15/79
137
15.0

0.316
11/22/79
138
17.1

0.362
11/29/79
160
16.8

0.413
12/6/79
171
15.7

0.413
12/13/79
143
16.5

0.362
12/20/79
60
19.0

0.175
1/8/80
90
20.0

0.102
1/17/80
—
—

—
1/25/80
64
20.4

0.175
1/31/80
79
24.0

0.340
2/8/80
—
—

—
2/14/80
69
21.0

0.260
2/21/80
107
19.0

0.312
2/28/80
147
19.0

0.429
3/7/80
251
22.0

0.848
3/20/80
706
17.8
5.62 .61 2.02
1.039
4/3/80
1450
15.6
4.47 .69 .67
1.737
(continued)
230
-------
TABLE 7.11 (continued). DATES, YIELDS, DRY WEIGHTS AND NUTRIENT
CONTENTS OF REED CANARY GRASS HARVESTS IN THE
CORNELL BRACEHOUSE UNIT U. THIS UNIT WAS THE
PRIMARY TEST UNIT IN EARLY EXPERIMENTS AND
SERVED AS THE ET CONTROL IN LATER EXPERIMENTS.
Date
Yield
Dry Wt.
N
?
Cd
Dry Weight

g
%
%
%
Ug/g
g/m2-d
4/17/80
4912
13.3
4.87
.65
1.00
5.018
5/1/80
7470
14.9
5.01
.63
.63
8.549
5/15/80
4750
14.6
4.47
.56
.94
5.326
5/29/80
3530
18.9



5.124
6/12/80
2695
15.4
4.63
.62
.64
3.188
6/26/80
1142
18.5
4.97
.53
.22
1.623
7/10/80
1823
—
4.41
.58
.74
2.681
7/24/80
1216
19.8
4.52
.53
.29
1.849
8/7/80
1263
17.1
4.35
.67
2.16
1.659
8/21/80
1792
14.9
4.25
.77
.37
2.051
9/8/80
1115
17.7
4.43
.66
6.31
1.179
9/18/80
1749
15.2
5.03
.72
4.37
2.859
10/2/80
2219
14.6
5.50
.73
1.35
2.488
10/16/80
2864
13.3
5.08
.76
4.43
2.926
10/30/80
1232
13.0
4.95
.72
2.73
1.230
11/13/80
288
14.0
6.42
.73
1.62
0.310
12/18/80
272
—



0.131
1/22/81
78
17.4



0.042
3/12/81
1867
16.0
4.91
.68
3.45
0.656
4/17/81
7976
15.9
4.36
.58
2.33
3.788
6/3/81
—
18.6
2.79
.49
2.91
—
7/10/81
7200
25.4
2.45
.33
2.03
5.315
231
-------
TABLE 7.12. DATES, YIELDS, DRY WEIGHTS AND NUTRIENT CONTENTS OF REED
CANARY GRASS HARVESTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE UNIT #3.
THIS UNIT WAS A CONTROL UNIT IN EARLY EXPERIMENTS AND WAS
PART OF 18.6 m2 SYSTEMS LATER.
Date
Yield
Dry Wt.
N
P
Cd
Dry Weight

3
%
%
%
ug/g
g/m2-d
10/6/79
—
—




10/18/79
1370
18.9



2.320
10/26/79
398
17.4



1.064
11/1/79
179
14.2



0.456
11/8/79
787
12.1



1.463
11/15/79
—
—



—
11/22/79
557
10.7



0.915
11/29/79
1197
11.4



2.096
12/6/79
265
13.2



0.537
12/13/79
110
20.6



0.348
12/20/79
69
17.5



0.185
1/8/80
209
20.0



0.237
1/17/80
187
17.7



0.395
1/25/80
1018
16.0



2.189
1/31/80
110
25.0



0.493
2/8/80
—
—



—
2/14/80
80
22.0



0.315
2/21/80
113
19.0



0.330
6/12/80
1840
13.8
4.19
.44
.61
—
6/26/80
4600
17.0
4.97
.53
.22
6.006
7/10/80
3665
—
3.74
.53
.33
5.123
7/24/80
2088
19.4
4.98
.66
1.33
3.111
232
(continued)
-------
TABLE 7.12 (continued). DATES, YIELDS, DRY WEIGHTS AND NUTRIENT
CONTENTS OF REED CANARY GRASS HARVESTS IN THE
CORNELL BRACEHOUSE UNIT #3. THIS UNIT WAS A
CONTROL UNIT IN EARLY EXPERIMENTS AND WAS PART
OF 18.6 m2 SYSTEMS LATER.
Date
Yield
Dry Wt.
N
P
Cd
Dry Weight

g
%
%
%
ug/g
g/m2-d
8/7/80
1703
16.3
4.01
.60
.50
2.132
8/21/80
2541
16.9
4.18
.67
.47
3.298
9/8/80
1568
19.9
4.65
.75
.57
1.864
9/18/80
2085
21.4
3.83
.53
3.89
4.798
10/2/80
1709
16.7
4.53
.56
1.06
2.192
10/16/80
1108
13.9
4.86
.72
1.08
1.183
10/30/80
416
15.3
5.60
.73
2.68
0.489
11/13/80
70
13.2
5.41
.71
1.38
0.071
12/18/80
40
—



—
1/22/81
17
4.2



—
233
-------
TABLE 7.13. HARVEST DATA FROM THE CRREL GREENHOUSE WHICH GREW CANARY GRASS IN 7.4 m2 UNITS (TOTAL).
Date
Unit
Yield
g
Dry Wt.
%
Dry Yield
g
N
%
P
%
Dry Wt.
g/m2-d
N
Removal
Rate
kg/ha-d
P
Removal
Rate
kg/ha-d
3/3/80
A
1814
14
254
6.0
0.76




B
1588
15
238
5.8
0.77




Total
3402
14
492
(Avg.)
5.9
5.8
0.76
0.76
2.4
1.39
0.18
3/18/80
A
1361
13.5
184
6.1
0.69




B
1588
13
206
5.8
0.80




Total
2949
13
390
(Avg.)
5.9
5.9
0.75
0.75
3.5
2.06
0.27
4/11/80
A
3087
12.5
386
5.9
0.65




B
3522
12.5
440
5.4
0.76




Total
6609
12.5
826
(Avg.)
5.6
5.63
0.71
0.71
4.6
2.61
0.33
(continued)
-------
TABLE 7.13 (continued). HARVEST DATA FROM THE CRREL GREENHOUSE WHICH GREW CANARY GRASS
IN 7.4 m2 UNITS (TOTAL).
Date
Unit
Yield
g
Dry Wt.
%
Dry Yield
g
N
%
P
%
Dry Wt.
g/m2-d
N
Removal
Rate
kg/ha-d
P
Removal
Rate
kg/ha-d
5/1/80
A
3270
12
392
5.4
0.69




B
2720
12
326
5.4
0.74




Total
5990
12
718
5.4
0.71
4.8
2.61
0.34




(Avg.)
5.4
0.71



5/22/80
A
3521
13
458






B
3049
13.5
412






Total
6570
13
870


5.6






(Avg.)
5.4
0.71

(3.01)
(0.40)
6/17/80
A
1848
15.5
286






B
2513
15.5
390






Total
4361
15.5
676


3.5






(Avg.)
5.4
0.71

(1.92)
(0.25)
Parenthesized numbers are estimated.
-------
TABLE 7.14. HARVEST DATA FROM HANOVER
GREENHOUSE IN 1981.
Date
Species
Wet Wt.
g
Dry Wt.
%
3/20/81
Canary Grass
7878
35.9
4/13/81
Canary Grass
6603
15.5
5/8/81
Canary Grass
8555
14.8
5/14/81
Phragmites
2711
26.5
5/14/81
Phragmites
5412
24.6
6/3/81
Canary Grass
3435
15.9
6/3/81
Phragmites
11232
20.6
^Upper (1.2 m2 cut).
2Lower (1.2 m2 cut).
Some of the nutrient uptake data with the synthetic sewage studies are
illustrated in Table 7.13. A smaller amount of information is available for
the domestic sewage studies. However, this information does illustrate
several comparisons. First, it should be emphasized that none of the
experiments represented optimum yields since the focus was on BOD and
suspended solids removal. No yield information was taken during the Cayuga
Heights sewage studies. Under all high rate loading conditions with the
sewage units large amounts of organic suspended solids were present that
tended to inhibit growth of all species. Subsequent tests should be
conducted using high yielding plants such as napier grass downstream of the
sewage units after the BOD and suspended solids have been removed in the
high loading rate unit. Discussion of the cadmium concentration and other
heavy metals will be included in a subsequent section on toxic constituent
concentrations.
F. PLANT CULTURING AND PROPAGATION FOR ESTABLISHING AND OPERATING AN NFT
SYSTEM
F.l. Culture of Species in Total Controlled Environments
The objective of the cultural task was to identify techniques for rapid
propagation of large quantltltes of the selected species. From these tests,
the essential characteristics of either the propagation system and/or the
plant itself was to provide rapid germination and some protection to the
root from direct sunlight. Sunlight promotes algal growth that inhibits
rapid root development. Experiments conducted by General Electric Company
were in a highly artificial environment (controlled temperature, light
intensity and duration, humidity and carbon dioxide concentration) that
would not be considered for application to wastewater treatment. However,
propagation experiments can be used to approximate less controlled condi-
tions. All yields and nutrient uptakes will be significantly less in con-
ventional greenhouses. All species rooted rapidly when provided with narrow
strips of shade at varying widths (the width depended on the species). Root
236
-------
development was rapid in shade, shoot growth followed, and shading by the
shoot quickly eliminated the algal growth. This sequence held for all
species except the cattails, which were not inhibited by algal growth.
Figure 7.61 indicates the extent of the algal growth on newly germinated
seedlings. Watercress is shown in Figures 7.62 and 7.63 before and after
the sixth harvest.
A subsequent set of trials involved propagation by plugs of the reed canary
grass, coastal Bermuda grass, and watercress. The plugs were separated by
various distances; spacing of up to twice the diameter of the plugs produced
rapid filling of the interspaces (see Figure 7.64). This proved to be a
successful method of propagation.
Napier grass cuttings are shown as received in Figure 7.65. The rapid
response is dramatically Indicated in Figure 7.66 and 7.67. Comparisons of
characteristics of roots of the species are shown in Figures 7.68 to 7.71.
It is clear from these root observations that several of these species may
have a role in wastewater treatment.
The cultural experiment series in the controlled environment greenhouse
succeeded in establishing a crop of each plant species In six weeks or
less. Healthy plants with vigorous and extensive root systems were
maintained through several harvests.
F.l.a. Nutrient Removal in Total Controlled Environmental Greenhouses—
Each of the crop stands was propagated in a low nutrient solution, similar
to a half strength Hoagland's solution (Hoagland and Arnon, 1950). When
active growth was evident the crops were given a full strength nutrient
solution such as is used in hydroponic operations. Once stand establishment
was assured, nutrient levels were reduced to those indicate in Table 7.15.
An example of nutrient disappearance for the baseline species is shown in
Figure 7.72 (see Appendix for other experiments). Exact bed areas and
volumes of recirculating nutrient solution are indicated on the respective
figures. For reed canary grass, napier grass, and watercress in excess of
1 g/m nitrogen disappeared within 24 hours of application (vol = 230 I; 230
x 30 ppm = 6.9 g per 6 m2 bed area). The linearity of the nitrogen removal
down to less than 1 ppm is also apparent. Removal of phosphorous was also
very efficient; the time required for removal was slightly longer. It is
also clear that the species operate with different efficiencies. Reed
canary grass and napier grass were more efficient in the removal of
phosphorous than the other species; bermuda grass efficiency was generally
disappointing.
F.l.b. Biomass Production—
Biomass yield records were maintained since the first, harvests oc the
crops. Computation of dry weight biomass yields is shown in Table 7.16 and
extrapolated to annual productivities.
237
-------
Figure 7.6l. Plant seedlings growing on mat in NFT trough
Darkened areas around roots are algal growth


< Figure 7.62. Growth of watercress before biweekly
harvest. Plants grew to 20 err. above
bed floor.
-------
Figure 7.63- Sxand cf v/atercress after biweekly harvest.

Figure 7.6'-. Stand of reed canary grass grown from plugs.
Note that, grass has filled in areas between
plugs, thus expanding the root max and
limiting algal production.
239
-------
Figure J.65- Napier grass cutting at initial transplant
into the NFT trough.
Figure J.66. -Napier grass stand at tine .of. .move to
laraer bed.
-------
rigure 7-67- Regrowth of napier grass three weeks after
first harvest.
mes ?
	.«-r		
m, is, m
Figure 7-68. Side view of root mats of reed canary grass,
coastal Bermuda grass, and water cress grown
in NFT trough.
2Ul
-------
3 mw ws&
£. s.'tw* erfi*-* *

PfC.B,W70
Figure J. 69. Bottom view of root, mats of reed canard-
grass, coastal Bermuda grass, and
water cress grown in NFT trough.

ISill
Jill
mpkc mscm
mm
Figure 7- TO. Side view of root mats of cattails and
napisr grass grown in NFT trough.
242
-------
. .. -oot mats of cattails and
gure T.Tl. Botto. «ri;s-rw la „ .rough.
243
-------
IV)
i=-
\"
W
e
V)
h
w
I I
OS
hH
I«1
hJ
§
o
CO
0 14 81;
SAMPLING TIME, hours
Figure ¦( .12. Nitrogen and 'jhosphoru;; removals from General Electric NFT unit
containing re-'d canary grass.
-------
TABLE 7.15. GRASS NUTRIENT FORMULA USED IN PLANT PROPAGATION
IN TOTAL CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT
Constituent	Nutrient	Concentration (mg/Jl)
Ca(N03)24H20
Calcium
45

Nitrogen
40
kh2po1+
Potassium
12

Phosphorous
10
MgS0il*7H20
Magnesium
5

Sulfur
7
FeDTPA
Iron
0.1
MnS04H20
Manganese
1.0
H3BO3
Boron
0.2
(NHit)6Mo702it4R 20
Molybdenum
0.05
ZnS0i+*7H20
Zinc
0.1
CuS0i+5H20
Copper
0.1
TABLE 7.16. BIOMASS YIELD OF TEST SPECIES SHOOT HARVEST
Species	Yield,	Dry Weight Yield
Wet Wt. Dry Weight 	
kg/m2-wk Fraction kg/m2-wk g/m2-d tonnes/ha-yr
Napier
3.55
.083
.29
41.5
150
Watercress
0.92
.066
.061
8.7
32
Bermuda Grass
0.1 _
.20
.02
2.9
10.4
Reed Canary Grass
0.61
.15
.09
12.8
46.9
Cattails
2.21
.048
,106
15,2
55.3
F.2. Culture of Species in Greenhouses
The response of plants placed in NFT units varied according to the environ-
mental conditions in the greenhouses and the solutions into which they were
placed. The wetland plants and some terrestrial plants were placed in non-
carbonaceous nutrient solution in Ken Po9t greenhouses in the fall of 1980
and are discussed first. Other terrestrial plants were later cultivated in
this clean solution. Many of the wetland plants, along with flower and
vegetable plants, were transported to Hanover and tested on sewage; and
these are discussed later in this section.
F.2.a. Response to Non-Carbonaceous Nutrient Solution—
The plant species placed in the NFT units exhibited a variety of growth
21+5
-------
responses, from practically no growth to luxurious growth. Accordingly, the
species were evaluated on the basis of top growth and root development and
were assigned to one of the following categories:
1.	species that flourished;
2.	species with marginal growth;
3.	species that died or failed to form new growth.
Table 7.17 summarizes the overall responses of different plants to the
nutrient solution. It should be noted that the species were rated based on
growth during the short-day conditions of autumn and winter. If the plants
had been grown throughout the summer months, higher productivity would have
been expected. The value of conducting autumn and winter tests, however,
was that the species experiencing a period of dormancy could be distinguish-
ed from those that grew continuously. It should be made clear that these
listings are based on survival performance in NFT systems. When nutrient
levels are lower than those used in this study, plant performance may be
affected. Similarly at high loadings of sewage, plant response could be
quite different.
Species that Flourished—Among all plant species grown in the units, none
surpassed the vigorous growth of napier grass. Grown from cuttings, this
species rapidly developed a thick root mat and dense top growth. A colony
of the grass may be rapidly increased in size by propagating shoot
cuttings.
Reed canary grass grew very well, even after repeated top growth harvests.
The root mat was well developed. This species is exceedingly common in
wetlands of the Northeast, so wild stock is readily available for
transplanting purposes. Also, the plant was easily established from seed in
the greenhouse.
Although the shoots of phragmites grew well, shoot density and vigor was not
equal to that of napier grass. Roots developed into a relatively thin mat
and new shoots were produced from rhizomes. Following a winter harvest cf
the shoots, the plants at first responded slowly but eventually developed
new shoots from the rhizomes. As day length increased in the spring,
phragmites grew rapidly and developed a more extensive root mat.
Soft rush continuously produced new shoots through the winter months and
developed a thick root mat. Although the plants were relatively low in
stature (<50 cm), shoot density was high. During spring and summer plant
vigor declined until little or no new shoot growth was produced. The
reasons for this plant's condition at that time are unclear.
Lake sedge experienced good growth during autumn but grew slowly during
winter. The root mat was relatively thin. Spring and summer growth was
relatively poor.
Softstem bulrush grew well initially but responded very slowly following a
harvest of the shoots. The shoots of this species, therefore, should not be
harvested until they attain full development.
2k6
-------
TABLE 7.17. PLANT RESPONSE TO NUTRIENT SOLUTIONS
Category	Species
Species that flourished	Napier grass
Reed canary grass
Phragmites
Soft rush
Lake sedge
Softstern bulrush
Roses
Geraniums
Petunias
Species with marginal growth	Japanese millet
Bristly sedge
Cattails
Sugar cane
Eastern cottonwood
Arrow aram
Cucumbers
Carnations
Blackberry
Species that died or failed to grow	Wild rice
Swamp loosestrife
Woolgrass
Lizardtail
Three ornamental species performed well in the NFT units. Roses, geraniums
and petunias showed good top growth, root development and flower
production. These plants were grown under the longer daylengths of late
spring, so their performance in winter light conditions was not
demonstrated; the general response of geraniums and petunias to short days
is elongated stem growth. Roses, however, continued to grow well as long as
the temperature remained above 15°C. Temperature stress in the form of red
leaves was evident in the roses when temperatures dropped below 15°C.
Species with marginal growth—Japanese millet, an annual, established from
seed, grew to maturity, but the plants were stunted (<20 cm). An
established colony later, however, grew nuch more vigorously than the first
colony, suggesting that the plants may have been responding favorably to an
increasing photoperiod. The greatest potential of this species lies in its
ability to grow rapidly from seed during the summer.
Bristly sedge grew slcwly during fall and winter, but did develop a fairly
dense root mat. Growth in this species appeared to be limited by short day
and/or low light intensity conditions. During the summer months it grew
well and produced seed.
21+7
-------
Cattail seedlings and overwintering shoots grew very slowly and seemed to be
in a dormant condition due to the short photoperiod (and/or low light
intensity). With increased day length, top growth improved and a fibrous
root mat developed.
Sugarcane grew very slowly during the winter and did not develop a root
mat. Its growth, however, Improved with increased day length. Also its
placement next to napler grass might have been an impediment, since napler
grass quickly shaded any adjacent plant.
Although some cuttings of eastern cottonwood died, others developed lateral
branches and grew fairly well. The roots were sparse and did not form a
mat.
Arrow arum remained dormant until February when the increasing daylength
and/or light intensity stimulated growth. Later, its leaves grew
vigorously, although the root mat was not very extensive.
Cucumbers and carnations performed moderately well in the clean solution NFT
unit. Like roses, cucumbers seemed subject to nutrient deficiency at higher
levels of nutrients than other plants in these units; conversely, when the
cucumbers grew well they grew as fast as any other plant except napler
grass. Carnations grew continuously in the nutrient solution but did not
produce large, high quality flowers. Stems were often elongated and did not
grow erect, possibly due to shading by adjacent plants.
Rooted cuttings of blackberry bushes were grown in NFT units, but survival
was poor. This was due primarily to the root configuration of the cuttings;
the woody roots grew around the lower six inches of the cutting, and only a
small portion of the roots was in contact with the nutrient film. The
plants that survived the first few weeks grew very well, suggesting that
blackberry bush production in NFT units may be successful.
Species that died or failed to grow—Wild rice seeds planted in NFT units
germinated within a week, but the seedlings were spindly and few attained an
erect stature. All eventually died. A large amount of algae that became
established in the unit may have contributed to this failure. Possibly,
this species would grow better given a longer photoperiod and/or a higher
light intensity.
The rooting branch tips of swamp loosestrife grew slowly, and leaves soon
began to be shed and the shoots died. The leaves were damaged by spider
mites, but it is not known whether this factor contributed to the plant's
demise. Had root masses been collected rather than branch tips, growth may
have been better. The two species of burreed (big burreed and burreed) had
overwintering shoots when they were placed in the NFT units, but did not
grow. Both species were, therefore, considered unsuitable for use in the
NFT units.
Wool grass and lizardtail failed to grow appreciably and appeared to be in a
state of dormancy.
248
-------
F.2.b. Plant Response to Sewage in NFT Systems—
Plants in the Hanover greenhouse were grown in sewage. Their growth
responses were in many ways similar to the plants grown on nutrient
solution. Overall, however, the sewage loading proved to be a harsher
treatment. The plants were again rated in three categories, from those that
flourished to those that died, and this categorization is presented in Table
7.18. Because the test unit was 36.6 meters long, a plant's position in the
unit may have had some effect on that plant's survival and growth. After
some plants were grown in the NFT unit some were planted in standard potting
mixtures to determine whether plants could either recover from pathologies
suffered in the unit or flourish in pots suitable for market. Plant growth
in sewage and recovery of the plants following stressful periods are
discussed in the following sections.
TABLE 7.18. PLANT RESPONSE TO SEWAGE
Category
Species
Species that flourished
Cattails
Bulrush
Strawflowers
Japanese millet
Roses
Napier grass
Marigolds
Wheat
Phragmites
Species with marginal growth
Bristly sedge
Chrysanthemums
Carnations
Tomatoes
Comf rey
Reed canary grass
Soft rush
Cucumbers
Species that dies or failed to grow
Lantana
Gemanlums
Fuchsia •
Petunias
Species that flourished—Cattails began to grow rapidly after they were
introduced to the NFT unit in February. Figure 7.73 shows cattails as well
as other plants which responded well. Roots and shoots appeared healthy
throughout the testing period and reached heights of 2 meters. They
responded to harvesting well, even when a second harvest was conducted on
the same plants. Cattails which were cut back resumed growth and were
eventually Indistinguishable from those not cut. Although cattails grown in
synthetic wastewater at Cornell flowered profusely, cattails grown in sewage
never flowered.
249
-------
Figure 7-73.
Cattail, bulrush, phragmites, and
canary grass growing well in the
Bracehouse 36.6 meter system.
250
s
-------
Bulrush exhibited slow growth under low light conditions (February and early
March), but rapid growth began and continued thereafter. Most shoots
reached a meter or longer in height and flowered. Upon harvesting the cut
stems died and were replaced by new growth emerging from the rhizomes. Over
the course of testing, the plants developed a thick stand.
Strawflowers grew very well, producing stems over 60 centimeters tall and
large flower heads. The plants appeared very healthy, showing no signs of
insect damage or root rot.
Japanese millet performed well and showed an interesting phenomenon. Where
a gradient of film depth was present (due to an unlevel unit) the taller
plants were produced on the shallower film areas. Overall the millet grew
rapidly and produced a large quantity of seed, although this species in the
field may grow somewhat taller (Rawinski, 1981). The root system developed
an extensive mat, particularly in the shallower areas.
Roses grew well in the sewage. When flower buds were cut the plants
continued to grow and produce flowers. Rose cuttings in peat pots developed
some adventitious roots projecting from the pots above the film surface (see
Figure 7.74). Roots above the sewage appeared healthier than those below
it. Following a severe infestation of spider mites, olants developed new
leaves and shoots, and resumed growth.
Just as in the nutrient solution, napier grass grew vigorously. A thick
root mat developed rapidly such that the root zone was never completely
submerged although the mat itself raised the water level. Tall stems were
cut in one-node sections and placed in sewage for rooting, which occurred
within two weeks. The cut stems continued growing from branches at the
lower nodes, and these new stems eventually produced inflorescences.
Marigolds flourished in the sewage, putting out new leaves, increasing in
height and flowering. The root system developed well and appeared healthy.
Wheat established a healthy stand 20 centimeters tall in about two weeks
(starting from sprouted seed). The root system was developing into a
fibrous mat.
Phragmites grew slowly in early spring but grew much more rapidly later.
The position of phragmites in the system was changed, which also affected
its vigor. It responded well to cutting, showing a rapid regrowth. Roots
formed a dense mat around the rhizomes and raised the entire plants.
Species with Marginal Growth—Bristly sedge had considerable top growth and
healthy roots. In late spring it went to seed, and leaves turned brown at
the tips. After producing seed new leaves continued to grow while older
ones continued to brown.
Chrysanthemums grew well initially, but at the initiation of flowering the
plants suffered a severe aphid infestation and root death. Peat pots were
removed from the roots and buds were removed from the stems, but the plants
showed little improvement. The buds did not grow and the plants barely
251
-------
Figure	Root zone of a rose in peat pot showing
anoxic accumulations at bottom.
252
-------
survived. Because this plant has a very strong reaction to photoperiod, it
might have performed much better in the summer.
Carnations were similar to the mums in that their initial growth was good,
but they soon suffered from rotting roots. There was some regrowth after
flower buds were removed. The peat pots were again suspected of causing
problems and were removed, but only small growth in roots was noted.
Initially, the tomatoes showed healthy roots and vegetative growth. As the
plants began flowering and setting fruit, lower leaves began turning brown
and died. Roots were never extensive but in latter stages of fruit produc-
tion they turned gray. The fruit ripened when still very small.
Comfrey wilted when it was first put in the unit but later sent out new
leaves and appeared healthy.
Read canary grass grew very well through the lower loading rates tested (6.9
and 10.2 centimeters per day). Toward the end of the 20.3 centimeter inch
per day loading much of the grass had died and the productivity of the
remaining grass was quite low. Under these conditions, new leaves in the
grass were rare, and much of the root mat was black and rotten. It appeared
that many solids from upper parts of the system had been washed down and
trapped by the canary grass's finer root system. The grass was flushed with
tap water for several days to remove solids, after which the system was
operated at a low 5.1 centimeter per day loading. The grass remained viable
and recovered slowly at this low condition.
Soft rush appeared to be in dormancy until late April. Prior to that time
much of it had degenerated and was discarded as dead. The remaining plants
appeared healthy and had firm white roots.
Cucumbers, when first placed in the unit in February, responded with vigor-
ous growth. Good shoot and root development and flowering with subsequent
fruit were noted. When the loading rate was Increased from 6.9 to 10.2
centimeters per day, roots deteriorated rapidly which was followed by the
degeneration of plant tops (see Figures 7.75 and 7.76). The plants were
removed from the unit when appearing nearly dead. A second set of cucumbers
were introduced to the unit but did equally poorly, and all eventually
died.
Species that Died or Failed to Grow—Lantana flowered immediately upon
placement in the unit but produced only small leaves and a very small root
system.
Geraniums were the first species to show signs of failure. Leaves yellowed
and dropped, and root6 deteriorated quickly. The poorest performance among
geraniums was noted for those planted in the greatest depth of sewage.
Attempts to culture geraniums without peat pots gave the same results.
Plants flowered continuously, but leaves produced were very small. Root
growth or regeneration was minimal.
Fuchsia grew well initially but then degenerated rapidly. Plants lost
leaves with no new production.
253
-------
Figure.7-75- Hanover units containing cucumbers during
early testing of the large unit. Note
stressful condition of plants.
Figure 7.76. Poor root development of cucumber after a
month in the EFT unit in the Hanover
greenhouse.
2?k
-------
Petunias flowered but never grew in height or put out new roots. Leaves
yellowed and dropped, and roots eventually rotted away.
Plant Order in the NFT Sewage System—Plant species were placed in the NFT
units in the order in which they were judged most suited: first, plants
able to withstand high solids sedimentation and anaerobic root zones;
second, plants capable of rapid nutrient uptake and high biomass production;
and third, plants capable of flourishing on low nutrient concentrations.
The initial setup of the multispecies unit is shown in Figure 7.77.
Cattails and bulrushes were in the first 6.1 meter section followed by other
wetlands plants considered hardy enough to survive the adverse conditions.
Because little was known of the other species' responses to sewage, they
were arranged in the remaining 24.4 meter section on the basis of their
expected nutrient uptake. As more species became available, they were
entered into available spaces judged best suited to them.
The specific placement of plants in the units did have a significant affect
on the performance of some species. Roses grew well when they were placed
in a location 30 to 35 meters downstream of the influent but fared poorly
when placed between 10 and 12 meters. This later section failed to produce
buds and grew slowly. Similarly, tomatoes grew better between 35 and 36
meters than between 20 and 2^ meters.
Some species appeared to grow well regardless of placement. Napier grass
thrived at the 35 to 36 meter location and also at the 12 to 13 meter
section. In fact, napier grass cuttings were propagated in the sewage film
between 13 and 15 meters. Millet also grew well in considerably different
locations, first at 29 to 30 meters and later at 10 to 12 meters. In the
main testing unit, phragmites did not perform well when it was in the first
12 meters of the unit. This part of the unit had only a slight slope and
usually contained standing sewage. Phragmites roots were clogged with
solids and were not growing well. For testing of the second condition, the
phragmites were moved to the 12 to 24 meter position which was further
downstream and had a greater slope. The phragmites roots performed well
there (as did the cattails and bulrush which replaced it in the first 12
meters).
From these observations one could conclude that more species could survive
further from the influent than closer to it. The D.O. profile of this unit
generally supports this. The ability of some plants to grow at various
locations indicates that the organic buildup is not an impediment to plants
in general, but it may have a gradient effect on some species.
One question that was not answered was whether plants which thrived at the
influent (cattails and bulrush) could survive in lower reaches where condi-
tions were more favorable to most plants.
Plants Removed for Potting—Toward the end cf the experimental phase, flower
species were removed from the multispecies unit and potted. This was done
to see whether placing them in a soil medium would improve their vigor or,
if they were growing well, to find out if they could be potted for
transport. Six flower species were selected. Of these, carnations,
255
-------
affluent
36 .¦? m
Napier Grass
(Tomatoes)
Roses
Fuchsia
(Marigolds M-
Carnations
(Petunia) J (Wheat)
Millet
c+
H-
C\
Cc
Figure 7-77. Schenatic diagram of second system in Hanover
greenhouse shoving locations of plants relative
to sewage flow. Distances shown are lengths from
sewage influent. Plants in parentheses were
introduced later in the experimental program.
256
-------
chrysanthemums, geraniums and lantana improved their vigor after repotting,
looked much healthier and increased their growth rate. The two species
which showed no significant improvement after potting were roses and
fuchsia.
F.3. Diagnosing and Treating Plant Growth Problems
Because reed canary grass was the most frequently used test species, most
experience was obtained in diagnosing and treating problems associated with
the growth of this species. In the Brace house the plant was grown continu-
ously for two years, during which time it suffered several infestations.
The major pathologies and treatments are shown in Table 7.19. Aphids
flourished periodically, probably because of the absence of naturally occur-
ring predators. Fungus infestations in turn developed on the sugary "honey
dew" secretions of the aphids. There developed a large population of
spiders, however, which heavily fed upon the aphids and flies (Psychoda),
which abounded in the greenhouse.
TABLE 7.19. REED CANARY GRASS PATHOLOGIES AND TREATMENTS
Problem
Treatment
Major Results
Minor Results
Algae clogging
seedling roots
and increasing pH
Aphid infestations
and secondary
fungal attack
Aphid infestation
Fungal infection
(Pythium sp.)
Fe deficiency
0.2 mg/1 CuSOt*
in recirculated
solution
Chemical
oastieidea
by
iaay beetle
introduction
Specific
fungicides
Subdue and
Bayleton used
Sequestrene
chelated Fe
added
Algae growth
cut back; grass
outgrew algae
Aphids wiped out;
fungus infection
reduced
Aphids controlled;
few adult bettles
noted; control
may also be due
to spiders or
parasites
Drought symptoms
remedied
None; solution
replaced after
3 days
Grass matted
down by heavy
spray
None
Yellow appearance
disappeared
Testing suspended
during treatment;
effects on micro-
flora unknown but
may be major
Plants less
susceptible to
fungus attack
The atmosphere In the Brace house had a high relative humidity due to the
constant operation of the NFT units. This high humidity was relieved only
257
-------
Figure 7.78. Black root zone below dead reed canary grass.

Figure 7-79. Geranium plant showing new root growth
8-x ter old roots had routed in peat, pot-.
258
-------
Fig-ore 7.80. Chrysanthemum and peat pot shoving absence
of roots due to root death.
259
-------
by ventilation used for cooling. High temperatures coupled with this high
humidity provided excellent conditions for fungus development. Infection of
a Pythium species occurred several times. This disease caused the death of
the more mature grass leaves. These infestations appeared to be prevalent
during periods when the grass was stressed. Aphlds were commonly noted on
grass leaves when the units were operated at high hydraulic loading rates
which resulted in anaerobic deposits among the roots. Pythium infection was
noted during a period of nutrient deficiency in the feed solution.
In the sewage loaded system the canary grass grew well until higher loading
rates (20 centimeters per day) were tested. Solids then accumulated among
the roots and produced an anaerobic black colored mass (see Figure 7.78).
Grass roots died and plants grew poorly until the deposits were removed by
flushing with fresh water. The grass soon thereafter recovered.
Other plants suffered similar Infestations. Weakened plants were
susceptible to pest attack and became hosts to the rapidly reproducing
disease organism. Before long the spread of the disease to nearby healthy
plants would be noted. Growing several species in the same greenhouse
requires close observation and timely action to control pests. In
commercial greenhouses this problem is overcome by limiting a particular
greenhouse to a single species, which allows the climate to be tailored to
the plant.
General root death affected many species when they were grown in sewage.
These species Included geraniums, cucumbers, chrysanthemums, fuchsias,
carnations, petunias, tomatoes and lantana. Figure 7.79 shows a geranium
partially recovering from root death, and Figure 7.80 shows a similar
condition in a chrysanthemum. It was hypothesized that some of this root
death was due to waterlogging by the peat pots. Removal of the peat
material from the roots, however, resulted in no improvement. Along with
the root death, fungus gnat larvae appeared in the sewage test units and
grew to large populations (see Figure 7.81). A solution of dlazanon was
used to soak the root zone of all the plants downstream of any known
occurrence of the fungus gnats. Some improvement was noted in plants
following this treatment and the removal of peat pots, but the fungus gnats
were not eliminated from the system.
To ensure that atmospheric gases had maximal exposure to the sewage, the
placement of black plastic, used to inhibit algae growth, was elevated in
the units so that It was not in contact with the sewage.
White flies Infested cucumbers, fuchsias, tomatoes and lantana. These
insects often pose a serious problem in commercial production of these
crops. They were treated with Resmethrln spray and controlled, but not
eradicated. Periodic treatments were necessary.
Aphlds infested many plants but were particularly severe on chrysanthemums,
bulrushes and cattails. In the sewage system, the general treatment for
aphlds was fumigation with a nicotine bomb. This treatment was effective in
the short term, but needed to be repeated periodically.
260
-------
Figure 7*81. Larval gnats in connecting gutter between
trays at the Hanover greenhouse.
2ol
-------
Spider mites first infected roses and were treated with rose dust. At their
peak they infested many plants such as cattails, cucumbers, blackberries,
bulrush, etc. Pentac was used as the general spider mite treatment. Again
the treatment had to be repeated at regular intervals.
G.	TOXIC CONSTITUENT CONSIDERATIONS—CADMIUM AND TOXIC ORGANICS (VOLATILE
AND NONVOLATILE)
The data presented earlier for the composition of canary grass species in
Tables 7.10 through 7.14 and Figure 7.82 showing the example decrease in
cadmium are useful in describing the fate of these elements in wastewater.
Most of the cadmium data and the application rates that were used to various
systems are shown in Table 7.20. This table confirms the rapid uptake of
cadmium. The influent concentrations of 0.1 to 0.3 mg/£ represent a waste-
water that is relatively contaminated with an industrial waste that
generates significant quantities of cadmium. These values decreased signi-
ficantly in the effluent down to low values of around 0.01 and 0.02 and 0.04
in most cases. Domestic sewage often contains values of .01 mg/£ cadmium.
Example cadmium removal rates are shown in Figure 7.82.
The data shown in Table 7.11 and 7.12 Indicate that the canary grass had
significant concentrations of cadmium in the plant tissue. An effort to
illustrate the mass flow of cadmium through the system is shown in Table
7.20. The cadmium uptake in the plants appeared to be an insignificant
portion of that applied. This indicates that since in many cases most of
the cadmium was removed, the larger majority of the cadmium is assimilated
and held In the root zone.
Due2to the high concentration of microbes (entrapped mass greater than 1,000
g/m ) In the large root surface area, it was hypothesized that the NFT
system should have some active pollutant removal mechanisms for some of the
toxic organics. Experiments were conducted by adding small amounts of
background toxic organics by Jenkins of the CRREL staff. A summary of the
fate of the volatile and nonvolatile organics is shown in Table 7.21. This
information Indicates that the 36 meter long units were effective in
removing most of the applied volatile organics and nonvolatile organics,
excepting for dlethylphthalate. In all cases the PCB's that were added to
the system were removed by greater than 90 percent even at high concentra-
tions. This Information suggests that the NFT roughing treatment system
could also be significant in removing the toxic organics that will be
contained in many wastewaters.
H.	COMPARISON OF SYNTHETIC AND DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NFT SYSTEMS
The general approach of this study was to attempt to operate synthetic
wastewater under comparable loading conditions as the tests with the
domestic sewage. The goal was to show that the results that were obtained
with a synthetic wastewater could be extrapolated to sewage so that future
testing could be simplified at small scale with a synthetic wastewater. The
data shown in Tables 6.11 (characteristics of influent synthetic and
domestic sewage) and Figure 7.83 indicate that there was a good correlation
between a number of the variables in synthetic wastewater and domestic
262
-------
TABLE 7.20. FATE OF CADMIUM IN NFT PILOT SYSTEMS AT CORNELL
Area System Number Cd
Cd
Cd
Cd
Dates
Loading Sije of Applied Effluent In plants	in R£G
Cm/d m Units mg/m -d mg/m -d ng/m -d	mg/m -d
(Univ. No.)
Cd
in Phr^g.
mg/m -d
(Univ. No.)
Cd
in Cu^es
rog/m -d
( Uni v. No.
Cd
in Cattail-
Bulrush
mg/m -d
) (Univ. No.)
Cd
Control RCG
mg/m ~d
3/18/80 -
5/11/80
5.1
9.3
1
16.80
2.55
3.42xl0~3
(±2.10x10 )
3.42xlO~3
(1)
	 	 	 2/14X10-3
5/12/80 -
6/17/80
10.2
9.3
1
21.42
6.12
3.53xl0~3
(±2.10x10 )
3.53xlO-3
(1)
	 	 	 2.63x10-3
6/18/80 -
7/ 3/80
5.1
9.3
1
7.65
3.06
0.36
(±0.36x10 )
0.36xlO-3
(1)
	 	 	 1.02xl0-3
7/ 4/80 -
9/ 8/80
20.3
9.3
1
30.45
18.27
2.86xl0-3
(±2.83x10 )
2.86xl0-3
(1)
	 	 	 0.58x10-3
9/ 9/80 -
10/15/80
10.2
18.6
2
19.38
6.12
7.46xl0~3
(±6.57xl0-3)
7.46xl0-3
(1&2)
	 	 	 1.20x10-3
10/16/80 -
10/31/80
20.3
18.6
2
50.75
22.33
4.73xlO~3
(±5.57x10 )
4.73xlO-3
(1&2)
	 	 	 1.18xl0~3
2/13/81 -
3/14/81
6.9
27.9
3
2.07
0.21
	
0.01
(3)
	 	 	 4. 6x10-4
4/16/81 -
5/10/81
10.2
27.9
3
18.36
5.10
	
4.4xl0~3
(3)
	 	 	 1. 7xl0-3
5/11/81 -
6/10/81
20.3
27.9
3
12.18
4.12
	
	
	 	 	 	
-------
JO
o
i—t
3
0.2
3.1
<
u
R = Canary Grass
B = Cattail/ Bulrush
P = Phragmites
DISTANCE FROM INFLUENT, x
.gure 7-82. Cadmium concentratior.s at various points
in three different length systems, the
longest of which contained several
species. All curves from 10.2 cra/d
loading conditions.
-------
Date
J/10/811
J/12/81
4/I5/M1
4/24/81
TABLE 7.21. TRACK ORCANIC CONCENTRATIONS IN SEWACE IN THE HANOVER NPT SYSTK*.
(Value* In pph)
vulaillc Trace Organic^
CHLOROFORM
Applied
TKTRACHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
Applied	Effluent from	Ann HeJ Effluent from	Applied Effluent from
First Second Third	First Second Third	First Second Third	First Second Third
U X	03 X	94 X
65. 9	28.0 6. 5 J
J1.2	9.86 5.05
10.b	4.92 2.14
100 X	0 X 61 Z 97 X 99 X 0 X 76 X
1.17	12.2	3.6* .533	.118	29.9 2.18 .219
1.84	9.83 3.U .880	.35*
1.18	.529 .276 .154	.077	1.44 .425 .148 .081
TRICHLOROETHYLENE	XYI.KNF
Applied Kf f luent t run __ Applied El 1 luont t ton
First Second Third	First Second Third
0 X 57 X	68 X 96 X
44.3	10.7	4.45 .13?
19.5 5.77	1.41
40.8	14.2	4.87 1.41
169 5ft.4
1.82 1.03
20.5 /.I
0.61 0.26
29. 7
67.7
16.2
2 5.1'
4.77 ?. I i
9.64 2.H /
ro
a\
-------
2C0
100
C3
P
<
cn
c
12
T
, m
Figure 7.83. Comparison of synthetic (•) and domestic ( 0)
sewage variables in 27-9 m2 units operated
at an area loading rate of 10.2 cm/d.
266
-------
sewage. Figure 7.84 compares the removal of total chemical oxygen demand in
domestic and synthetic wastewater as a function of application of flow rate
in the system. This Indicates that at many of the loading rates the
removals that were observed were similar. Tables 7.22 and 7.23 show a
comparison of the mass removals of various pollutants for the two different
substrates studied. In general, the rates observed for the various para-
meters where the loading rates were comparable were in the same order of
magnitude. This information should be useful in enabling the system to be
defined both in this study and others for the application of typical waste-
water to the NFT system.
The average performance of the two systems at the varying loading conditions
is also summarized in Tables 7.22 and 7.23. This information summarizes the
large amount of data that was developed for the pilot application and as
presented earlier under the various pollutants.
I. DEVELOPMENT OF PREDICTIVE RELATIONSHIPS
Two approaches were examined to predict effluent quality from NFT units
applied to wastewater treatment. First is a correlation of loading rate
relationships to the effluent quality. This approach included an attempt to
correlate plant yield information to removal efficiencies of various pollu-
tants. The earlier figures correlating remov&l rates are useful in estimat-
ing area requirements for treatment systems. The second approach was to
apply simple removal kinetics to the information to define the time required
for varying influent concentrations to achieve a given level of efficiency.
A comparison and summary of the removal rates presented earlier are given in
Table 7.24 as examples from which the size of an NFT system might be
predicted. Some of the limitations of this information include restricted
nutrient uptake and yield due to the dual application of suspended solids
and BOD. At no time was a high quality effluent from an optimized treatment
system fed to healthy, high-yielding plants to test the nutrient removal
capacity.
A kinetic examination of the data was performed using the assumption that
the flow in these units approached plug flow and that the removal of the
pollutants was first order and described by the following equation:
Se = S0 • e-kt	(7.4)
where Se = effluent concentration
S0 = influent concentration
k = removal rate coefficient
t = time of exposure of the reaction or the hydraulic retention time
in the unit
267
-------
I
Ci:
c:
>-
x
200
c
c;
K
X
O
lOO
influent Effluea
0	5	10	15	20
AREA LOADIMG RATE, cn/d
Figure ?-3U. Comparison of chemical oxygen demand
reductions in domestic and synthetic
sewage a~ various leading rates in
2^.9 ni2 units.
-------
TABLE 1.22. SYSTKM PEKKORMANCK SUMMARY OF PI LOT SCALE SYSTKMS USING SYNTHETIC SEWAGE.
Turner
COD
Soluble COD

local
Phosphorus

Soluble
Phosphorus
Total
Nitrogen

Soluble
Kltroxer

Cadmium

Soluble
Cadmium

Area L.K.
eui/d
toss I..
kg/ha-d
K. Removal
ktf/ha-d X
Hush L.R.
kg/ha-d
Removal
kg/ha-d
X
Mass I..K
kg/ha-d
. Removal
kg/ha-d
X
Mass L.R
k^/ha-d
Removal
kg/ha-d
X
Mass L.R
kg/ha-d
Removal
kg/ha-d
X
Mass L.R.
kg/ha-d
Removal
kfi/ha-d
X
Mass L.R.
kg/hn-d
Removal
kg/ha-d
X
Mass L.R.
kg/ha-d
Remnva1
kg/ha-d
X
10.2
412
244
59
412
245
60
16.9
0.2
1
17.7
1.1
6
38.7
6.7
17
38.8
9.8
25
.112
.092
82



Hi.2
318
150
4 7
382
201
53
10.9
1.2
11
13.5
3.9
29
42.2
12.5
30
38.3
9.0
24
.112
. 102
91



10.2
J//
104
28
392
129
33
16.0
1.2
8
16.2
1.1
7
34.2
Increase
-
39.2
8.6
22
.061
.041
67



10.2
407
257
63
382
234
61
14.3
2.2
16
13.7
1.4
10
36.3
6.5
18
38.7
10.7
28






5.1
213
187
87
213
182
85
7.2
0.7
10
7.2
0.5
6
19.0
4.2
22
19.3
4.6
24
.168
.143
8'j



10.2
2H0
241
86
2/8
244
88
15.1
1.2
8
14.1
0
0
41.9
9.6
23
41.4
8.0
19
.214
.163
70



5.1
133
101
/ 6
128
103
80
7.4
3.8
52
7.2
3.8
53
18.8
6.0
32
18.3
7.3
40
.076
.046
60



20.3
392
265
68
376
250
66
29.3
Increase
-
29.5
Increase
-
71.1
15.6
22
68.5
13.2
19
.305
.122
4(1



10.2
210
191
91
101
87
86
9.9
Increase
-
13.5
3.3
24
34.1
19.5
57
37.0
12.8
35
.193
.132
68



20. J
391.
342
87
391
338
86
27.1
0.2
i
27.7
1.0
4
35.8
Increase
-
38.3
Increase
-
.509
.285
56



6.9
18/
154
82
194
170
87
11.3
0.9
8
10.7
0.3
3
26.5
5.9
22
25.3
5.6
22
.020
0
0
.014
.007
50
10.2
185
137
/4
173
131
76
13.4
2.3
17
12.3
0.9
7
39.7
6.6
17
37.6
6.0
16
.183
.132
72
.173
.142
82
20.3
384
283
81
375
310
83
12.0
0.4
3
12.2
1.2
10
36.2
12.6
35
34.8
12.8
37
.122
.081
67
.122
.102
83
40.6
972
414
43
903
461
51
50.1
Increase
-
45.6
Increase
-
140.8
8.1
6
132.3
2.0
2






6.9
144
46
32
151
101
67
6.2
Increase
--
5.7
Increase
-
13.3
Increase
-
11.3
Increase
-






10.2
460
330
72
390
311
80
16.9
0.1

15.0
Increase
-
57.1
4.8
8
58.6
7.8
13






-------
TABLE 7.23. SYSTEM PfcttyORMANCE OF PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS USING DOMESTIC SEWAGE
Target
BOD
TOC
COD
Soluble COD
Total
Nitrogen

Total
Phoaphorua

Suapeoded Sollda
Volatile
Suapended Solida
Soluble BOD
Area L.K.
ca/d
Has* L.I
kg/ha-d
Braoval
kg/ha-d
Z
Haas L.
kg/ha-d
R. Reaoval
kg/ha-d
Z
Maaa L.l. Reaoval
kg/ha-d kg/ba-d
Z
Haas L.S. Reaoval
kg/ha-d kg/ba-d
Z
Maaa L.t
kg/ha-d
Beaoval
kg/ba-d
Z
Maaa L.S
kg/ha-d
. Reaoval
kg/ha-d
Z
Maaa L.t.
kg/ba-d
Reaoval
kg/ha-d Z
Maaa L.R.
kg/ha-d
Reaoval
kg/ha-d
Z
Maaa L.R. Reaoval
kg/ha-d kg/ha-d
Z
5.1
4.0
10.2
172
129
/5
132
97
73










117
96 82
54
41
76


10.2
109
67
61
75






44.5
2.8
6
7.22
0.38
5
73
45 62
65
41
63


10.2
103
69
67
84
47
56




41.2
6.5
16
6.31
1.22
19
68
40 59
46
33
72


5.1
62
44
71
42
26
62




20.2
5.7
28
3.77
1.21
32
47
36 77
35
27
77


; 20.3










67.9
12.7
19
12.96
1.77
M
106
153 74
180
145
83


5.1
58
48
83
48
35
73




17.5
1.1
18
3.05
0.71
23
46
31 67
29
20
69


10.2
101
80
79
64
43
51




27.3
4.6
17
4.84
0.39
8
no
78 71
108
95
88


20.3
133
118
89













175
164 94
174
167
96


6.9
67
61
91
49
35
72
133 99
74
94 62
66
13.0
3.3
25
2.97
0.67
23
20
17 85
24
22
92
44 38
86
10.2
182
134
74
101
59
58
372 190
51
272 113
42
36.4
11.1
30
7.62
1.67
22
57
48 04
50
42
84
120 78
65
20.3
272
166
61
100
51
51
556 247
44
395 144
36
44.4
6.9
16
12.09
1.12
9
98
66 67
87
56
64
150 74
47
-------
TABLE 7.24. COMPARISON OF MEAN MASS REMOVALS FROM SYNTHETIC AND DOMESTIC SEWAGE
IN PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS. (kg/m2-d)
Domestic Sewage
t

Synthetic
: Sewage

Average Flow (A/d)
1563
3804
5773
1913
2834
5668
11336
Target Loading (cm/d)
7
10
20
7
10
20
40
Total BOD
.0062
.0125
.0131
—
—
—
—
Soluble BOD
.0042
.0078
.0064
—
—
—
—
Total COD
.0105
.0181
.0197
.0134
.0137
.0295
.0496
Soluble COD
.0065
.0104
.0104
.0153
.0138
.0315
.0522
Total TOC
.0038
.0056
.0048
—
—
—
—
Total SS
.0025
.0047
.0064
+
+
0
+
Volatile SS
.0022
.0040
.0054
1.4 x 10-I+
+
0
+
Total N
5.3 x lO"1*
8.3 x 10-1*
3.9 x lp-1*
6 x 10~5
7 x 10~5
1.4 x 10"1*
+
Total P
9 x 10~5
1.0 x lO-*4
2 x 10-5
.0001
.0002
8 x 10-5
+
CD
—
—
—
i
o
X
1 x 10~5
1 x 10-5
2 x 10-5
- = Not determined
+ = Increase in concentration through system
-------
By plotting the removal efficiency versus the hydraulic retention time in
the system it is possible to obtain an empirical determination of k, the
substrate removal coefficient. If the data follow a straight line on a
semi-log plot, it also confirms that the reaction rate is driven by the
substrate concentration in the reactor and that it is a first order rela-
tionship. Departures or scatter of the data reflect the fact that the
system is being tested in a substrate-limited zone, that the reaction is not
first order, or that the system is a significant departure from a plug flow
and that mixing and short-circuiting occurred.
Example plots of rate determinations for BOD, suspended and volatile solids,
nitrogen, and phosphorus for domestic sewage are shown in Figures 7.85
through 7.89. Similar plots for COD, nitrogen and phosphorus removal from
synthetic sewage are shown in Figures 7.90 through 9.92. The substrate
removal rate coefficient as determined from this information is summarized
in Table 7.25. This information, although quite variable, tends to indicate
that the removals are first order for most of these systems. Because of the
variability of the data, this approach has a limited value in the design of
this system. The application of this information to sizing the units will
be presented in the next section.
TABLE 7.25. SUMMARY OF SUBSTRATE REMOVAL COEFFICIENTS
AS DETERMINED FROM ASSUMED FIRST ORDER
KINETIC ESTIMATES FOR CANARY GRASS SYSTEMS
Sewage Type
Variable
k
Domestic
BOD
-0.0015

TSS
-0.0096

VSS
-0.010

N
-0.0016

P
-0.0016
Synthetic
COD
-0.0038

N
-0.0001

P
-0.0008
272
-------
1 • \J
0.9
0.8
-


k = -.0015

0.7
—




0.6
—

•


0.5
—



•
o. u
—




0.3
—




0.2
—


•

0.1

1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1 1
1
0 10 20 30 1<0 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
IIYDRAIILLC: RETENTION TIME, mill.
Figure 7.85. liat.e d<;UM-;ni nation plot for BOD removal L t'rom dome:; I i c
b.y a canary gratis system.
-------
k = -0.00960
)i
1
80
120
60
100
20
1IYDRALJ],IC RETENTION TIME, min.
I1'i. guro 7.86. Rate dotormi na I, loii plot for suspended solids removal from
domestic newage by a canary grasn system.
-------
0
9
8
-0.010
.6

Ji
3
2
"I ?.()
} 00
HYDRAULIC RETENTION TIME, min
Figure	Hate detei'ininatiori plot for voJub Lie suspended .solid:;
removal. Croin domestic sewage by a canary p,raan :;y:itoin.
-------
.0
0.9
0.8
0.Y
0.6
O.H
o
0.
0. i
00
120
100
60
20
HYDRAULIC RETENTION TIM]''., mi n .
Figure Y-00. Rate detcrminat.ion plot for total nitrogen removal from
domestic sewapc by a canary grass system.
-------
0.8	-
0 • 7	-
0.6	-
o.^	-
0. )|	-
o
t n
0.1 	I	I	I	l	I	L_
0	1*0	6o	80	i00	120
HYDRAUL,fC RLITKNT10N '[MMK, min.
Figure 7• 89 • Hate dotermi nat.i on plot for total phosphorus removal, from domestic
sewage b.y a canary grtisr; system.
-------
9
8
Y
18.6 m2
6
o
j.
160
200
80
ho
120
HYDRAULIC HKTENTTON T'L'MF!, rnin.
Figure '(.90. Kate determinat. ion plot. I'oc COD rcmova] from synthetic sewage by
canary gra:;^ unit'.; in different size sy ytoma.
-------

L • > '
0.9
zrv	
A "AO
		~


0.8
-




0.Y
-




0.6
-




0.5
-



0
(O
O.'l
-

e
9.3 ni2 systems






0)
cn
0.3
-

~
18.6 m2 systems




A
27.9 "i2 systems

0.2
—







k
= -.0007:;

0.1

1
1 1
1
o	UO	Bo	120	160	200
UYDHAULLC RETENTION TIMK, min.
Figure T-9L.
Rate determination plot for' phosphoi'us removal
from .synthetic sewa,'.;e by canary {jriiaa units in
di ITerent size unit:;.
-------
1.0
0.9

11 A *
~

A
0.8
0.7
5
0 & 0
0


~
0.6
-

~


o.b
-




o.U
-




0.3
-


0
9.3 1,12 uyi-itenu;
0.2



~
A
|8.6 m? :;y:;tems
27.9 m2 :sy:;l«rnri
0.1

1
1 1

1
0	ho	Bo	120	.160	200
HYDRAU1.T'": RUTKNTJON '['IMK, mi 11.
!¦'j fr,urc 7-92.
Ral.e (ict'.erinj nut, i ori for tola"! ni t.rogen removal
from ;;yril'.he'...ie uowuf,c in canary (-',raas unit::-,
or different area:;.
-------
CHAPTER VIII
DISCUSSION
A. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The general goal of this large study was to provide data to support a
feasibility analysis for the use of plants for wastewater purification. The
experimental program was designed to test the NFT under conditions that
would make it a viable alternative to conventional technologies. Units up
to 36 meters long were tested at flow rates up to 11,000 liters (3,000 gpd)
per day. Although a detailed costing analysis is beyond the scope of this
study, it appears that the NFT will achieve the goal of being competitive
with most conventional technologies; that is, secondary treatment efficiency
or better can be achieved with the NFT system for a similar or lower cost.
The testing program was conducted in such a way that a given loading rate
was tested to the point of achieving relatively constant results, and then
an Increased loading rate was imposed on the system until treatment failure
or plant death occurred. This approach resulted in the testing of plant
systems that were relatively immature under highly adverse conditions.
Thus, the results of this study should be considered conservative. Since
the results also reflect plant activity in a cold climate, the capability of
the system should improve with higher incident solar radiation and tempera-
ture. The disadvantages and the advantages of the NFT system over conven-
tional treatment systems are listed in Table 8.1. In general, this study
provides the Information that enables all plant species to be considered as
potential candidates for a wastewater treatment system. The weeds and other
marginally valued plants can all be useful, but the NFT enables considera-
tion of trees, shrubs, food plants and pharmaceutical producing plants as
potential candidates. Existing agricultural practices for propagation,
growth, harvesting and pest management can be applied to the NFT system.
The operation of units In northern New York and New Hampshire indicates that
a cold climate is not a severe limitation and that the system would operate
anywhere in the contiguous United States. Another possible advantage of the
NFT system is the value of the potential by-products when ornamental, food
or biochemical products are considered. As will be Indicated under the cost
anaylsls, the covered system and the size of the NFT that is required to
provide effluent quality appears to be competitive with the conventional
treatment systems. Finally, a significant advantage is the psychological
Impact of a treatment system which produces a beautiful and potentially
valuable by-product from a wasted resource. The Impression gained from a
bed of roses in blossom when visitors enter the sewage plant provides a
significant asset for the treatment system.
281
-------
TABLE 8.1. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE NFT SYSTEM WHEN USED FOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
ADVANTAGES
1.	All plants are potential candidates
2.	Existing agricultural techniques applicable — propagation,
growth, harvesting, pest control, etc.
3.	Not limited by climate — applies anywhere In U.S.
4.	Potentially valuable by-products
5.	Covered system cost-effective compared to conventional
6.	Psychological Impact of treatment system appearance
DISADVANTAGES
1. Limited by all factors that apply to biological treatment
-	toxic response
-	seasonal affects
The major disadvantages that limit the application of the NFT system are
essentially those that apply to all biological systems. The recovery of the
system from toxins will be slow and costly. In northern climates the
seasonal effects are significant and will affect effluent quality.
Due to the Interaction of the large number of variables in the NFT, It was
difficult to define all of the mechanisms affecting pollutants in domestic
sewage. Parameters that are important will be discussed below. However,
several general observations can be made, regardless of the climate and
location of the NFT system. Effluent total COD concentrations of less than
100 mg/£, BOD5 values less than 30 mg/£ and suspended solids less than 10
mg/£ were often achieved at loading rates of 20 cm/day with NFT unit lengths
of 24 and 36 meters. Effluents of less than 10 mg/£ of suspended solids
occurred under loading rates of 30 cm/day with the longer test cells under
virtually all conditions.
In general, the plant productivity and nutrient removal aspects of the NFT
were not remarkable. This is attributed to the low temperature and Incident
light conditions in combination with the high loading rates of domestic
sewage pollutants that were examined for most of the test period. The
original system was proposed to be useful for manipulating the nitrogen
cycle via nitrification-denitrification. However, conditions never enabled
nitrification to occur to any significant degree.
B. NFT CHARACTERISTICS AND POLLUTANT REMOVAL MECHANISMS
B.l. Settling, Filtration, and Suspended Solids Control
The accumulation of solids in the root mass leads to the possibility of
pollutant manipulation in the NFT system. Background suspended solids lost
from a biological processing NFT can be estimated from the synthetic sewage
studies since the influent solids were always low. At lower loading
282
-------
conditions of 5 to 20 cm/day of a synthetic soluble wastewater, effluent
suspended solids resulting from microbial growth were always less than 5 to
7 mg/&, and these usually occurred in a coagulated, flocculated form so that
the effluent clarity was quite high; in other words, the turbidity was low.
At the higher loading rates, effluent suspended solids never exceeded
10 mg/£.
A consideration of the loading rates and the average flow-through velocities
indicates that most suspended solids should be easily removed at relatively
high loading rates in the NFT system. What is undefined are the mechanisms
that encourage small, colloidlal-sized bacterial solids to coagulate and
form larger particles that could be removed from the system by sedimentation
and filtration processes. It was anticipated in the hypothesized system
that the solids would attach and concentrate within the root mass. These
solids would then gradually induce additional root production so that the
root depth would increase and thus provide a mechanism for suspended solids
stabilization and control. In most cases, this did not occur. The sus-
pended solids were effectively blocoagulated in the unit, but they remained
relatively light and flocculant, and moved freely in the system. The
results of this interaction suggest that the controlled hydraulic loading
and unloading of these units could lead to separation and accumulation of
suspended solids In the reactor. At a specified time these solids could
then be flushed from the system in a relatively concentrated form. This
alternative was tested in the latter phases of the study and was found to be
effective for the treatment of raw sewage. Intermittent loadings of 30
cm/day were found to result in complete removal of settleable solids, 89
percent removal of suspended solids, and 77 percent removal of COD. These
extraordinarily high efficiencies were achieved in short-term experiments
and should not be taken as conclusive results; but they do represent an
encouraging optimization of the system.
The solids control capability of the NFT system and manipulation represents
one of the important advantages of the NFT system. In short-term experi-
ments attempting to document the capability for accumulating solids and the
rate of accumulation of solids £t was found that blomass entrapped In the
root zone often equalled 1 kg/m and that It accumulated at rates of between
2 and 548 gm/m /day (See Tables 7.4 and 7.5). This large amount of micro-
bial solids represents an interesting reservoir for manipulation of various
pollutant removal mechanisms. This large organic reservoir combined with
low redox potential, Is one of the reasons for the efficient cadmium
removals, for example.
The accumulation of solids in the NFT system Is predictable based on the
biodegradable organlcs and the suspended solids in the system. For example,
if It is assumed that 80% of the suspended solids and BOD are removed from a
domestic sewage, then 200 mg/I of suspended solids and approximately
160 mg/£ of BOD would be removed based on a medium strength domestic
sewage. The minimum microbial yield under these conditions is approximately
32 mg/4 of refractory microbial suspended solids and about 50 mg/A of
remaining undegraded suspended solids. Thus the wastewater can be consid-
ered to add approximately 80 mg/£ of solids that could be entrapped within
the root zone if removed from the wastewater. At a loading rate of
283
-------
10 cm/day, it would be expected that each square meter would accumulate
approximately 8 gm of suspended solids per day, and this would increase
proportionally with the hydraulic loading rate. Since these organics are
relatively concentrated, this adds approximately 0.013 cm/day of organic
matter. Based on the concentration that accumulates in the system and the
total mass in the system, it can be assumed that the solids retention time
in the NFT root zone is high, being greater than 125 days in a mature NFT
system. This long solids retention time of coagulated solids in the root
zone represents a large population of microorganisms that could be used to
manipulate many of the pollutant cycles. The capability of this microbial
community was limited in this study because of the high loadings that were
tested under most conditions and the resulting low dissolved oxygen levels.
The efficient biocoagulation and separation of organics from settled and raw
sewage indicate an important role for plants in achieving solids separa-
tion. This may be an alternative to clarification processes. Clearly, the
accumulation and the use of this large amount of organic matter must be
limited to application of plants that can withstand low dissolved oxygen
levels and redox potentials. Swamp plants such as bulrushes and cattails
are excellent candidates for this particular part of the system.
B.2. Microbial Metabolism and BOD and COD Removal
Microbial metabolism of the BOD must be the main organic removal mechanism.
This in turn is controlled by the oxygen aeration rates. Organic removals
were less impressive than suspended solids removals. Typical effluents of
less than 10 mg/& BOD occurred when treating sewage in the 36 meter long
units at loading rates of 7 cm/day. At the higher loading rate of 20 cm/day
the effluent BOD Increased to 40 mg/£. At this higher loading rate the dis-
solved oxygen levels were often close to zero throughout most of the length
of the system. Even at the lower loading rates dissolved oxygen was usually
no greater than 2 or 3 mg/A, indicating significant microbial activity.
The high efficiency of syspended solids control and lower capability for BOD
control indicates several possible alternatives for configurations of the
NFT system. For example, high rate preliminary treatment NFT units could be
used to efficiently separate solids and achieve perhaps as much as 50 per-
cent BOD removal. Aeration by a low energy-consuming technique such as
cascades could be inserted between this roughing NFT system and the
following organic removal step. High rate processes that efficiently remove
organics might be considered for installation after this unit prior to the
addition of a polishing and nutrient removal NFT section.
Although it was difficult to quantify the relationship of the plant growth
to the loading condition, the dissolved oxygen and the organic loading rates
were clearly a major controlling factor for plants that do not have physio-
logical adaptations for growing in anaerobic environments. For example,
long-term tests Indicated that influent organic loadings with 12 meter long
units at 20 cm per day exceeded the tolerance of the reed canary grass.
Long term operation at 20 cm/d at BOD values of 200 mg/A or greater would
kill healthy reed canary grass in several weeks. Also, several days'
284
-------
submergence of a root mat, such as that of napler grass, would result In
death of the plant.
The low turbidities that we achieved at relatively high loading rates were a
direct result of the blocoagulatlon that occurred in the system. An example
of the clarity of the effluents can be seen In Figure 8.1 showing the accu-
mulated solids in the bottom of an overflow trough and high clarity water
being discharged from the unit. Efficient separation of solids throughout
the testing indicates that alternate flushing and sedimentation may be
necessary and useful to obtain complete control over solids in the system.
High turbidity effluents should be expected during flushing cycles.
Finally, it should be emphasized that roughing NFT systems operating at low
or zero dissolved oxygen concentrations should be expected to generate
malodors. Since in the northern climates a greenhouse is required, it
should be possible to separate these odors and to strip them before dis-
charging the air from the greenhouse. Odors in subsequent portions of the
system were insignificant throughout most of the study.
Efforts were made to estimate the Impact of the NFT on reaeratlon character-
istics, and indirectly to determine the role of the plants in organic oxida-
tion. Due to the complexity of the factors affecting reaeratlon, no conclu-
sive insights were developed. Attention to this topic in future studies
will assist in optimizing alternative NFT configurations for organic
removals and nitrogen cycle manipulations.
B.3. Nutrient Removals
The use of plants for nutrient control is an old technology, especially with
the application of microscopic algae in wastewater ponds. This use of
plants for nutrient removal, however, raises several problems. Large land
areas are usually required. Figure 8.2 illustrates the relationship between
nitrogen content and yield of plants and the area required to treat domestic
sewage based on nitrogen removal. Exceptionally high plant yields are
required for nitrogen control before the land area requirements are small
enough to represent practical treatment areas, especially where greenhouse
covers may be necessary. Literature values Indicate that many of the plants
that were studied, such as cattails, have the capacity to yield up to 80
t/ha-yr when the root mass is included. With the higher nitrogen content,
this plant yield is such that as few as 15 ha of land would be required for
nitrogen removal from sewage produced by 10,000 people. However, this
represents a large surface area, and one that would be costly to enclose.
It is likely that lower efficiencies for nutrient removal would be achieved
with the NFT system. Another possible limitation for nitrogen and phospho-
rus removal with plant systems is the relationship between the nitrogen and
phosphorus in sewage and the ratio in plant matter. The concentration
ratios of nitrogen to phosphorus can be as low as 2:1 In settled or
secondary treated sewage, whereas plants often have a nitrogen:phosphorus
ratio of 10:1. Certain plants also have other requirements that raise
special problems when applied to domestic sewage. For example, many plants
require large quantities of potassium and iron, two elements found at low
concentrations in domestic sewage.
285
-------
Figure 8.1. Photograph of the effluent, from an NFT unit
treating primary settled sewage showing the
the large coagulated, particles settled in
the overflow trough.
286
-------
100
o
H
o
o
in
10
P-t
tn
w
%
LH
O
ro
m
E<
U
ui
CO
N
m
W
AlU'.AiJ
WLTI1
CONVENT.LONA
PLANT YIELDS

AKEAU "
ADVANCED
AC k.i cut/run i
TECHNIQUE:
iTlCAL
1'OTENITAL YIELD£>
KENI10USE
i LELDS
0 10	:'0	UO 60 80 LOO	L'OO	1+00
PLAN!' YIELD, METRIC TONNES PER HECTARE
h'igure 8.P. h'e I at, iour.h Lp ol' pi ant yield to land area required for
complete nitrogen removal from domestic sewage for
crops with two different levels of nitrogen. Tt. jr.
assumed that the sewage has HO ing/8. of total nitrogen,
that it is all available to the plants at the initial
high rate of uptake, and that the per capita flow rate
is O.h inJ / 
-------
In tropical areas nutrient removal with the NFT may be more promising. How-
ever, in the colder climates the attractiveness of nutrient control is
limited. It is likely that the nutrient film can be used to produce valua-
ble plants and a marginal nutrient removal efficiency. Where additional
nutrient removal is required, a combination of other higher rate biological
and chemical processes may be required. Finally, it should be noted that in
areas where seasonal discharge limitations are acceptable, biological
processes such as the NFT may be useful. Significant nutrient removals can
be achieved in the summer periods where temperatures are higher and light
intensity greater in temperate climates, but during the colder times of the
year when low radiation occurs, little nutrient removal may result.
C.	TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Data obtained on heavy metals and toxic organics indicate that the NFT can
effectively remove toxic materials. Zinc and cadmium concentrations of 0.1
to 0.3 mg/& were efficiently removed from the wastewater down to a level of
0.06 mg/i or less, thus meeting effluent standards for irrigation and higher
quality uses. These metals were concentrated in the volatile solids entrap-
ped by the roots. The efficiency is probably related to microbial activity
and the low redox potential. However, a significant portion of the cadmium
that was removed from the wastewater was transferred into the foliage of the
reed canary grass. Any use of the plant material mist take into considera-
tion the concentrations of the toxic metals in the plant matter.
The NFT unit also appeared to be efficient in removing volatile and non-
volatile organics. As in overland flow land treatment, the large surface
area of the NFT enhances the chances of losing volatile organics such as
chloroform (Jenkins, 1981). Non-volatile toxic organics such as PCB's
appear to be absorbed in the root zone. This stripping of toxic organics
needs to be defined in future activities so that the fate of these materials
can be predicted.
Although it was not anticipated that the indicator bacterial organisms'
reduction would be significant enough to result in the elimination of a
disinfection process, significant removals could occur if the NFT system
were optimized. The lower loading rate condition usually resulted in large
decreases in fecal coliforms.
D.	TDS MANIPULATION
The introduction of the NFT system provides the design engineer with the use
of the entire plant kingdom as treatment mechanisms. There is potential for
dissolved solids control with plants under certain circumstances when using
the NFT system. This possibility, however, may not be realized since the
uptake of dissolved salts is closely related to plant yield and evapo-
transpiration. The relationship between plant yield and dissolved solids
control is illustrated in Figure 8.3 where three different loadings are
compared to varying plant yields with varying ash content. With most
288
-------
100
90
80
Y0
6o
l;0
no
30
:>o
]0
T.ine
Hydraulic
Loading
Rate
cm/d
1
L0
10
Plant
Ash
Content
% TW
10
10
30
30 3 '3 1|0 1*5
I'TiANT Y1RT.D, p;m/m"-d
60
P'Lfrure ft. 3-
Calculated maximum total diusolved suits removal. efficiency with plants
in the NFT at varying yields. The influent total dissolved solid:.;
concent,ration is assumed to be [300 tug/&. ('IT is assumed to be zero.
-------
plants that have relatively low ash content, efficient removal of dissolved
solids could occur, but only at extremely high yields. Note that it is
assumed that ET is zero in Figure 8.3, a simplifying assumption that does
not occur in plant metabolism.
E.	TEMPERATURE EFFECTS
The effect of temperature on the NFT treatment system has both negative and
positive aspects. Studies with the NFT indicate that plants that maintain
their roots in warmer solutions can withstand relatively cold temperatures
around the vegetative portions and still grow at significant rates. Root
temperatures of 10°C will be expected in all but the most northern cli-
mates. Temperatures as low as 7°C occurred in New Hampshire. This did not
kill the plants, but it did limit their productivity. It is anticipated
that the heat provided from the sewage would minimize the amount of heating
for the greenhouse that would be required in northern climates in order to
maintain acceptable air temperatures. The combined use of solar greenhouse
techniques with large water flows with minimum temperatures of 10°C could
eliminate the need for additional heating with marginal quality plants.
The negative aspects of the temperature effects relates to the solar heat
absorption that occurs in the greenhouse and the possibilities of thermal
pollution effects. The large surface area required to treat the sewage
provides an ideal opportunity to capture solar heat in the water. When
feeding colder temperature sewage at 7°C, temperature rises greater than 10°
were observed in January and February in New Hampshire. In the summertime
the temperature increase appeared to be less, although this may have
reflected the Impact of shading by the more mature plants that were tested
in most summer operations. The relationships of temperature and greenhouse
requirements should be contrasted to the storage requirements with land
application systems. In the northern U.S. climates, more than 10 ha of
wastewater winter storage would be required for a population of 10,000
people.
Another advantage of a greenhouse cover Is that it enables complete control
of pests and pest management techniques. Biological controls (such as with
the ladybeetles tried here) and chemical controls are easily contained.
F.	PROCESS SENSITIVITY AND DESIGN
The relationship between the major loading rate parameters and the
efficiency for various pollutant removals were examined to provide a predic-
tive relationship between wastewater quality, NFT area, and effluent
quality. Several loading rate parameters affect the removal mechanisms.
The hydraulic and weir loading rates to the system dictate the efficiency of
the suspended solids and BOD removals, and also indirectly determine the
hydraulic retention time, which influences other pollutant removal mechan-
isms. The Results section outlined techniques to relate the loading rate to
the hydraulic retention time under a specific set of conditions. Unfortun-
ately, due to the large number of variables (plant species, reactor length,
depth of liquid, temperature, incident radiation, and pollutant concentra-
tion) no consistent theory of kinetics of removal for each pollutant was
290
-------
defined. However, empirical removal rates at given loadings can be used as
a first approximation of the size of the system required to achieve a given
effluent. The dissolved synthetic sewage used at Cornell generated by the
Cayuga Heights community in New York, and that of the Hanover, New
Hampshire, community were similar within certain limits, and can be used for
empirical estimates of process sizing and efficiencies.
As indicated in the Results Chapter, loading rates up to 20 cm/day resulted
in effluent qualities exceeding secondary standards in most cases. The
removal rates reported in Tables 7.22 and 7.23 express the range of removals
achieved at the varying loading conditions. During lower loading rates the
systems worked more efficiently, while at higher loadings the systems were
receiving more pollutants and were operating less efficiently for many of
the pollutants. Given a loading rate, the area required for treatment can
be calculated from the removal rate when it is expressed as kilograms
removed/ha-day. For example, if the COD removal rate of 900 kg/ha-day cou^.d
be achieved continuously in an NFT system, a design loading rate of 4500 m
applied/ha-day would result, or a hydraulic depth of loading of approxi-
mately 45 cm/day would be acceptable (assuming that the COD concentration is
0.2 kg/m ). The hydraulic retention time that is required to produce this
effluent is not known specifically; however, the volume of the system with a
given application rate defines the hydraulic retention time. In this case
the hydraulic retention time in a 36 meter long unit would be approximately
95 minutes if the system responded similar to the test given in Figure
7.45. Deeper or finer root masses with varying void spaces and accumulation
of different levels of biomass will change the system's volume and thus the
hydraulic retention time. The relationship of hydraulic retention time to
efficiency is an area where much additional work needs to be conducted
before rational design of the NFT process is possible. Example loading
rates and removal rates are listed in Table 7.23 for removal of nitrogen,
phosphorus, and cadmium as obtained from the empirical loading rates that
were achieved in the system. Bench scale kinetic work also provided the
removal rate values which can be contrasted to those obtained under steady
state with the larger system. Maximum BOD removal of 50 gm/m -day were
measured with small reed canary grass units. This indicates that an
application of 25 cm/day would result in an acceptable secondary effluent.
G. PLANT ENVIRONMENT FACTORS
A wide range of plants were tested to determine their viability under
varying loading conditions and adverse environmental conditions. Although a
large amount of information remains to be developed to define the specific
conditions that will lead to maximum yields, considerations for plant
production, harvesting, and management were defined in this study. The main
candidate species, reed canary grass, was used throughout the study and was
found to be viable throughout the four seasons in the cold climate of the
United States. However, the most sensitive parameter appears to be related
to the organic loading rates on the root system and, indirectly, to the
dissolved oxygen concentration. At a 20 cm/day loading of medium strength
sewage, the reed canary grass will eventually die. The reason for this
291
-------
death is likely the lack of dissolved oxygen reaching the root system to
provide metabolic requirements. In actual systems it is recommended that
the organic loading rate be limited when plants that require an aerobic or
facultative root system are utilized. This can be accomplished in a sewage
treatment system by utilizing a roughing treatment unit upstream from plants
that are more sensitive. Plants that feed oxygen to the roots through their
structure, such as the bulrushes, may be viable for encouraging the bioco-
agulatlon and stabilization of sludges. The extent of aeration caused by
such plants was not measured in this study.
It is essential that the photoperiod and temperature interactions be
carefully evaluated in choosing a plant species. One candidate species
tested, phragmites, grew rapidly during the warmer parts of the year; but
when the photoperiod declined to a certain duration, phragmites became
dormant; and growth ceased until the photoperiod reached the minimum
length. In New York the dormant period occurs between mid-December through
the first of March. Phragmites' dormancy and reaction to the light period
was in contrast to the reed canary grass, which remained green and healthy
throughout several years of testing in the NFT unit. Surprisingly, the
tropical napier grass also remained green and growing throughout the entire
year.
It should be emphasized that the combination of organic loadings and low
oxygen tension in the root zone provide an inhibitory environment for many
plants, and the presence of large quantities of bacteria and organic matter
provides an excellent environment for the growth of pests. As indicated in
the Results section, numerous crises were experienced where a pest would
grow to a point that would threaten the entire plant system. In all cases,
the organism was controlled by a plant management scheme, by manipulation of
the water flow, or by the addition of pest controls. It is essential in
considering this type of system that the expertise gained in greenhouse and
plant management be used since all of the problems that occurred have
essentially been solved by plant scientists. A full scale NFT system would
require the services of a horticulturalist or other plant specialist.
In general, the more valuable plants would be exposed to the wastewater at a
point in the system where the stress on the plant would be minimzed. In
other words, the roses that were produced in this system grew well when the
sewage had received treatment to a level that removed most of the biodegra-
dable organics and suspended solids. This suggests that the latter part of
the NFT system where the wastewater is relatively clean could be used for
production and testing of a number of different species for community or
commercial utilization.
H. OPTIMIZED FACILITY CONSIDERATIONS
The pollutants which must be removed from sewage range from the large solids
to toxic trace organics. The fundamental mechanisms that control their
removal may not be compatible with one another. For example, a continuously
flowing system where the biochemical materials are exposed to the bacteria
is the most favorable environment for rapid removal. However, suspended
solids management may be achieved under quiescent conditions much more
292
-------
readily than in a continuously operated film unit. It is also likely that
the solids accumulation within the reactor will be useful for further
pollutant reduction if they can be accumulated in the root zone and
intimately mixed with the wastewater over a short period of time and
efficiently removed.
Consideration of the pollutant removal mechanisms and the NFT requirements
in terms of oxygen in the root zone and photoperiod led to an optimized
alternative that was tested in the latter phase of this study at the Cayuga
Heights plant. For maximum accumulation of solids in the anaerobic root
zone of roughing plants such as cattails and bulrushes, a rapid addition of
wastewater to the system followed by quiescent draw off into subsequent
units used to polish the remaining BOD and suspended solids was tested. The
preliminary results from this testing show that at an overall addition of
30 cm of raw sewage per day, 100 percent of the settleable solids was
removed and contained in large particles that were biocoagulated; 75 to 80
percent of total COD was removed; 90 percent of the suspended solids was
removed; and, surprisingly, 60 percent of the total nitrogen was removed
from the wastewater. These results lead to the consideration of an excep-
tionally small system for roughing treatment followed by a polishing
secondary system that would have water of a high enough quality that many
alternate species could be produced without dissolved oxygen and solids
inhibition in the root zone. These data suggest that the roughing treatment
unit could achieve better than primary treatment with less than 0.5 ha for
sewage flow from 10,000 people (1 MGD). By removing the suspended solids
and the BOD rapidly in this system, further treatment and some additional
nutrient removal could be achieved with several hectares of NFT following
this roughing batch mode type of treatment. This will be the type of design
discussed in the following chapter.
I. PLANT CULTURING AND PROPAGATION
The wide range of testing with weeds and valuable commercial plants con-
ducted in this study indicates that nearly all plants can be considered
candidates for use in the NFT system. By using culturing techniques such as
propagation with cuttings, it is relatively easy to produce large plant
stands. In cases where seeds are available with plants such as cattails, it
is also possible to rapidly produce large stands of these plants.
The major limitations for the plant culturing aspects of the system relate
to the practical consideration for Installation of the system. If plant
culturing takes place after construction it would be necessary to begin
plant production in the spring when the sources of plants are available as
young plants or as seeds. Winter start-up would be a difficult task. How-
ever, there is also the possibility that while the facility is under con-
struction large quantities of plants could be propagated by growers, or
temporary facilities could be constructed to produce large quantities of the
material. For example, temporary NFT propagation units could be established
during warmer weather by spreading plastic on top of the ground and allowing
water to be sprayed as a fine mist over such a surface. This would be one
alternative to providing plant systems that would be available at the finish
of construction.
293
-------
It should also be noted that the latter sections of the NFT unit can be used
as culturlng and propagation sections for other portions of the facility.
It 9hould be anticipated that pests have the capability of eliminating por-
tions of the system at any time, and it would be wise to have replacement
materials available so that portions could be removed and replaced with new
plant matter. Another option for the latter portion would be to use it as a
nursery area for production of valuable plants for either commercial sales,
or for use in the municipality.
294
-------
CHAPTER IX
NFT TOTAL SYSTEM FEASIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS
The following total system requirements and some economic estimates provide
a perspective on the potential of this technology. Due to the promising
results obtained from the large size and the duration of these tests, It Is
hoped that this information will lead rapidly to innovative testing of the
NFT process in larger pilot operations and possibly in full scale opera-
tion. The following analysis is divided into two areas. First is a con-
sideration of an alternate secondary wastewater treatment system, and
second, the application of the NFT as the main unit process in tertiary
treatment or water reclamation. Both examples are based on a system large
enough to treat wastes from a community of 10,000 people (wastewater flow of
about 3800 m /d or 1 MGD).
A. THE NFT AS A SECONDARY TREATMENT SYSTEM
A secondary NFT treatment system that would produce effluent quality with
less than 30 mg/£ of BOD and suspended solids throughout the year, even in a
northern climate, was developed using the conservative data of this study
and is illustrated in Figure 9.1. This system is composed of a two-phase
NFT treatment. The first phase is an intermittently loaded roughing NFT
designed to remove all of the settleable solids and a significant portion of
suspended solids and BOD. It has a covered greenhouse area of about one
hectare per 10,000 people served. It is followed In sequence by a polishing
treatment system which has a greenhouse area of approximately two hectares.
The loading rate on the roughing system is approximately 50 cm/day, and the
polishing area receives a flow equivalent to 25 cm/day. The overall loading
rate on the entire treatment system is equivalent to 17 cm/day.
Potential plant species for the system include a variety of the submerged
aquatics such as bulrushes, cattails, and sedges for the roughing treatment
system. The polishing unit would be composed of rapidly growing plants with
large root systems such as the napier grass and the reed canary grass.
Approximately one-third to one-half of the latter unit could be used for the
production of useful plant materials—ornamentals, trees, and shrubs.
It Is beyond the scope of this study to perform a detailed design and cost-
ing of the system. However, some general comments regarding the economics
of the NFT can be made. The unit shown in Figure 9.1 would be built with a
low-cost solar greenhouse type of construction. The greenhouse has a
capital investment of approximately $54/m ($5/ft ). Thus the total capital
investment for the entire treatment system, minus the sludge handling, would
be approximately $1.6 million for a sewage flow from 10,000 people. This
295
-------
Preliminary
Treatment
Influent
Waste Solids
Zffluent Air
Scrubbed for
Odor Removal
Roughing NtT l.G ha)
to
¦Aeration
EFT for
"Treatment and
utrier.t Conversion
2 ha
\Arsa Available for
commercial plant production
approximately 1 ha)
» Useful Plant
Material
5rr.amer.t al, cheir.ical
or animal feed)
Disinfection
Figure
9.1.
Schematic of NFT treatment facility capable of treating
domestic sewage from 10,000 people.
-------
contrasts to an average capital investment for conventional technology on
the order of $2 million for a total treatment facility for the same flow.
Energy requirements for this facility also appear to be low, since no aera-
tion and only low head pumping would be required.
Although it is difficult to compare systems, it is interesting to contrast
the area requirements, energy, and economic benefits of a conventional
treatment system, a water hyacinth aquatic treatment system, and an NFT. An
attempt to summarize these comparisons for a flow from a 10,000-person
community is shown in Table 9.1. When applied as a secondary treatment
process, the energy produced from the biomass grown in an NFT process is
insignificant unless anaerobic digestion is used for treatment of the
sludge. In contrast, the water hyacinth has an energy production value
equal to approximately $0.08 per 3785 liters (1,000 gallons). However, this
is a misleading value since the cost of handling the added wet material in
the form of the water hyacinth is often neglected. As shown in the table,
the estimated sludge produced by a water hyacinth facility is more than four
times that produced in either the conventional faciltiy or the NFT
facility. If this is considered, the sludge disposal costs in the water
hyacinth system may eliminate all economic benefits from the energy produced
in that system. In contrast, the potential value from the use of a small
portion of the latter part of the NFT system can be equal to $0.40 to $0.80
per 3785 liters (1,000 gallons) treated. This by-product value assumes that
useful and economically viable plants are produced from only one-sixth of
the area of the NFT unit. If more area could be used to produce
commercially viable plant matter, the NFT would clearly be more attractive.
TABLE 9.1. SUMMARY COMPARISON OF TWO SECONDARY TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
COMPARED TO AN NFT SYSTEM (all achieve effluents of 30 mg/I
of BOD and SS).

Conventional
Biological Treatment
Water
Hyacinth
NFT
Area Needs, ha
2
6
1
Energy Production,
Cents/3785 i (1000 gal)
0 to 4
0 to 8
0
By-Product Value
Cents/3785 I (1000 gal)
0
0
40
Sludge for Disposal
Metric tonnes (wet) per
year for 3800 m /d flow
(1 MGD)
% plant material
4600
0
19,100
87
5,200
4
Sludge Disposal Costs
Cents/3785 !¦ (1000 gal)
7
25
10
Note: Tertiary NFT would involve an additional 5 ha, capital cost
a$3,000,000/3875£/d (1 MGD), annual value of products ° $1,000,000.
297
-------
B. THE NFT AS A TERTIARY TREATMENT FACILITY
The use of the NFT for complete treatment of and/or nutrient recovery from
sewage is a possibility which was not tested in this study. It is likely
that the incorporation of several supporting unit processes and concepts
would be useful in an innovative application of the NFT for tertiary
treatment. The nutrient removal section of the NFT would require a minimum
area of approximately 10 hectares per 10,000 population. In areas of the
country where freezing weather is not a problem, this section would not
require greenhouse protection. In areas south of Pennsylvania it is
possible that the heat in the wastewater would minimize heating
requirements.
Except under the higher light conditions, the nutrient removal from this
system would not meet stringent effluent requirements. Therefore, the
nutrient removal alternatives would have to consider the installation of
either nutrient recovery or nutrient destruction alternatives such as
nitrification/denitrification and/or other chemical alternatives. The
estimated quality with and without the NFT nutrient polishing section and
with the additional unit process and removal of nutrients is shown in Table
9.2. Additional research would be required to confirm these values.
The use of the NFT as a nutrient removal and polishing system raises
numerous questions that can be only partially answered by this study. There
may be significant opportunities for cost recovery through commercial sales
of biomass products from this section. The growth of plants in a low
nutrient environment may limit the number of species that can be produced in
this section. However, there are plant production techniques that can
eliminate substrate composition imbalances for plants. For example, for
many plants foliar feeding (the application of nutrients directly to the
leaf) can be utilized. This would enable high value crops to be produced in
a nutrient stripping NFT, but at an additional cost for adding nutrients.
The economics of using the NFT as a nutrient recovery system remain to be
defined. Although there are large greenhouses in commercial operation, the
sizes proposed here are far larger than any current commercial operation.
The economics, however, are attractive since the capital investment may be
limited to around $54/m2 ($5/ft^) and the return per year may be one-third
of this, depending on the value of the crop. The total capital investment
for the nutrient stripping NFT would exceed $6 million for a flow from
10,000 people. If, however, a significant portion of this facility could be
used to produce commercially viable products, it may be an economically
attractive alternative.
298
-------
TABLE 9.2. ESTIMATED WATER QUALITY TO BE PRODUCED BY THE PROPOSED WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY.
(Values In mg/£ except as noted).
After Nutrient
Characteristic	After Nutrient Removal/Polishing
Raw Sewage	At Nutrient	Removal/	Additional Unit
(degrltted)	Removal NFT Polishing NFT	Process
Solids
Suspended	200
Dissolved*	500
Settleable, m£/liter	10
Organlcs
BOD	200
COD	500
Nutrients
Nitrogen, Total	40
Phosphorus, Total	10
Heavy Metals	0.1
Toxic Organlcs, ppb
Volatlles (such as chlorlform)	200
Non-volatlle8 (such as PCB)	10
10	<1 <1
150	100	100
0.5	0 0
20	<1 <1
50	<50	<50
20	<10 <0.1
7	5 <0.1
0.01	<0.01	<0.005
20	<5 <5
3	<2 <2
*Plu8 background salts In tap water.
-------
REFERENCES
Alabaster, J. S., and R. Lloyd. Water Quality Criteria for Freshwater
Fish. Butterworths, London, 1980.
Albright, L. D. et al. Experimental Results of Solar Heating a Brace
Institute Style Greenhouse. Third Annual Conference on Solar Energy
for Heating of Greenhouses and Greenhouse Residence Combinations. Fort
Collins, CO, 1978.
Althouse, A. D., C. H. Turnquist and A. F. Bracciano. Modern Refrigeration
and Air Conditioning. Goodheart-Wilcox Comp., South Holland, IL, 1979.
APHA, AWWA, and WPCF. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. 14th edition. American Public Health Assoc., Washington,
D.C., 1976.
ASHRAE. Handbook and Product Directory: Fundmentals. ASHRAE, New York,
NY, 1981.
Anonymous. Project Looks for Value in Wastewater. Water Engineering and
Management. March, 1982.
Argo, D. G. and J. G. Montes. Wastewater Reclamation by Reverse Osmosis.
JWPCF 51(3):590-600, 1979.
Armstrong, W. The Oxidizing Activity of Roots in Waterlogged Soils. Phys.
Plant., 20:920, 1967.
Armstrong, W. Root Aeration in the Wetland Condition. In: Plant Life in
Anaerobic Environments, D. D. Hook and R. M. M. Crawford, eds. Ann
Arbor Science Press, Ann Arbor, MI, p. 269, 1978.
Asay, K. H., I. T. Carlson, and C. P. Wilsie. Genetic Variability in Forage
Yield, Crude Protein Percentage and Palatability in Reed Canary Grass.
Phalaris arundlnaceae L. Crop Sci., 8(2):568-571, 1968.
Assoc. of Official Agricultural Chemists. Offical Methods of the AOAC.
Washington, D.C., 1980.
Bartlett, R. J. Iron Oxidation Proximate to Plant Roots. Soil Sci.,
92:372, 1961.
Bohn, H. C., B. L. McNeal, and G. A. O'Connor. Soil Chemistry. John Wiley
& Sons, New York, 329 pp, 1979.
Bole, J. B. and R. G. Bell. Land Application of Municipal Sewage Waste
Water: Yield and Chemical Composition of Forage Crops. J. Environ.
Qual. 7(2):222-226, 1978.
300
-------
Boyd, C. E., and C. W. Hess. Factors Influencing Shoot Production and
Mineral Nutrient Levels in Typha latifolia. Ecology, 51(1):296—300,
1970.
Broome, S. W., W. W. Woodhouse, and E. D. Seneca. The Relationship of
Mineral Nutrients to Growth of Spartina altemlflora in North
Carolina. I. Nutrient Status of Plans and Soils in Natural Stands.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer., Proc., 39(2):295-307, 1975.
Brown, B. T., and Rattigan, B. M. Toxicity of Soluble Copper and Other
Metal Ions to Elodea canadenses. Environ. Pollut., 20:303, 1979.
Bryan, G. W. Some Aspects of Heavy Metal Tolerance in Aquatic Organisms.
In: Effects of Pollutants on Aquatic Organisms. A. P. M. Lockwood,
ed. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, England, 1976.
Byers, R. H., and K. E. Zeiders. Effects of Spray Irrigation with Municipal
Sewage Effluent on the Cereal Leaf Beetle and Fruit Fly Infesting Reed
Canary Grass. J. Envir. Qual., 5(2):205-206, 1976.
Chaney, R. L., M. C. White, and P. W. Simon. Plant Uptake of Heavy Metals
from Sewage Sludge Applied to Land. In: Proceedings of the Second
National Conference of Municipal Sludge Management, Rockville, MD,
1975.
Chang, H. T., and W. E. Loomis. Effect of Carbon Dioxide on Absorption of
Water and Nutrients by Roots. Plant Physiol. 20:221, 1945.
Chirkova, T. V. Some Regulatory Mechanisms of Plant Adaptation to Temporal
Anaerobiosis. In: Plant Life in Anaerobic Environments, D. D. Hook
and R. M. M. Crawford, eds. Ann Arbor Science Press, Ann Arbor, MI,
1978.
Conway, V. M. Studies in the Autoecology of Cladlum marlscus R. Br. III.
The Aeration of the Subterranean Parts of the Plant. New Phytol.
36:6-96, 1937.
Cook, C. D., B. J. Gut, G. M. Rip, J. Schneller, and M. Seitz. Water Plants
of the World: A Manual for the Identification of the Genera of
Freshwater Macrophytes. Dr. W. Junk b.v., The Hague, 561 pp, 1974.
Cooper, A. Nutrient Film Technique - Early Fears About Nutrition
Unfounded. The Grower, 84, 1975.
Cooper, A. Nutrient Film Technique of Growing Crops. Grower Books, London,
1976.
Corns, W. G. Influence of Time and Frequency of Harvests on Productivity
and Chemical Composition of Fertilized and Unfertilized Awned Sedge.
Can. J. Plant Sci., 54:493-498, 1974.
301
-------
Crawford, R. M. M. Metabolic Adaptations to Anoxia. In: Plant Life In
Anaerobic Environments, D. D. Hook and R. M. M. Crawford, eds. Ann
Arbor Science Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1978.
Crawford, R. M. M. and P. D. Tyler. Organic Acid Metabolism In Relation to
Flooding Tolerance in Roots. J. Ecol., 57:235, 1969.
Cunningham, J. D., D. R. Keeney, and J. A. Ryan. Phytotoxicity and Uptake
of Metals Added to Soils as Inorganic Salts or in Sewage Sludge. J.
Environ. Qual., 4:460, 1978.
Dacey, J. W. H. Internal Winds in Water Lilies: An Adaptation for Life in
Anaerobic Sediments. Science, 210:1017-1019, 1980.
Davies, D. D., K. H. Nascimiento, and K. D. Patel. The Distribution and
Properties of Malic Enzyme in Flowering Plants. Phytochem., 13:2417,
1974.
Davis, W. E. P. Effect of Clipping at Various Heights on Characteristics of
Regrowth in Reed Canary Grass (Phalarls arundlnacea L.). Can. J. Plant
Sci., 40:452-456, 1960.
Davis, J. A. Ill, and J. Jackson. Heavy Metals in Wastewater in Three Urban
Areas. J. Water Pol. Control Fed., 47(9):2292-2297, 1975.
Decker, W. L. Potential Evapotranspiration in Humid and Arid
Climates. In: Evapotranspiration and its Role in Water Resource
Management. Conf. Proc. ASAE. St. Joseph, MI. 1967.
deWit, M. C. J. Morphology and Function of Roots and Shoot Growth of Crop
Plants Under Oxygen Deficiency. In: Plant Life in Anaerobic
Environments, D. Hook and R. Crawford (eds.). Ann Arbor Science,
Ann Arbor, MI. 1978. 564 pp.
Drew, M. C., and J. M. Lynch. Soil Anaerobiosls, Microorganisms and Root
Function. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol., 18:37, 1980.
Drew, M. C., and E. J. Sisworo. The Development of Waterlogging Damage in
Young Barley Plants in Relation to Plant Nutrient Status and Changes in
Soil Properties. New Phytol., 82:301, 1979.
Dykyjova, et al. Productivity and Root/Shoot Ratio of Reed Swamp Species
Growing in Outdoor Hydroponic Cultures. Folia Gebst. Phytotax. Praha,
6:233-234, 1971.
Dykyjova, D., and K. Veber. Experimental Hydroponic Cultivation of
Helophytes. In: Pond Littoral Ecosystems: Structure and Functioning,
D. Dykyjova and J. Kvet, eds. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1978.
pp. 181-192.
302
-------
Fassett, N. C. A Manual of Aquatic Plants. Univ. of Wisconsin Press,
Madison, WI. 405 pp. 1966.
Fiala, K. Growth and Production of Underground Organs of Typha angustlfolia
L., Typha latlfolla L., and Phragmites communis. Trin. Polskie
Archiwum Hydrobiologii, 20(l):59-66, 1973.
Poy, C. D., R. L. Chaney, and M. C. White. The Physiology of Metal Toxicity
in Plants. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol., 29:511, 1978.
Gambrell, R. P., and W. H. Patrick, Jr. Chemical and Microbiological
Properties of Anaerobic Soils and Sediments. In: Plant Life in
Anaerobic Environments, D. D. Hook and R. M.	M. Crawford, eds. Ann
Arbor Science Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1978.
Garcia-Novo, G., and R. M. M. Crawford. Soil Aeration, Nitrate Reduction
and Flooding Tolerance in Higher Plants. New Phytol. 72:1031, 1973.
Geisler, G. The Morphogenetic Effect of Oxygen on Roots. Plant Physiol.,
40:85, 1975.
Giddings, J., and G. K. Eddlemon. Photosynthesis Respiration Ratios in
Aquatic Microcosms under Arsenic Stress. Water, Air, Soil Pollut.,
9:207, 1978.
Gomm, F. B. Growth and Development of Meadow Plants as Affected by
Environmental Variables. Agron. J., 706(6):1061-1065, 1978.
Gomm, F. B. Accumulation of NO3 and NHi* in Reed Canary Grass. Agron. J.,
71:627-630, 1979.
Gordon, M. 1977. Biological Recycling of Dissolved Nutrients in Treated
Domestic Wastewaters using Hydroponic and Aquacultural Methods. In:
Wastewater Renovation and Reuse, D. Itri, ed. Marcel Dekker, New York,
1977. pp. 133-182.
Gorham, E., and W. H. Pearsall. Production Ecology. III. Shoot Production
in Phragmites in Relation to Habitat. Oikos, 7(11):206-214, 1956.
Guthrie, R. K., and D. S. Cheery. The Uptake of Chemical Elements from Coal
Ash and Settling Basin Effluent by Primary Producers. Sci. Total
Environ., 12:217, 1979.
Harmon, J. Shearwater Fish Farming, Ltd. 109/111 Lowthen Street, Carlisle,
Cumbria. Personal communication to B. G. Vinzant. Feb. 4, 1980.
Haslam, S. M. The Performance of Phragmites communis. In: Relation to
Water Supply. Ann. Bot., 34:867-877, 1970.
Haslam, S. M. The Development of the Annual Population in Phragmites
communis. Ann. Bot. 34:571-591, 1970a.
303
-------
Haslam, S. M. Variation of Population Type in Phragmites communis. Ann.
Bot. 34:147-158, 1970b.
Haslam, S. M. The Development and Establishment of Young Plants of
Phragmites communis. Ann. Bot., 35:1059-1072, 1971.
Haslam, S. M. Biological Flora of the British Isles: Phragmites communis.
J. Gcol., 60(2):585-609, 1972.
Haslam, S. Some Aspects of the Life History and Autecology of Phragmites
communis: A Review. Polskie Archiwum Hydrolbiologii, 20(1):79-100,
1973.
Hoagland, D. R., and D. R. Anion. The Water-Culture Method for Growing
Plants Without Soil. Circular 347. University of California
Experimental Station, Berkeley, CA, 1950.
Hopkins, H. T., A. W. Specht, and S. B. Hendricks. Growth and Nutrient
Accumulation as Controlled by Oxygen Supplied to Plant Roots. Plant
Physiol., 25:193, 1950.
Horowitz, M. Growth, Tuber Formation and Spread of Cyperus rotundus from
Single Tubers. Weed Res. 12:348-363, 1972.
Hutchinson, G. E. A Treatise on Limnology. Volume III. Limnological
Botany, J. Wiley & Sons, New York, 1975.
Hyppio, P. A. A Selected Bibliography on Hydroponics. Leaflet 15, L. H.
Bailey Hortorium, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1974. 4 pp.
Jackson, M. B. Aeration in the Nutrient Film Technique of Glasshouse Crop
Production and the Importance of Oxygen, Ethylene and Carbon Dioxide.
In: Symposium on Research on Recirculating Water Culture.
Littlehampton, West Sussex, U.K., 1980.
Jackson, W. T. The Role of Adventitious Roots in Recovery of Shoots Follow-
ing Flooding of the Original Root Systems. Amer. J. Bot., 42:816,
1955.
Jenkins, T. Personal communication. 1981.
Jewell, W. J., and B. L. Seabrook. A History of Land Application as a
Treatment Alternative. EPA Technical Report No. 430/9-79-012, 1979.
John, M. K., C. J. Van Laerhoven, and H. H. Chuah. Factors Affecting Plant
Uptake and Phytotoxicity of Cadmium Added to Soils. Environ. Sci.
Technol., 6:1005, 1972.
304
-------
Jones, J. C., J. F. Hancock, and E. H. Llv. Biochemical and Morphological
Effects of Temperature on Typha tatlfolla L. (Typhascea) Originating
from Different Ends of a Thermal Gradient. I. Controlled
Environmental Studies. Amer. J. Bot., 66(8):902-906, 1979.
Kawase, M. Effect of Ethylene on Aerenchyma Development. Amer. J. Botany,
68:651, 1981.
Keeton, W. T. Biological Science. W. W. Norton & Co., New York, NY, 1980.
Koeppe, D. E. The Uptake, Distribution and Effect of Cadmium and Lead in
Plants. Sci. Total Environ., 7:197, 1977.
Kreith, F., and W. Z. Black. Basic Heat Transfer. Harper and Row,
New York, NY. 1980.
Lalng, H. Respiration of the Rhizomes of Nuphar advenum and Other Water
Plants. Amer. J. Bot., 27:574, 1940.
Lake, J. V., J. D. Postlethwalte, G. Slack, and J. Edwards. Seasonal
Variation in the Transpiration of Glasshouse Plants. Agr. Meteor
3:187-196. 1966.
Langhans, R. Personal communication, 1980.
Lauder, K. GCRI Hope to make Low Cost Crops Worth Growing by NFT. The
Grower, 86(3):151-154, 1976.
Larson, G. L., C. E. Warren, F. E. Hutchins, C. P. Lamperti, D. A.
Schlesinger, and W. K. Seim. Toxicity of Residual Chlorine Compounds
to Aquatic Organisms. EPA-600/3-78-023, National Tech. Infor. Ser.,
Springfield, VA, 1978.
Laward, T. A. al. The Development and Testing of an Environmentally
Designed Greenhouse for Colder Regions. Solar Energy, 17:307-312,
1975.
Lawrence, T., nd R. Ashford. Effect of Stage and Height of Cutting on the
Dry Matter Yield and Persistence of Intermediate Wheat Grass, Broome-
grass, and Reed Canary Grass. Can. J. Plant Sci., 49:321-332, 1969.
LeSieur, H., and B. Brungard. Hydroponics: Where's it at? Part I. The
Grower, suppl. to The Packer 84:10B-11B, 1977.
Levitt, J. Responses of Plants to Environmental Stresses. Academic Press,
New York, NY, 1972. 697 pp.
Lewis, W., J. Yopp, H. Schramm, Jr., and A. Brandenburg. Use of Hydroponics
to Maintain Quality of Recirculated Water in a Fish Culture System.
Trans. Am. Fish Soc., 107(1):92-99, 1978.
305
-------
Linhart, Y. B., and I. Baker. Intrapopulation Differentiation of
Physiological Response to Flooding in a Population of Veronica
peregrina L. Nature, 242, 275, 1973.
Loyacano, H., and R. Grosvenor. Effects of Chinese Waterchestnut in
Floating Rafts on Production of Channel Catfish in Plastic Pools. In:
Proceedings Annual Conference Southeastern Assoc. Game Fish Comm.,
27:471-473, 1973.
Marshall, D. E. Characteristics of Spartlna Marsh which is Receiving
Treated Municipal Sewage Wastes. In: Studies of Marine Estuarine
Ecosystems Developed with Treated Sewage Wastes, H. T. Odum and A. T.
Chesnut, eds. Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 1970. pp.
317-357.
Massey, D., and G. W. Winsor. Some Responses of Tomatoes to Nitrogen in
Recirculating Solutions. Acta Hort., 98:127-137, 1980.
Mayes, R. A., A. W. Mcintosh, and V. L. Anderson. Uptake of Cadmium and
Lead by a Rooted Aquatic Macrophyte (Elodea canadenses). Ecology,
58:1176, 1977.
Mcintosh, A. W., B. K. Shephard, R. A. Mayes, G. J. Atchison, and A. W.
Nelson. Some Aspects of Sediment Distribution and Macrophyte Cycling
of Heavy Metals on a Contaminated Lake. J. Environ. Qual., 7:301,
1978.
McNaughton, S. J. Ecotype Function in the Typha Community - Type. Ecol.
Monogr., 36:298-325, 1966.
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. Wastewater Engineering: Collection, Treatment,
Disposal. McGraw-Hill, NY, 1972. 782 pp.
Muenscher, W. C. Aquatic Plants of the U.S., Vol. 4. Handbooks of American
Natural History, A. H. Wright (ed.), Comstock Publishing Co., Ithaca,
NY, 1944.
Ondok, J. P. Vegetative Propagation in Scirpus lacustris L. Biologia
Plantarum (Praha), 14(3):213-218, 1972.
Page, A. L., F. T. Bingham, and C. Nelson. Cadmium Absorption and Growth of
Various Plant Species as Influenced by Solution Cadmium Concentration.
J. Environ. Qual., 1:288, 1972.
Palmer, R. D. The Effect of Temperature, pH, and Nutrition upon the
Germination and Growth of Sedge (Cyperus rotundus L.). In: Proc.
Southern Weed Conf., 14:479, 1961.
Parkinson, G. Big Waste-Treatment Job for Water Hyacinths. Chemical
Engineering, 88(9):34-35, 37, 1981.
306
-------
Pearsall, W. H. The Aquatic Vegetation of the English Lakes. J. Ecol.
8:163, 1920.
Philipson, J. J., and M. P. Coults. The Tolerance of Tree Roots to
Waterlogging. III. Oxygen Transport in Lodgepole Pine and Sitka
Spruce Roots of Primary Structure. New Phytol. 80:341, 1978.
Pompe, H. 1983. Potential for Recovery of Evapotranspiration Vapor from
NFT Systems Which are Used for the Treatment of Wastewater.
Unpublished M.P.S. report, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Ponnamperuma, F. N. The Chemistry of Submerged Soils. Adv. Agron., 24, 29,
1972.
Raveh, A., and Y. Avnimelech. Total Nitrogen Analysis in Water, Soil and
Plant Material with Persulfate Oxidation. Water Res. 13(9):911—912,
1979.
Rawlnski, T. Personal communication. 1981.
Reid, D. M., and A. Crozier. Effects of Waterlogging on the Gibberellin
Content and Growth of Tomato Plants. J. Exp. Bot., 22, 39, 1971.
Rudescu, L. The Use of Sawgrass for Paper Product Manufacture: An
Examination of Properties. In: Biological Control of Water Pollution,
J. Tourbier and R. W. Pierson, Jr. (eds.). 1976. 340 pp.
Russell, R. S. Plant Root Systems. McGraw-Hill Publ., NY, 144 p. 1977.
Sanderson, P. L., and W. Armstrong. The Responses of Conifers to Some of
the Adverse Factors Associated with Waterlogged Soils. New Phytol.,
85:351, 1980.
Sato, K., and A. Audo. Growth of Reed Canary Grass (Phalarls arundlnaceae)
as Affected by Environment and Cutting. I. Growth Responses to
Day-Length and Temperature. In: Proc. Crop Sci. Soc. Japan,
45(3):456-463, 1976.
Schippers, P. Construction and Operation of the Nutrient Flow Technique for
Growing Plants. V. C. Mimeo 187. Dept. of Vegetable Crops, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, 1977. 16 pp.
Schippers, P. Annotated Bibliography on Nutrient Film Technique. V. C.
Mimeo 186. Dept. of Vegetable Crops, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY,
1977a. 18 pp.
Schippers, P. Annotated Bibliography on Nutrient Film Technique. (Update
No. 1.) V. C. Mimeo 188. Dept. of Vegetable Crops, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, 1977b. 6 pp.
307
-------
Schippers, P. The Nutrient Flow Technique. V. C. Miraeo 212. Dept. of
Vegetable Crops, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1979. 60 pp.
Scott, Russell R. Plant Root Systems: Their Function and Interaction with
the Soil. McGraw-Hill Book Co. (UK) Ltd., London, 1977.
Sculthorpe, C. D. The Biology of Aquatic Vascular Plants. Edward Arnold
(Publ.) Ltd., London, 1967. 610 pp.
Seidel, K. Macrophytes and Water Purification. In: Biological Control of
Water Pollution, J. Tourbier and R. W. Pierson, Jr., eds. Univ. of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 1976. pp. 109-121.
Seneca, E. D., and S. W. Broome. Seedling Response to Photoperiod and
Temperature by Smooth Cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, from Oregon
Inlet, North Carolina. Chesapeake Sci., 13(3):212-215, 1972.
Serfling, S., and C. Alsten. An Integrated, Controlled Environment
Aquaculture Lagoon Process for Secondary or Advanced Wastewater
Treatment. In: Performance and Upgrading of Wastewater Stabilization
Ponds, Middlebrooks et al., eds. U.S. Env. Prot. Agency,
EPA-600/9-79-011, 1979. pp. 124-145.
Shamsi, S. R. A., F. A. Al-Ali, and S. M. Hussain. Temperature and Light
Requirements for the Sprouting of Chilled and Unchilled Tubers of the
Purple Nutsedge, Cyperus rotindus. Physiologia Plantarum, 44:193-196,
1978.
Sheldrake, R., Jr., and R. M. Sayles. Plastic Greenhouse Manual: Planning,
Construction, and Operation. Department of Vegetable Crops, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, 1977, 21 pp.
Sholto-Douglas, J. Hydroponic layflats. World Crops, 23(2):82-87, 1976.
Sias, D., and T. Nevin. Experimental Gardening with Municipal Wastewater.
Bull. Environ. Contain, and Toxicol., 10(5):272-278, 1973.
Sipple, W. S. A Review of the Biology, Ecology, and Management of Sclrpus
Olneyl. Vol. II. A Synthesis of Selected References. Water Resources
Administration, Dept. Water Res., Annapolis, MD, 1979. 84 pp.
Smith, A. M. and T. ap Rees. Pathways of Carbohydrate Fermentation in the
Roots of Marsh Plants. Planta, 146:327, 1979.
Sneed, K., K. Allen, and J. Ellis. Fish Farming and Hydroponics.
Aquaculture and the Fish Farmer, 2(1):11, 18-20, 1975.
Spangler, F. L., W. E. Sloey, and C. W. Fetter, Jr. Wastewater Treatment by
Natural and Artificial Marshes. EPA-600/2-76-207, U.S. EPA, Ada, OK,
1976a. 172 pp.
308
-------
Spangler, F. L., W. E. Sloey, and C. W. Fetter, Jr. Experimental Use of
Emergent Vegetation for Biological Treatment of Municipal Wastewater in
Wisconsin. In: Biological Control of Water Pollution, J. Tourbier and
R. W. Pierson, Jr., eds. University of Pennsylvania Press, Inc.,
1976b. pp. 161-171.
Spence, D. H. N. Factors Controlling the Distribution of Freshwater
Macrophytes with Particular Reference to the Locks of Scotland. J.
Ecol., 55:147-170, 1967.
Stanley, R. A. Toxicity of Heavy Metals and Salts to Eurasian Watermilfoil
(Myriophyllum spicatum). Arch. Environ. Contain. Toxicol., 2:331, 1974.
Stead, P. A. Integrated Recycling of Solid and Liquid Wastes. Presented at
the Public Health Specialists Meeting, Imperial College of Science &
Technology, 1977.
Stead, P. A. The Potential Integrated Recycling of Solids and Liquid
Wastes. Part IV. In: Water Pollution Control (English), 1978.
pp. 452-463.
Stead, P. A., and D. A. Rome. The Nutrient Film Technique - Its Connection
with Sewage Treatment and Plant Growth. Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Portsmouth Polytechnic, Portsmouth, England, 1979.
Stephenson, M., G. Turner, P. Pope, J. Colt, A. Knight, and G.
Tchobanoglous. The Environmental Requirements of Aquatic Plants.
Appendix A of Publ. No. 65, The Use and Potential of Aquatic Species
for Wastewater Treatment. Calif. State Water Res. Control Board,
Sacramento, CA, 1980. 655 pp.
Steward, I. C., and W. E. Berry. The Absorption and Accumulation of Solutes
by Living Plant Cells. VIII. The Effect of Oxygen on Respiration and
Salt Accumulation. Ann. Bol., 50:345, 1936.
Stolzy, L. H., J. Letey, T. E. Szuszkiewicz, and 0. R. Hunt. Root Growth
and Diffusion Rates as Functions of Oxygen Concentration. Soil Sci.
Soc. Amer. Proc. 25:463-467, 1961.
Stunnn, W., and J. J. Morgan. Aquatic Chemistry. Wiley-Interscience,
New York, NY, 1970.
Teal, J. M. Energy Flow in the Salt Marsh Ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology,
43(4):614-624, 1962.
Thompson. 1972.
Trought, M. C. T., and M. C. Drew. The Development of Waterlogging Damage
in Wheat Seedlings (Triticum aestivum L.) I. Plant and Soil, 54:77,
1980.
309
-------
Turner, R. E. Geographic Variations in Salt Marsh Macrophyte Production: A
Review. Contrib. Mar. Sci., 20:47-68, 1976.
Ulehlova, B., S. Husak, and J. Dvorak. Mineral Cycles in Reed Stands of
Nesyt Fishpond in Southern Moravia. Polskie Archiwum Hydrobiologii,
20(1):121, 1973.
Ulehlova, B., and S. Pribil. Water Chemistry in the Fishpond Littorals.
In: Pond Littoral Ecosystems: Structure and Functioning, D. Dykyjova
and J. Kvet, eds. Springer-Verlag, NY, 1978. pp. 126-140.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Quality Criteria. Washington,
D.C., 1976.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Process Design Manual for Land
Treatment of Municipal Wastewater. Report No. EPA-625/1-81-013, 1981.
Vandermevlen, J. H., and J. P. Aheen. Effect of Petroleum Hydrocarbons on
Algal Physiology: Review and Progress Report. In: Effects of
Pollutants on Aquatic Organisms, A. P. M. Lockwood, ed. Cambridge
Univ. Press, Cambridge, England, 1976.
Van der Valks, A. G., and C. B. Davis. Primary Production of Prairie
Glacial Marshes. In: Freshwater Wetlands: Ecological Processes and
Management Potential, R. E. Good, D. F. Whigham and R. L. Simpson,
eds. Academic Press, New York, 1978. pp. 21-37.
Vartapetian, B. B. Introduction—Life Without Oxygen. In: Plant Life in
Anaerobic Environments, D. D. Hook and R. M. M. Crawford, eds. Ann
Arbor Science Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1978.
Vinzant, B. Nutrient Film Technique for Crop Production (NFT). Unpublished
memo. Department of Floriculture and Ornamental Horticulture, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, 1978. 11 pp.
Wallace, A., P. Patel, W. Berry, and 0. Lunt. Reclaimed Sewage Water: A
Hydroponic Growth Medium for Plants. Resource Recovery and
Conservation, 3:191-199, 1978.
Westlake, D. F. Comparisons of Plant Productivity. Biol. Rev., 38:385-425,
1963.
Wetzel, R. G. Factors Influencing Photosynthesis Execution of DOM by
Aquatic Macnophytes in Hardwater Lakes. Verh. Internat. Verein Limnol.
17:72-85, 1969.
Wetzel, R. G., and B. A. Manny. Secretion of Dissolved Organic Carbon and
Nitrogen by Aquatic Macrophytes. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol.
18:162-170, 1972.
310
-------
Wills, G. D. Effect of Light and Temperature on Growth of Purple Nutsedge.
Weed Sci., 23(2):93-96, 1975.
Wolverton, B., and R. McDonald. Upgrading Facultative Wastewater Lagoons
with Vascular Aquatic Plants. J. Water Poll. Cont. Fed.,
51(2):305-313, 1979.
Wolverton, B. C., and M. M. McKown. Water Hyacinths for Removal of Phenols
from Polluted Waters. Aquat. Bot., 2:191, 1976.
Yeo, R. R. Life History of Common Cattail. Weeds, 12:284-88, 1964.
Yu, P. T., L. H. Stolzy, and J. Lotey. Survival of Plants under Prolonged
Flooded Conditions. Agron. J., 61:844, 1969.
311
-------
La)
H
ro
§
2 A 6 10 ? 6 2 6
8 HOUR 8AMPUNQ INTERVALS
10 Z 6
Figure A-l, Nitrogen and phosphorus removals from Ceneral Electric NFT unit
containing Watercress.
-------
A 6 10 2 6 10 2 A 6 |0 2 6 2 6 10 2 6
6 HOUR 3 AM RUNG INTERVALS
Figure A-2, Nitrogen and phosphorus removals from General Electric NFT unit
containing Napier Grass.
-------
U)
H
-p-
& 40
<0 |0-
• 10
e io
a HOUR SAMPLING INTERVALS
Figure A-3. Nitrogen and phosphorus removals from General Electric NFT unit
containing Coastal Bermuda Crass.
-------
APPENDIX B
This appendix presents data developed in Hanover, New Hampshire, using
domestic sewage. It includes data from both the CRREL and Hanover
greenhouses. Tables B.l through B.18 present mean values for variables
tested during each loading condition. The complete data set is presented in
three chronological sets. The first set (Figures B.l to B.27) shows data
from the early experiments in a 7.4 m system in the CRREL greenhouse. The
second set (Figures B.28 to B.58) shows data from later experiments in that
same system. The last set (Figures B.59 to B.113) shows data from the
27.9 m system at the Hanover treatment plant.
315
-------
TABLE B.l. LOADING CONDITION PARAMETERS TESTED IN PILOT SCALE NFT SYSTEMS IN
NEW HAMPSHIRE USING DOMESTIC WASTEWATER. CONDITION NUMBERS ARE
GUIDES TO SPECIFIC VARIABLE DATA, WHICH FOLLOWS.
Target Loading	Condition
Rate	Dates
Condi-
tion
No.
Area
Loading
Rate
cm/d
Weir
Loading
Rate
m3/m-d
Start
End
System
Area
m
Plant
Species
Application
Mode
1
5.1
0.62
11/16/79
12/2/79
7.4
Canary Grass
Intermittent
2
4.0
0.48
12/19/79
12/27/79
7.4
Canary Grass
10 min on
50 min pause
3
10.2
1.25
12/31/79
1/11/80
7.4
Canary Grass
10 min on
50 min pause
4
10.2
1.25
1/14/80
1/18/80
7.4
Canary Grass
8 hr on
16 hr pause
5
10.2
1.25
1/19/80
1/30/80
7.4
Canary Grass
20 min on
40 min pause
12 hr/d
6
5.1
0.62
1/31/80
2/8/80
7.4
Canary Grass
10 min on
50 min pause
12 hr/d
7
20.3
2.48
2/9/80
2/13/80
7.4
Canary Grass
20 min on
40 min pause
18 hr/d
8
5.1
0.62
2/15/80
4/11/80
7.4
Canary Grass
5 min on
50 min pause
9
10.2
1.24
4/12/80
6/13/80
7.4
Canary Grass
10 min on
50 min pause
10
20.3
2.48
6/14/80
6/30/80
7.4
Canary Grass
20 min on
40 min pause
11
6.9
2.49
2/13/81
3/20/81
27.9
Phragmites*
Cucumbert
Canary Grass §
Continuous
12
10.2
3.74
4/13/81
5/8/81
27.9
Cattail/Buirush*
Phragmitest
Canary Grass§
15 min on
15 min pause
13
20.3
7.47
5/9/81
5/22/81
27.9
Cattail/Buirush*
Phragmitest
Canary Grass§
30 min on
30 min on
*Unit 1, tUnit 2, §Unit 3.
316
-------
TABLE B.2. SEWAGE FLOW APPLIED AND EFFLUENT FLOW FROM NFT PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS AT THE CRREL AND HANOVER GREENHOUSES. STANDARD
DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Condition Number of	Unit 1	Unit 1	Unit 2 Unit 3
Number Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1
11
352
(77)



2
1
2650
—
—
—
3
6
959
(501)
—
—
—
4
2
694
(96)
—
—
—
5
4
649
(216)
—
—
—
6
3
310
(107)
—
—
—
7
2
1090
(390)
—
—
—
8
55
353
(108)
340
(89)
—
—
9
39
746.2
(200)
701
(160)
—
—
10
10
2069
(647)
1926
(644)
—
—
11
17
1565
(878)
—
—
—
12
17
3729
(1905)
—
—
3458
(1802)
13
12
5816
(951)
—
—
5563
(952)
317
-------
TABLE B.3. BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/Jl) IN PILOT
SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 TTnit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1






z
3
172
4
133.2
33.6





(27.1)
(19.5)
——
——
4
109
2
116.0
95.0
__
__



(4.2)
(3.4)


5
103
2
117.0
38.7
—
—



(17.0)
(21.6)


6
62
3
148.0
42.3
__

7


(48.9)
(5.1)


8
58
23
121.3
21.8





(61.0)
(12.3)


9
101
12
99.9
21.4

— —



(50.6)
(10.2)


10
133
3
51.0
9.6

_



(16.9)
(7.6)


11
67
4
119.4
71.0
39.5
10.7



(23.6)
(6.0)
(19.8)
(5.5)
12
182
4
136.1
105.2
74.9
38.8



(28.8)
(21.1)
(17.1)
(9.2)
13
272
3
130.7
88.3
70.8
53.4



(9.2)
(15.5)
(6.2)
(9.4)
318
-------
TABLE B.4. SOLUBLE BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) IN
PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
2
3
5
A
—
—
—
—
—
—
0
7
8
9
—
—
—
—
—
—
10
11
44
2
78.6
(1.9)
45.7
(6.1)
32.4
(13.6)
10.0
(2.2)
12
120
4
89.5
(9.9)
79.6
(12.9)
52.0
(14.2)
33.4
(7.9)
13
156
3
74.7
(9.5)
74.7
(5.5)
53.7
(8.8)
40.8
(8.5)
319
-------
TABLE B.5. TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON CONCENTRATIONS (mg/*) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD
DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1
2
3
7
8
132
75
84
48
84
13
102.0
(8.5)
80.5
(41.7)
95.5
(13.4)
101.1
(36.9)
83.2
(36.9)
27.5
(7.7)
42.0
(2.8)
(10.6) (4.9)
29.3
(9.0)
43.2
(16.9)
10
11
12
13
49
101
100
3
4
5
6
86.5
(21.8)
75.7
(13.6)
48.0
(21.1)
51.4
(4.4)
63.2
(10.0)
45.6
(11.1)
46.0
(8.7)
50.7
(8.5)
35.6
(14.2)
24.0
(2.7)
34.3
(7.1)
24.7
(9.5)
320
-------
TABLE B.6. CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/i) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD
DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
2
3
4
5
6
—
—
—
—
—
—
7
8
9
—
—
—
—
—
—
10
—
—
—
—
—
—
11
133
3
236.3
163.3
132.0
59.0



(4.5)
(8.0)
(21.3)
(19.5)
12
372
5
278.2
235.4
192.6
146.4



(40.9)
(35.7)
(32.6)
(16.2)
13
556
4
266.5
218.2
190.7
154.5



(13.0)
(3.4)
(7.0)
(10.1)
321
-------
TABLE B.7. SOLUBLE CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/I) IN
PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
94
3
167.0
107.7
92.3
56.0



(3.6)
(4.0)
(18.6)
(17.4)
12
272
5
203.2
182.0
156.0
128.0



(20.2)
(20.8)
(15.8)
(13.0)
13
395
4
189.5
169.2
142.5
126.0



(6.4)
(5.1)
(6.6)
(3.8)
322
-------
TABLE B.8. SUSPENDED SOLIDS DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/i) IN
PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1
2
3
10
11
117
73
68
47
206
46
110
175
20
3
3
1
20
13
3
3
90.2
(20.5)
78.3
(14.2)
77.7
(18.0)
111.
(93.8)
140.0
97.2
(93.3)
108.9
(85.1)
62.5
(50.2)
35.1
(9.4)
15.8
(11.6)
30.1
(21.7)
32.0
(31.3)
26.2
(19.8)
36.2
33.8
(16.2)
33.5
(19.2)
4.3
(0.3)
27.1
(5.1)
17.2
(2.3)
4.1
(1.5)
12
57
42.4 31.7 17.3 7.3
(12.9) (14.7) (3.9) (1.6)
13
98
47.2
(7.4)
24.1
(2.9)
26.2
(4.8)
16.4
(3.5)
323
-------
TABLE B.9. VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/i) IN
PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
X
0






£.
3
54
4
42.0
(39.1)
10.7
(10.2)
—
—
4
65
3
69.7
(13.0)
15.9
(1.7)
—
—
5
46
3
52.7
(24.9)
15.6
(4.4)
—
—
6
35
3
83.1
(63.6)
17.5
(7.8)
—
—
7
180
1
122.0
20.8
—
—
8
29
6
59.9
(81.2)
19.0
(7.8)
—
—
9
108
4
107.5
(34.8)
14.2
(12.4)
—
—
10
174
3
62.3
(22.8)
2.9
(0.1)
—
—
11
24
4
3
42.3
(17.6)
24.4
(4.7)
15.3
(2.2)
3.8
(1.2)
12
50
5
37.4
(11.7)
26.7
(11.8)
15.8
(3.5)
6.8
(1.3)
13
87
4
41.8
(6.1)
20.4
(2.2)
23.4
(4.1)
15.5
(3.1)
32k
-------
TABLE B.10. TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/Jl) IN PILOT
SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1
2




__
__
3
4
44.5
1
47.4
40.2
__ __
_ _
5
41.2
3
47.0
(2.2)
39.2
(1.6)
—
—
6
20.2
3
48.3
(2.9)
31.8
(1.4)
—
—
7
67.9
2
46.1
(3.5)
36.6
(2.7)
—
—
8
17.5
13
36.7
(12.2)
27.3
(6.4)
—
—
9
10
11
27.3
5
27.1
(7.2)
22.6
(6.4)


13.0
3
23.1
(2.5)
21.8
(2.0)
20.5
(1.7)
16.9
(1.3)
12
36.4
6
27.2
(3.4)
25.7
(2.3)
23.1
(1.8)
20.4
(2.4)
13
44.4
5
6
21.3
(6.1)
19.6
(2.2)
18.6
18.8
(2.8) (2.7)
325
-------
TABLE B.ll. NITRATE NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/&) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number of
Unit 1
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Number
Determinations
Influent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
1
1
0.0
16.8
—
—
2
3
2
0.0
0.4




—
(0.1)


4
3
0.0
4.2
—
—


	
(4.7)


5
4
0.0
0.4
——
__


—
(0.2)


6
3
0.0
2.9
__



—
(3.4)


7
3
0.0
0.9

——


—
(0.7)


8
13
0.0
4.1
——
	


—
(2.3)


9
5
0.0
1.4
	
	
1 n


(1.6)


1U
11
4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.26


—
—
—
(0.21)
12
6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
13
5
0.0
0.0
0.0
—

8
—
—
—
0.0







326
-------
TABLE B. 12. AMMONIUM NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/Jt) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number of
Unit 1
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Number
Determinations
Influent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
1
1
55.3
23.0
—,
—
2
3
2
40.0
36.6




(4.9)
(3.7)


4
3
36.2
30.1
—



(2.3)
(3.8)


5
4
37.8
32.8
—
__


(3.3)
(1.5)


6
3
35.3
25.2
——
	


(1.9)
(3.7)


7
2
35.3
29.9
__



(3.0)
(3.0)


8
13
29.0
19.8




(9.1)
(6.9)


9
5
21.6
18.1
—
__
1 fi

(4.7)
(6.3)


1U
11
4
21.4
20.2
20.5
17.5


(2.7)
(3.0)
(3.4)
(2.9)
12
6
21.8
21.8
21.5
21.7


(2.2)
(2.6)
(3.2)
(2.8)
13
5
20.7
21.3
20.0
21.3


(2.5)
(3.1)
(3.5)
(3.5)

327
-------
TABLE B.13. TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Actual Mass
Condition Loading Rate Number of Unit 1 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3
Number	kg/ha-d Determinations Influent Effluent Effluent Effluent
1
2






3
4
7.22
1
7.7
7.3
—
—
5
6.31
3
7.2
(0.5)
5.8
(1.2)
—
—
6
3.77
3
9.0
(0.9)
6.1
(1.1)
—
—
7
12.96
2
8.8
(0.1)
7.6
(1.1)
—
—
8
3.05
12
6.4
(2.3)
5.1
(1.2)
—
—
9
10
11
1.24
5
4.8
(1.6)
4.7
(1.1)


2.97
4
5.3
(0.1)
5.0
(0.2)
4.7
(0.5)
4.1
(0.7)
12
7.62
4
5.7
(0.5)
5.4
(0.6)
5.2
(0.6)
4.8
(0.7)
13
44.4
5
5.8
(0.5)
5.6
(0.6)
5.5
(0.7)
5.5
(0.8)
328
-------
TABLE B.14. SOLUBLE PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
Number of
Determinations
Unit 1
Influent
Unit 1
Effluent
Unit 2
Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
1
2
3
3
6.5
(0.1)
6.1
(0.5)

—
4
1
9.3
6.5
	
—
5
6
3
7.7
(0.7)
8.0
(0.4)
——
——
7
8
13
4.8
(1.5)
4.3
(1.1)
	
	
9
10
11
5
4.1
(1.0)
4.4
(1.0)


4
4.6
(0.3)
4.4
(0.2)
4.2
(0.5)
3.8
(0.9)
12
6
4.7
(0.5)
4.7
(0.5)
4.6
(0.6)
4.6
(0.7)
13
5
4.5
(0.4)
4.7
(0.5)
4.7
(0.6)
4.8
(0.7)
329
-------
TABLE
B.15. pH IN PILOT
SCALE SYSTEMS
I TREATING
DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN

NEW HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD
DEVIATIONS
ARE SHOWN IN

PARENTHESES.




Condition
Number of pH
Unit 1
Unit 1
Unit 2 Unit 3
Number
Determinations
Influent
Effluent
Effluent Effluent
1
2
8.0
7.7



(0.8)
(0.4)

z
3
7
7.3
7.3



(0.2)
(0.1)

4
3
7.3
7.2
_


(0.2)
(0.2)

5
6
7.3
7.2
	 	


(0.2)
(0.1)

6
4
7.1
7.0
	 	


(0.2)
(0.1)

7
3
7.3
7.1
	 	


(0.2)
(0.1)

8
37
7.2
6.9
	 ——


(0.4)
(0.3)

9
28
6.9
6.9
—— —_


(0.3)
(0.2)

10
6
7.2
7.1
	 	


(1.2)
(1.1)

11
4
7.2
7.4
7.3


(0.6)
(0.1)
(0.1)

3


7.4
12



(0.1)
X fa
13
—
—
—
—

330
-------
TABLE B.16. FECAL COLIFORMS CONCENTRATIONS (NUMBER/100 m*) IN PILOT SCALE
SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD
DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
Number of pH
Determinations
Unit 1
Influent
Unit 1
Effluent
Unit 2
Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
1
2
3
1
0.9
0.4
—,
—
4
1
1.6
0.0
—
—
5
1
1.8
0.8
—
—
6
7
1
2.1
0.7
—
—
/
8
4
7.9
(2.8)
0.6
(0.2)
—
—
9
4
6.0
(1.6)
1.4
(1.5)
—
—
10
11
1
3.6
1.0
MM
	
12
13
—
—
—
	
—
331
-------
TABLE B.17. TURBIDITY (JTU) IN PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING DOMESTIC
SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN
PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
Number of pH
Determinations
Unit 1
Influent
Unit 1
Effluent
Unit 2
Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
1
O
1
58.0
27.0
—
—
Z
3
7
48.7
(13.7)
13.5
(9.9)
—
—
4
3
38.0
(4.0)
17.0
(2.0)
—
—
5
6
40.7
(4.8)
18.7
(1.6)

—
6
4
51.0
(16.9)
13.6
(3.2)
—
—
7
2
49.5
(9.2)
25.5
(3.5)
—
—
8
37
44.8
(18.0)
13.2
(6.3)
—
—
9
28
51.8
(34.3)
14.8
(8.8)
—
—
10
11
6
28.8
(12.1)
5.6
(6.1)


12
13
—
—
—
—
—

332
-------
TABLE B. 18. SEWAGE TEMPERATURE (°C) IN PILOT SCALE SYSTEMS TREATING
DOMESTIC SEWAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. STANDARD DEVIATIONS
ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
Number of pH
Determinations
Unit 1
Influent
Unit 1
Effluent
Unit 2
Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
1
2
3
10.3
(0.6)
13.5
(1.8)
—
—
3
3
10.7
(0.6)
15.0
(1.7)
—
—
4
5
9.1
(0.7)
14.2
(2.0)
—
—
5
4
7.6
(2.4)
12.8
(0.5)
—
—
6
7
3
8.8
(0.3)
12.0
(1.0)
-¦ ¦
—1~
/
8
37
9.2
(0.9)
13.8
(2.1)
—
—
9
27
12.2
(1.5)
15.5
(1.5)
—
—
10
6
16.0
(1.2)
17.2
(0.4)
—
—
11
5
14.0
(0.7)
24.0
(3.6)
25.8
(4.8)
24.8
(6.0)
12
7
16.0
(2.7)
21.4
(4.5)
23.0
(4.8)
20.7
(3.8)
13
9
18.2
(1.9)
21.8
(2.2)
22.6
(2.6)
21.5
(2.8)

333
-------
?70 0
ELiQQ
2-1 0 0
130 0
o<
» '1 3 0 0
5
rH '120 0
b
30 0
E0 0
30 0
0
0 -10 EQ 30 !-i0 5 0 EO 70 B0 3 0 -100
Time, days
Figure 3.1. Daily influent sewage flow to the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0, beginning on November lo, 19T9-
33U
-------
no
e
*
Q
O
«
E50-J-
sss..
20 0 - -
•1 75..
150-
it.
1S5--
-100..
?5-
50-
as--
0 —
0

	1-
-1 3
20 2E 33 33 l,e
—i—
53
ES
		Time, days
Figure B.2. Biochemical oxygen demand concentration
of influent sewage flow to the CRREL
NFT unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
25 0
225-.
200 -¦
•175..
'1 5 0 - -
155-'
1 00-
75-
50
25
0
0
Figure B.3.
rj'
a
"o——^
t	i	1	>
H	b
•13 20 2E 33 35 >-.E 52 55 E5
Time, days
Biochemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT unit
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979-
335
-------
-1501
'135-



1E0-
1 05 -
50 !
75-
50-
«-i5 ¦
r'
	-G3
\ K
\ / \
\ / ^
V
,~
		
30-



-1 5-



0 -
1
t t 1 t 1
—1 I 1
0	7 '11 m -1B 21 E5 SB 3E 35
Time, days
Figure 3.U. Total organic carbon concentration of
influent sewage flow to the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was January 2, 1980.
Time, days
Figure B.5. Total organic carbon concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT unit
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
January 2, 1980.
336
-------
1 Q0
3 0
50
70
B0
5 0
Li 0
30
30
'1 0
0
0 7 m E-1 EB 35 I-.E *-i3 5B E3 70
Tine, days
Figure B.6. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration of
influent sewage flow to the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 12, 1979-
•1 00
30
B 0
70
50
50
L-.0
30
E 0
•1 0
0
0 7 '1 !-i S'l E B 35 LiS 1-.3 55 B3 70
Time, days
Figure B.7. Toxal Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT unix
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 12, 1979-
337
-------

S0T

5 l-i 5 I

L-.B --

«-.a-
to
£
35-
r*
s
30-
+
Si-.-.
ac
s
•1 B
1 a -•
E --
Figure B.8.
Ammonium nitrogen concentration of
influent sewage flow to the CRREL
NFT unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was November 29, 19T9-
B 0
Id
•15 E3 3Q 3B	S3 E8 S3 7E
Figure B.9.
Time, days
Ammonium nitrogen concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was November 29, 1979-
338
-------
50
e
co
3S +
d r +
•1 ~ •
1 Li«
3
hJ ffi-
0
{ !_
i i
i i
I i
h—a—f-
~i a ~ (CD ~—>h nn m n nc rp-
•1 s
H ~J Ht3
5E B"i
B0
Fig-are B.10.
Time, days
Nitrate concentration of influent
sewage flew to the CRREL NFT -unit
in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was November 29, 1979*
oj
to
s
I
on
o
i	—a " it- g cpnffr-~"	
B8
Time, days
Figure B.ll. Nitrate nitrogen concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was November 29, 1979*
339
-------
130
£
a<
EH
0
1 Q -13
¦10 20 23 25
Figure B.12.
Time, days
Total phosphorus concentration of
influent.sewage to the CRREL unit
in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was January 18, 1980.
Time, days
Figure B.13. Total phosphorus concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was January 19, 1980.
3^0
-------
I
•; .i.
"—
to	l
Pu
I
O
PL,
~
	VJ	_c
fa
3 i
P i
8 -i-

•i 0 15 s a
30 3:
L-i t) '-i 5 tl
Figure B.lU.
Time, days
Orthophosphate concentration of
influent sewage to the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 12, 19T9-
15r
1 - f
iai
to
e
-3"
O
cu
3
~
S
3
3
2 +
0
-1 0
_-9—«---
-s-
•15 30 35 30 35 >-.0 ^5 50
Figure B.15.
Time, days
Orthophosphate concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was Decem'cer 12, 1979*
3^1
-------
uo
s
m
CO
E-1
ESS y
225 --
20 0-
•175-
'150-
'125-
'1 0 0-
75-
50-
25-
3 --
0
I
¦a'
o-er'
a
JU AA
s .•
ti
h Yi

•m
S3 70
M 20 35 L-(2 t-tS 55
Time, days
Figure B.l6. Total suspended solids concentration
of influent sewage to the C3REL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979*
25 0
225
20 0
175
1 150
ui" 13 5
H 1 0 0
75
50
25
0 7 m 2-1 2 B 3 5 li2 i-,5 5 5 5 3 70
Time, days
Figure 3.17. Total suspended solids concentration
of the effluent sewage from the
CRREL NFT unit in Phase C. Firs^
day of analysis was December 7, 1979.

3b2
-------
1 50
1 Eh
-line, days
Figure B.l8.
Volatile suspended solids concentration
of influent sewage to the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979*
-1B0-|
1 l-l .


•iaa-


•1-1 a.


3 B -


B0-


B1-! -


L-.B-

w
32-

	...

1				
0-
	1	
—1	1 1 	1	1	1 1 1	
0
•1 a-1
aa as >-.a
Time, days
"iS BE S3 70
Figure B.19>
Volatile supsended solids concentration
of effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.
3^3
-------
1 0 -
9 t
I
I
5 -I	1 I	! I I I	1	1	1
0 1 fcJ 20 30 '—i kJ 5 0 G0 r"0 3 0 9 0 100
Time, days
Figure 3.20. pH of influent sewage to the CRRZL NFT
uni"£ in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was November 20, 1979•
•1 0
10 E0 30 '—10 50 E0 70 B0 3 0 100
Time, days
Figure B.21. pH of effluent sewage from the CRREL
NJT unit in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was November 20, 1979-
3UU
-------
Id
«-1
•11 1-i a a - i
Time, days
25 2B 35 35
Figure B.22,
Temperature of influent sewage to the
CRREL NFT unit in Phase 0. First day
of analysis was November 3C, 1979.
o
o
o
20 j
•1 b ..
-1 E--
mi
I
-1 2 »
r---
5 '10 +
05
^ S 1
ft
s a ±

E-i
x

if
i ¦¦ "> R f x a
41 S t "\i \ I *
a
i
""
a i
8 Li
•1 1 -1 !-i B 2'1 25 59 3d
Figure B.23.
Time, days
Temperature of effluent sewage from the
CRREL NFT unit in Phase 0. First day
of analysis was November 30, 19T9-
3h5
-------
Time, days
Figure B.2U. Turbidity of influent sewage to the
CRREL NFT unit in Phase 0. First
day of analysis was November 30, 1979.
1 9 0
3 0
7 0
S S --
I
= * +
1.0.1
31 j I	f I
'f-..	I !	/ ¦
^ ® f ""EL	„	_	j i, J3.
•-T3—J33	E',	,S#I
•1 0 4-	•
-i ci	a
0 \	1	1	1	1-
0 b -is sl-. aa ma ee £¦-, ?e 50
Time, days
Figure B.25- Turbidity of effluent sewage from
the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was November 30,
1979.
3^6
-------
Time, days
Figure B.26. Numbers of fecal colifcrns in influent
sewage to the CRREL N7T unit ir. Phase 0.
Firsx day of analysis was January 9,
1980.
Time, days
Figure B.27. Numbers of fecal coliforns in effluent
sewage from the CRREL NFT unit in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
January 9, 1979-
3^7
-------
Time, days
Figure B.28. Daily influent sewage flow to the CRREL
UFT unit in Phase 1, beginnong on
February 15 » 1980.

>
o
2=00 0 _
E70 8 -¦
i
S1—iQ 0 f
2-1 0 0 -
¦1 see --
1500 --
•1 0 --
S0e{
rr: 0 t'l 4-
nc i, ri.
! .= Ir(.
50 0
¦S
0
on
VI

•:ri i
I I til
%

Figure B.29.
7 5 50 •;! 05 -I 5 0 -1 35
?ime, days

Daily effluent sewage flow from the CRREL
NFT unit in Phase 1, beginning on
February 16, 1980.
3^8
-------
EB0
EE 5
E0 0
-17 5
-1 50
'1 E5
'100
' 75
50
E5
0
0 m E7 m 5•—i EB B1 55 i0B 'I EE 135
Time, days
Figure B.3C. Biological oxygen demand concentrations
of influent sewage to the CREEL NFT
unit in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.
E0 0 - •
100-.
?5-
50--
0 11-1 E"? m 5>1 EB B1 55 10B1EE135
Time, days
Figure B.31. Biological oxygen demand concentraxions
of effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.
3^9
-------
'1 70
\
1 -1 3
~'I -10h 117-130
Figure B.32.
Time, days
Total organic carbon concentrations of
influent sewage to the CRREL NFT uni"C
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 15, 1980.
'1 T7 0 j-
-1 53 --
•1 3E -•
•1 -1 3
0	I	I	1	1	1	1	1	1	I	
Q -13 EE 33 5 E E5 7B 3-1 •10^17-130
Tine, days
Fig-ore B.33. Total organic carbon concentrations
of effluent sewage from the CRREL
NFT uni~ in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.
350
-------

70-r

S3-

55-

^a-


no
L-.a --
S
el
*
35-
a

EH
5B -¦

2-1 -¦

m--

T7

0 --

0
Time, days
Figure B.3U. Total nitrogen concentrations of
influent sewage to the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.
70
so
e
V !»-%
Time > days
30
Figure B-35- Total nitrogen concentrations of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 1. Firsx day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.

-------
0 3
•IB 57 3E l-i 5 51-. S3 75 B-1 30
Time, days
Figure B.36. Ammonium nitrogen concentrations of
influent sewage to the CREEL NFT
unit in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.

50 T

1-.5 --

"—(0 --

33 --
to
30"
r\
s
as--
+
-a-
X
3
50 ..
•15-
•10--
5 --
V
0
1B 37
3E I-.5 S1—i
Time, days
S3 7S B-1 30
Figure B.37- Ammonium nitrogen concentrations of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.
352
-------
0 in do ogoDoo ~ omoaio	ma o ~ a a ~
0 3 -IB 5? 3E i-iS 5«-. S3 75 Bt 30
Time, days
Figure B.38. Nitrate nitrogen concentrations of influent
sewage to the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 15, 1980
1 Q
3
B
7
E
5
3
5
•1
0
0 3 '1B 57 3E US 51-. E3 75 B-1 30
Time, days
Figure B.39. Nitrate nitrogen concentrations of effluent
sewage from the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 15, 1980
353
-------
00
e
Pu
H
V
\
N
0 5
7S 01 30
IB E? 3E <-.5 5"-, E3
Time, days
Figure B.40. Total phosphorus concentration of influent
sewage to the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 22, 1980.
60
E
H
3
P
-1
a
-j a
•1 B
•a a-i as
Time, days
Figure B.41. Total phosphorus concentration of influent
sewage from CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 22, 1980.
3?4
-------
1	0
3
B
7
E
5
i-i
3
3
'1
0
0 3 "IB S7 3E liS S1-! S3 73 B-1 30
Time, days
Figure B.42. Orthophosphate concentration of influent
sewage to the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 15, 1980.
'1 0
3
B
7
E
5
L-.
3
2
1
0
0 3 -13 37 3E 1-.5 Si-. E3 73 B-1 30
Time, days
Figure B.43. Orthophosphate concentration of effluent
from the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 15, 1980.
.X
1V14
R
I

t Fx ,
\ /



-i	1	1	1	t	1	i	i	1-
355
-------
Time, days
Figure B.44. Total suspended solids concentration of
influent sewage to the CKREL NTT unit in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was February
15, 1980.
3E 0
3y\ -
:3 -•
= •1 :"l 1
i
¦1 r 5 |
1 0 i
1 Q C
~F 0 4-	i'n '7
\	9 "3 o _ ,?i • i
-	^ i	a r L __ i \ /' p p tor,
-	J	d 13 ^ ^ I
^ J	1	I	1	1	1-
-42ES31-I
0 -13 EE 33 5 3 EE 70 3-1 101-, Mr 130
Time, days
Figure B.45. Total suspended solids concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT unit
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 15, 1980.
356
-------
EE @
EtJti -¦
150-
I M 0 _.


33 55 S3 70 3-1 1 0I-, -1 -1 7 1 30
Time, days
Figure B.46. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
influent sewage to the CRREL NFT unit in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was February
20, 1980.
E5 0
EE5--
S00--
•173-.
-150--
-1 S3 -¦
•100-.
75 -•
50 --
2S,A
0


•13 as 33
iS 55 7B 3-1 -1 0h -1 -1 7 -1 30
Time, days
Figure B.47. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT unit.
First day of analysis was February 20, 1980.
357
-------
-1 G
~
B
sc 7
o.
S
5
0 15 30 >-15 B0 75 30 -1 05 1S0 135 -150
Time, days
Figure B.48. pH of influent sewage to the CRUEL NFT unit
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 15, 1980.
-1 0
3
B
a
Q.	_
E
0 15 30 I-.5 B0 7 5 30 -1 05 -1E0 1 3 5 -1 50
Time, days
Figure B.49. pH of effluent sewage from the CRREL NFT
unit in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.
358
-------
-1 B -•
-1 E --
-1 a --
0 'ii-i a? m s1-! bs b-i as'iQB-iaa-135
Time, days
Figure B.50. Temperature of influent sewage to the
CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.
301
-1 B -¦
-1 B ¦¦
•15-
0 -i L-t a? •—1-*1 S1-! 5B B1 55 'lyS 1 as '135
Time, days
Figure B.51. Temperature of effluent sewage from the
CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 15, 1980.
359
-------
0 -I	I	I	I	I	I	I	1	1
0 -10 20 30 LI0 50 E0 70 00 90 -100
Time, days
Figure B.52. Daily maximum air temperature in the CRREL
greenhouse in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.


i :
•l 8 f
I
B 4-
'JT"iT?Z:ZW	rjiysiQ
' i
I
:3
Z£l
'J
3
II & i
is j
I
•1 M
cr'd -:'J '~t0 by tr.0
S 0 B 0
Time, days
Figure B.53. Daily minimum air temperature in the CRREL
greenhouse in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.
360
-------
3 0
b
I
£0
70 E30 30 -100
Figure B.54.
>-i0 50 E0
Time, days
Outside incident radiation at CRREL in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 15, 1980.
361
-------
'1 30
1.-1 Y ¦¦
r
-y0
35 10B 12E -1 35
Figure B.55.
Time, days
Turbidity of influent sewage to the CRREL
NFT unit in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.
•1 3 0
• 1 t-,..
3-1 -¦
7B--
55 -¦
5E -•
4k
4-J
•H
•H
3a-
as --
•2
3
H
m ^7 L-,1 gi_ ES 3 1 35 "10 B -13 3 "135
Time, days
Figure B.56. Turbidity of effluent sewage from the CRREL
NFT unit in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 15, 1980.
362
-------
23
0 m a? m 51-. eb b-i as 10a -122 -135
Time, days
Figure B.57. Numbers of fecal coliforms in influent sewage
to the CREEL NFT unit in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 20, 1980.
0 m 2? i—i-"1 5h EB B-1 35 -10B -1SS -135
Figure B.58,
Time, days
Numbers of fecal coliforms in effluent sewage
from the CRREL NFT unit in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 20, 1980.
363
-------
S"r0
Ln?50 4-
i
330 0 --
2350 --
1 30 0 -
rj
I.
!S< n? IL.^
! i' ,1 ! ^7
CI
n
rp
tn?L
ar
:	ii.
I !,	! V
i	i *?
ra I :
n
. ,i ,_m| i|t«?
CD ("-P "j;l J '1
~0SK I
asiLi^—,	h
		
i® ¦*
I i Q 'S
4 f
i t
ir3
a
4L
0 -10 50 30 t-10 5 0 E0 70 ~ 0 30 -100
Time, days
Figure B.59. Daily influent sewage flow to the Hanover
NTT unit, beginning March 2, 1981.
350 0
355 0 I
750 ©
555 0
5700 - ¦
1-.75 0 --
350 0 ...
a5T
3B5 0 -k
1 50 0 --
35 0 ••
0 -
'ill
0
12 f

I

D5| -1
CU
a
•10 30 30
*-10 5 0 50 70
Time, days
Bu 5 0 100
Figure B.60. Daily effluent sewage flow from the Hanover
NFT unit, beginning March 26, 1981.
36U
-------
ESQ
'1B0
-1E0
•1 L-i0
'1 20
•*100
B0
E0
I-.0
50
0
0 B '15 E3 30 3B L-iB B3 B0 BB 75
Time, days
Figure B.61. Biological oxygen demand concentration of
influent sewage to the first unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 4, 1981.
E0 0
•1B0
•1E0
m©
•150
'10 0
B 0
G 0
1-.0
E 0
0
0 B -15 EE 30 3B I-.5 53 50 BB 75
Time, days
Figure B.62. Biological oxygen demand concentration of
effluent sewage from the first unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981. These values also repre-
sent influent concentrations to the second unit.

\ A
365
-------
i_ -.J 0
'1 B 0 ¦ ¦
•150-
'1 1-10..
•1 B 0 - ¦
•100-
B 0 - ¦
50-
t-10--
E O - -/
ij
0	
R
/ \ -A
/ I .•* 4

V ^
£3"
0 B
Figure B.63.
•15 23 30 30 Li5 53 50 SB 75
Time, days
Biological oxygen demand concentrations of
effluent sewage from the second unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981. These values also represent
influent concentrations to the third unit.
-130-
• 1 5 0--
I
1^0..
•1 S0 --
•1 e 0 - -
i
5 0 -}¦

.-•3
,D
3

•J l-
E0
Time, days
Figure B.64,
Biological oxygen demand concentrations of
effluent sewage from the third unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.
366
-------
H	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	A
0 7 I1-! E1 ES 3 5 L-iE i-i3 SE S3 7fcJ
Time, days
Figure B.65. Soluble biological oxygen demand concentration
of influent sewage to the first unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.
1 -1 0 ,	
33--
3 3-	/1 13?
/ '	'r
^ j / <3—^
BB-	U
cz ir: . •• S
^
33 f
ES --
•1 -| ...
0 I	t	t	I	t	I	1	1	1	I	
0 r m 3-1 SB 35 1-.3 u,g 55 53 70
Time, days
Figure B.66. Soluble biological oxygen demand concentration
of effluent sewage from the first unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.


A
P
V 1
} 1
/ 'i
, .-"V l
0 a 0
/ 't*		


• / "-o-"



367
-------
'1
33 --
BB --
BB-
SS--
s—.
SS ¦¦
0 7
m ai EB 35 1-.E >-,3 SB E3 70
Time, days
Figure B.67. Soluble biological oxygen demand concentration
of effluent sewage from the second unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.
"V V
«-.a SB B3

Figure B.68.
Time, days
Soluble biological oxygen demand concentration
of effluent sewage from the third unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.
368
-------

35 0
" 3-1 5 c j
EB0
SI-.5--
S-1 0--
17 5-
•1 L-.0 --
•10S--
70-.
35-
0	
0 I
Figure B.69,
A
.a,
^ B
-&ei
V"*

IE E<-I 3 S 1-10 LiB 55 EL, 75 B0
Time, days
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of influent
sewage to the first unit of the Hanover NTT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 4,
1981.
35 8
— —J •-




3-1 5 .




5B0-


ft

S<-.5 .
3-1 0 •
•1 7 5 -
"1 Li 0 .
1.
—	
/ \ .¦#
1 ,' la.
—R ''
- ' c
i3
*—¦—•a
10 5-




70 -




35 -




L~1 .




SB -IE Bi-i 35 '—10 L-iG 5E EL, 72 B0
Time, days
Figure B.70. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of effluent
sewage from the first unit of the Hanover NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 4,
1981.
369
-------
350
3-1 5 -¦
EB0--
E>-.5..
E-1 0
'175
-m0
105
70-
35-
0
W

R

.A

V
0 5
1E El-. 3E i-i0	5E EL, 72 B0
Figure B.71.
Time, days
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent sewage from the second unit in the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.
31 5-.
EB0--
EL.5..
E-1 0--
-175--
-m©..
'10 5
70
35
3
0
-vv"\
p
ils.

'ra
V*
1E El-.
3 E ^0 LiB
Time, days
5E EU 7E 50
Figure B.72.
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent sewage from the third unit of the
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 4, 1981.
370
-------
E5 0
EEB--
E0E -•
ib>-i
•1 BE
me--
-1 -1 B -.
3E --
55-

Tas—a

J\ A
/' Vq
a a
30
0 B
Figure B.73.
-IE Ei-i 32 Li0 1-.B 5E Eh 7S B0
Time, days
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of influent sewage to first unit of Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
30
Q
/Vk .
\ r
a

/
•1E
3 E l,0 <-.B
Time, days
EE Eh ?E B0
Figure B.74.
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent sewage from first unit of Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
371
-------
E50
EEB--
E0E --
•IB1-!-.
'1EE--
-11-.0
'1 '1 E
BE
71-.
5E +
r—
ivy
I
/ \ D
/ / W" \ .
30
0 B
A E El-. EE 10 LiB EE El-. ?E B0
Figure B.75.
Time, days
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent sewage from second unit of Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
EEB --
E0E--
•1 B1-!
•1 EE
-1 L-.0
•1 -1 B
BE
7h
EE
A,
I
B-
aj


W / \

Time, days
Figure B.76,
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent sewage from third unit of Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
372
-------
A
i \ .5? I \
/ V X I. J. V
0
•m SI SB 35 >-.£	5E E3 70
Time, days
Figure B.77. Total nitrogen concentration of influent
sewage to the first unit of Hanover NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 4,
1981.
35 i	
33 --
30 --
P
SB-	} \_
/ 7
as--	& \ cj,ax
'	'¦ / E1
« aa7\ / \	^
f seif v/	V
* IB-
H
1	5--
-1	3--
1	0 	1	I	I	t	I	1	1	I	I	
0 7 m S-1 EB 35 1-.E L-3 5B B3 70
Time, days
Figure B.78. Total nitrogen concentration in effluent
sewage from the first unit of Hanover NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.

r-
v%
~Y

V '
373
-------
35
30 --
SB-.
Q—El
<1 B
-m 2-1 SB 35 i-iB I-.3 5E S3 70
0 7
Time, days
Figure B.79. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
sewage from second unit of Hanover NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
33
30
2B
25
23
20
•1 B
1 5
•1 3
-1 0
0 7 -m 2-1 2B 35 Li2 ^3 5E S3 7©
Time, days
Figure B.80. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
sewage from third unit of Hanover NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
37U
-------
30
27 --
Si-i
21 .
1B-
'1 5--
'1 5--
3 ¦¦
E -¦
3 ¦¦
¦•f\A
0

A
LA
a
/
0 B
IB S«-i 32 *-» 0 1iB SB B1-! 72 B0
Figure B.81.
Time, days
Ammonium concentration of influent sewage to
first unit in Hanover NTT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.

SJ 1C.I -
27 -


5j>
o*
00
e
2i-i-
2-1 -
•1 B -
[
1 B -
-1 2-
\ &Q-
]

i
V
fif
•£
B ¦



+ ~141
0 B '1B 21-! 32 i-i0 L-tB 5B Ei-i 72 B0
Time, days
Figure B.82. Ammonium concentration of effluent sewage from
first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
37 5
-------
30
a?
a »i
a-i
-i a
•1 5
-1 a
3
E
3
0
0 b is a«-i sa >i0 i-iB se EL, ?a B0
Time, days
Figure B.83. Ammonium concentration of effluent sewage from
second unit in Hanover NTT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
B7
a«-.
ai
'1 B
•1 s
-1 a
3
E
3
0
0 B -IE a1-. 3a 1-10 "-iB 5E EL-. ?a B0
Time, days
Figure B.84. Ammonium concentration of effluent sewage from
third unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
:P\
V'V-
v
/y i-vi
V
I	I	I	I	I	<	I	I	I

376
-------
0 ma cmd am—a a t t aa—~~ ma ~~ eg—a—
0 B -IE Ei-i 32 l,0 "-iB SE E"h	B0
Figure B.85.
Time, days
Nitrate concentration of influent sewage to
first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
1 Q
bJ
1E
EE E Li 73 B0
33 >i0 LiB
Time, days
Figure B.86. Nitrate concentration of effluent sewage from
first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
37 T
-------
to
e
z
i
I m
O
z
0 "Pe
99
B-B
3S Li 0 LiB
Time, days
B0
Figure B.87. Nitrate concentration of effluent sewage from
second unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
oo
a
t O
O
z
¦
0
•1E E*-i
35 h0 1-.B
Time, days
55 Bh 75 B0
Fiyure B.88.
Nitrate concentration of effluent sewage from
third unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
378
-------
Time, days
Figure B.89. Total phosphorus concentration of influent
sewage to first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
—I i	!
Z t*	I
'	i
I .i.	;
¦:;i 4	1	1	1	!	;	;	i	1	!	!
0 ~ 1 S E"-i	SE G '-i r'3 E30
Time, days
Figure B.90. Total phosphorus concentration of effluent
sewage from first unit in Hanover NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 4,
1981.
379
-------
¦J
~
B
cr
L-i
3
a
1
0
a a IE a1-. 3 a 1-.0 ^b sb s 7 a 00
Time, days
Figure B.91. Total phosphorus concentration of effluent
sewage from second unit in Hanover NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 4
1981.
1 0
3
B
~F
B
5
i-i
3
a
'1
0
Q B IE a^ 3 a 1-10 LiB 5E SI-. 7 3 B0
Time, days
Figure B.92. Total phosphorus concentration of effluent
sewage from third unit in Hanover NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 4
1981.
1 ''••• ^
--i
i 'd
.P?
/ \
•3 ...a. 		——^
13
380
-------
•1 0
3
B
7
E
5
3
a
1
0
0 B -1E E1-! 3 a 1-10 hB SE E1-.	B0
Time, days
Figure B.93. Orthophosphate concentration of influent sewage
to first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 4, 1981.

/V



-t	1	1	t	ttii
M
•IE a^i 3a '—i 0 LiB SE E1-!
Ba
Figure B.94.
Time, days
Orthophosphate concentration of effluent sewage
from first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
381
-------
A / '^1
0 B
-IE E"-. 35 >10 '-iB BE E^i	BQ
Figure B.95,
Time, days
Orthophosphate concentration of effluent sewage
from second unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
A / fcr-"5?
0 B 15 EL-, 3 a !-iQ L-.a 5E EL-i 72 BO
Figure B.96.
Time, days
Orthophosphate concentration of effluent sewage
from third unit in Hanover NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
332
-------
30
B '1
75
E3
Si-1
•-i 5
3E
a?
•1 a
3
0
0 B 'IE S1-! 35 L-i0 LiB EE E^-. 75 B0
Time, days
Figure B.97. Total suspended solids concentration of
influent sewage to first unit in Hanover NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was March
4, 1981.
>—15 - -
3E--
0 B
•1E 5"-. 35 1-.0 1-.B 5E Ei-. 75 B0
Time, days
Figure B.98. Total suspended solids concentration of effluent
sewage from first unit in Hanover NFT in Phase
1. First day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
383
-------
30T-
B-1 --
75-
S3-
B1-! -¦
L-iB -¦
35--
E? ¦¦
•IB-
~ --
0 -I
0
.P-v

t	i


\ A
i	i	i
B -1E El-. 32 i-i0 1-.B SB BI-. ?E B0
Time, days
Figure B.99. Total suspended solids concentration of effluent
sewage from second unit in Hanover NFT in Phase
1. First day of analysis was March 4, 1981.
oo
S
zn
oo
H
32 1-.0 LiB BB Bi-i 72 B0
Figure B.100.
Time, days
Total suspended solids concentration of
effluent sewage from third unit in Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
38U
-------
0 B
IE S»i 3 2 0 hB BE Eh 7 2 B0
Time, days
Figure B.101. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
influent sewage to the first unit in Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
Time, days
Figure B.102. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent sewage from first unit in Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
385
-------
1 !-

3 i'	'i	i
"73--	C	PL.	rk
pj £	d3—-ed -S—"a
JI
at
ij B 1 S 21—i 3 2 L-i 0 1—113 bata E1-! r" 2 Bu
Time, days
Figure B.103. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent sewage from second unit in Hanover
NTT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
a
1E 2L-.
3 2 '-it) L-iB
Time, days
5E Ei-. 7 2 SQ
Figure B.104. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent sewage from third unit in Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 4, 1981.
386
-------
0
Figure B.105.
b 1 a -1 a
Time, days
•1 !-i ¦I G -1 B 20
pH of influent sewage to first unit in Hanover
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 2, 1981.
-1 0
id
•10 -1 a 1L-, 1 B 1 B E0
Time, days
Figure B.106. pH of effluent sewage from first unit in
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 2, 1981.
387
-------
-1 0
Time, days
-1 i-i -1 E -IB SQ
Figure B.107. pH of effluent sewage from second unit in
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 2, 1981.
Time, days
Figure B.108. pH of effluent sewage from third unit in
Hanover NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 2, 1981.
388
-------
Time, days
Figure B.109. Minimum daily air temperature in the Hanover
NFT greenhouse. First day of measurement was
April 2, 1981.
y
0 +
i
3 51
3 ii i-_
a
i3?
i
!*'
<1 .'fo
A I! %T \ !
3
' ij ft $ ^
raj J.Vi na :T.iii -j
a
Q .11 {
¦irt cr-

a
¦ 11 i i
•;r~ 2
-- T ,*•,
Time, days
Figure B.110. Maximum daily air temperature in the Hanover
NFT greenhouse. First day of measurement was
April 2, 1981.
389
-------

§
EC
(1)
>
•H

I ii
I l-!3
i' 'i
Q
3 icj ^ A
i H U
I V
:il '5 I
i 2?
•'! 0 50
Figure B.lll.
Time, days
a ¦;'! -100
Minimum daily relative humidity in the Hanover
NFT greenhouse. First day of measurement was
March 2, 1981.
'1 0 0
A
>.
4J
•H
13

-------
25 0
5-1 5--
-55-
—100
S -15 30 «-<5 B0 75 30 -1 05 -150 135 -150
TIME, days
Figure B.113. "Evapotranspiration from the Hanover three
unit NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
measurement was February 26, 1981.
391
-------
APPENDIX C
This appendix presents data developed at the Cornell University facilities
over the course of the project. Tables C.l through C.25 present mean values
of variables over each loading condition tested. The complete data set is
presented in three chronological sets. The first set (Figures C.l to C.98)
2
showB data from the 9.3 m system that was sampled at the influent and
effluent stations, as well as intermediate points (noted as points A and B,
which were about one-third and two-thirds of the distance through the
system, respectively). The second set (Figures C.99 to C.201) shows later
2
experiments using both 9.3 and 18.6 m systems, which were sampled at points
2
identical to those of earlier experiments. In the 18.6 m system the
effluent of the first section was the influent to the second section; thus
no influent data is shown for the second. The third set (Figures C.202 to
2
C.315) shows experiments in the 27.9 m system, which was made up of three
9.3 m sections connected in series. No intermediate point sampling data
was conducted on this large unit. A fuller discussion of test units and
loading conditions is presented in Chapter 6, Section A.2.b.
392
-------
TABLE C.l. LOADING CONDITION PARAMETERS TESTED IN PILOT SCALE NFT SYSTEMS AT
CORNELL USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. CONDITION NUMBERS ARE GUIDES
TO SPECIFIC VARIABLE DATA WHICH FOLLOWS.
Target Loading
	Rate	
Area Weir
Condi- Loading Loading
tion Rate Rate
No. cm/d m /m-d
Condition
Dates
Start
End
System
Area
m
Plant
Species
Application
Mode
1
10.2
1.24
12/ 6/79
1/ 2/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
Continuous
2
10.2
1.24
1/ 3/80
1/27/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
30 min on
30 min pause
3
10.2
1.24
1/28/80
2/20/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
30 min on
105 min pause
4
10.2
1.24
2/21/80
3/17/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
30 min on
90 min pause
5
5.1
0.62
3/18/80
5/11/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
Continuous
6
10.2
1.24
5/12/80
6/17/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
Continuous
7
5.1
0.62
6/18/80
7/ 3/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
Continuous
8
20.3
2.49
7/ 4/80
9/ 8/80
9.3
Canary
Grass
Continuous
9
10.2
2.49
9/ 9/80
10/15/80
18.6
Canary
Grass
Continuous
10
20.3
4.98
10/16/80
10/31/80
18.6
Canary
Grass
Continuous
11
6.9
2.49
2/13/81
3/14/81
27.9
Phragmites*
Continuous
12
13
14
15
16
10.2
20.3
40.6
6.9
10.2
3.74 4/16/81 5/10/81 27.9
7.47 5/11/81 6/10/81 27.9
14.94 6/11/81 7/ 1/81 27.9
2.49
7/ 2/81 7/30/81 27.9
3.74 7/31/81 8/21/81 27.9
Cucumbert
Canary Grass§
Cattail/Bulrush* Continuous
Phragmitest
Canary Grass§
Cattail/Bulrush* 30 min on
Phragmitest 30 min pause
Canary Grass§
Cattail/Bulrush* 30 min on
Phragmitest 30 min pause
Canary Grass§
Cattail/Bulrush* Continuous
Phragmitest
Canary Grass§
Cattail/Bulrush* 30 min on
Phragmitest 30 rain pause
Canary Grass§
*Unit 1, tUnit 2, §Unit 3.
393
-------
TABLE C.2. TOTAL CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/fc) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL
BRACEHOUSE PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN
PARENTHESES.

Actual





Mass
No. of



Condi-
Loading
Deter-



tion
Rate
mina- Unit 1
Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions Influent Point A Point B Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
412
3
405.0
(16.5)
320.7
(50.8)
235.3
(31.0)
164.7
(24.0)
2
318
3
313.0
(217.6)
233.0
(113.8)
189.0
(59.1)
165.0
(18.3)
3
377
4
371.0
(53.9)
323.2
(23.4)
302.0
(50.0)
269.0
(29.5)
4
407
4
400.2
(40.7)
297.2
(45.4)
237.5
(92.4)
147.2
(26.3)
5
215
8
423.4
(41.7)
256.4
(37.2)
138.4
(29.3)
55.0
(22.6)
6
280
5
275.6
(18.6)
161.8
(19.4)
118.0
(31.2)
38.4
(15.7)
7
133
3
260.7
(64.0)
108.0
(32.1)
77.0
(9.6)
62.3
(16.4)
8
392
5
192.8
(23.3)
134.4
(10.7)
83.0
(31.3)
62.4
(16.8)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.2. continued
Actual
Mass	No. of
Condi- Loading	Detec-
tion Rate	raina- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number kg/ha-d	tions Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9
210
3
207.7
(26.0)
146.3
(21.7)
147.0
(44.8)
31.2
(12.0)
62.7
(2.5)
60.7
(3.4)
19.7
(8.0)

10
395
4
194
(28)
158
(36)
140
(48)
81
(38)
97
(39)
72
(35)
26
(20)

11
187
6
275.0
(84.7)
—
—
156.7
(43.8)
—
—
103.5
(37.3)
48.3
(48.6)
12
185
4
181.5
(25.8)
—
—
100.00
(29.7)
—
—
65.2
(26.7)
46.8
(11.8)
13
348
5
170.8
(41.0)
—
—
125.8
(67.6)
—
—
85.6
(37.5)
31.6
(19.3)
14
972
3
238.7
(50.0)
—
—
242.0
(67.2)
—
—
215.0
(42.6)
137.0
(15.4)
15
144
2
212.5
(67.2)
—
—
143.0
(21.2)
—
—
401.3
(541.0)
144.0
(136.2)
16
460
4
452.2
(115.0)
—
—
306.7
(90.3)
—
—
173.3
(97.5)
127.0
(68.6)
-------
TABLE C.3. SOLUBLE CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND CONCENTRATIONS (mg/l) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL
BRACEHOUSE PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN
PARENTHESES.
Condi-
tion
Actual
Mass
Loading
Rate
No. of
Deter-
mina-

Unit
1
Unit 2 Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent
Point A
Point B
Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
412
3
405.0
(18.5)
250.0
(48.7)
222.3
(26.7)
163.7
(34.8)
2
382
3
375.7
(90.8)
208.0
(127.7)
173.3
(61.2)
175.7
(22.3)
3
392
4
385.8
(20.7)
324.2
(25.2)
280.2
(48.6)
258.5
(39.7)
4
382
4
375.8
(24.0)
252.8
(21.7)
158.2
(18.0)
145.5
(26.3)
5
213
8
419.5
(61.5)
217.9
(44.8)
112.4
(26.7)
62.5
(19.4)
6
278
5
273.4
(29.5)
134.4
(13.6)
67.8
(6.6)
33.4
(6.9)
7
128
3
252.3
(59.0)
103.3
(21.2)
53.0
(9.2)
50.0
(24.6)
8
376
5
184.8
(18.5)
110.8
(11.6)
73.0
(18.5)
62.0
(24.6)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.3. continued

Actual




Mass
No. of


Condi-
Loading
Deter-


tion
Rate
mina-
Unit 1 Unit 2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Effluent
9
101
3
99.3
131.7
82.0
50.7
35.3
23.7
13.7




(23.1)
(22.9)
(23.6)
(17.7)
(12.7)
(7.1)
(2.1)

10
391
4
192
143
94
72
51
33
26




(24)
(26)
(30)
(27)
(27)
(29)
(21)

11
194
6
286.2
—
—
174.2
—
—
106.8
36.3



(96.3)
—
—
(106.9)
—
—
(51.1)
(28.1)
12
173
4
170.2
—
—
91.0
—
—
60.8
41.8



(51.4)
—
—
(52.1)
—
—
(36.5)
(34.3)
13
375
5
184.4
—
—
85.2
—
—
83.6
32.0



(56.0)
—
—
(49.1)
—
—
(42.4)
(19.2)
14
903
3
222.0
	
—
246.3
—
—
178.7
108.7



(37.0)
—
—
(67.9)
—
—
(53.7)
(17.9)
15
151
2
222.5
—
—
169.7
—
—
89.3
74.0



(50.2)
—
—
(88.7)
—
—
(48.8)
(35.1)
16
390
3
383.7
—
—
272.3
—
—
160.7
78.3



(122.7)
—
—
(142.2)
—
—
(103.8)
(70.0)
-------
TABLE C.4. TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Actual





Mass
No. of



Condi-
Loading
Deter-



tion
Rate
mina-
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent Point A Point B Effluent
Point A Point B Effluent
Effluent
1
38.7
3
38.0
36.5
35.2
31.4



(4.4)
(3.1)
(1.6)
(4.1)
2
42.2
3
41.5
33.6
31.6
29.2



(3.4)
(8.0)
(6.4)
(5.0)
3
34.2
4
33.6
32.5
32.1
33.9



(5.2)
(6.1)
(5.5)
(5.8)
4
36.3
2
35.7
30.3
28.9
26.2



(3.4)
(12.3)
(5.6)
(2.7)
5
19.0
6
37.4
36.5
31.6
29.2



(4.1)
(3.0)
(6.4)
(4.1)
6
41.9
6
41.2
38.6
35.6
31.8



(3.3)
(4.3)
(3.7)
(3.8)
7
18.8
2
37.0
29.0
21.4
25.2



(1.6)
(6.9)
(12.0)
(0.0)
8
71.1
5
35.0
32.4
30.0
27.3



(4.9)
(4.8)
(3.7)
(3.4)
table continued...
-------
TABLE C.4. continued

Actual





Mass
No. of



Condi-
Loading
Deter-



tion
Rate
mina-
Unit 1 Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
9
34.1
3
33.6
(8.2)
27.3
(6.6)
26.7
(4.4)
24.1
(3.5)
26.1
(1.2)
27.0
(4.1)
14.4
(9.4)

10
35.8
4
17.6
(8.8)
33.6
(3.9)
33.8
(4.9)
30.5
(5.0)
31.0
(4.4)
29.8
(2.4)
30.4
(2.8)

11
26.5
6
39.1
(3.0)
—
—
34.2
(3.2)
—
—
32.0
(2.1)
30.4
(2.1)
12
39.7
5
39.0
(6.1)
—
—
35.1
(5.1)
—
—
33.4
(5.9)
32.5
(5.9)
13
36.2
6
17.8
(4.0)
—
—
19.3
(9.3)
—
—
11.7
(2.6)
11.6
(3.7)
14
140.8
4
34.6
(3.3)
—
—
35.2
(3.7)
—
—
35.2
(5.6)
32.6
(3.7)
15
13.3
3
19.6
(11.6)
—
—
23.3
(10.1)
—
—
26.9
(10.2)
22.3
(11.2)
16
57.1
3
56.1
(4.6)
—
—
55.3
(10.1)
—
—
52.0
(15.3)
51.4
(8.3)
-------
TABLE C.5. SOLUBLE TOTAL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/fc) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Actual





Mass
No. of



Condi-
Loading
Deter-



tion
Rate
mina-
Unit 1 Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
38.8
2
38.1
33.8
34.0
28.5



(4.9)
(4.4)
(1.5)
(3.2)
2
38.4
3
37.7
33.3
30.8
28.8



(2.2)
(7.0)
(4.0)
(4.4)
3
37.3
4
36.6
33.5
30.4
30.1



(4.3)
(6.1)
(5.5)
(4.6)
4
38.6
3
37.9
26.8
25.5
26.0



(3.9)
(7.9)
(0.4)
(2.8)
5
19.3
6
37.9
33.6
31.9
28.8



(5.9)
(6.7)
(7.1)
(3.7)
6
41.4
6
40.7
34.8
34.1
32.8



(3.2)
(4.0)
(5.0)
(5.9)
7
18.3
2
36.0
29.9
28.8
21.6



(0.6)
(4.2)
(0.0)
(0.0)
8
68.5
5
33.7
31.6
28.7
27.2



(4.4)
(4.9)
(3.7)
(3.1)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.5. continued
Condi-
tion
Number
Actual
Mass
Loading
Rate
kg/ha-d
No. of
Deter-
mina-
tions
Unit 1
Unit 2
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
9
37.0
3
36.4
(12.4)
28.4
(6.0)
25.7
(4.1)
22.8
(2.1)
26.8
(4.0)
26.4
(4.2)
23.8
(2.9)

10
38.3
4
18.8
(7.7)
28.3
(2.6)
29.0
(4.0)
30.3
(4.2)
34.1
(5.1)
29.9
(2.8)
30.8
(0.8)

11
25.3
6
37.3
(6.0)
—
—
32.5
(3.4)
—
—
30.6
(2.1)
29.0
(2.1)
12
37.6
5
37.0
(5.3)
—
—
30.7
(3.8)
—
—
29.7
(4.9)
31.1
(5.6)
13
34.8
6
17.1
(3.6)
—
—
13.6
(4.4)
—
—
10.3
(2.2)
10.8
(4.0)
14
132.3
4
32.5
(1.6)
—
—
35.8
(5.3)
—
—
32.8
(4.1)
32.0
(3.6)
15
11.3
—
16.6
(11.1)
—
—
19.5
(9.3)
—
—
19.5
(8.3)
21.1
(8.4)
16
58.6
—
57.6
(5.0)
—
—
50.3
(8.9)
—
—
50.9
(8.2)
49.9
(8.4)
-------
TABLE C.6. ORGANIC NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
3
34.6
12.5
5.8
4.3


(3.8)
(1.1)
(0.6)
(1.1)
2
3
38.1
23.2
10.0
5.3


(3.3)
(3.9)
(2.5)
(0.6)
3
3
26.1
24.8
23.6
25.6


(3.7)
(10.0)
(8.1)
(9.2)
4
2
32.9
19.7
10.1
6.7


(1.8)
(6.8)
(5.3)
(1.4)
5
6
30.6
8.9
5.0
5.1


(6.0)
(2.5)
(3.0)
(2.4)
6
6
33.6
7.0
3.7
3.7


(5.7)
(2.7)
(2.3)
(3.7)
7
2
33.3
1.6
0.0
1.1


(0.4)
(2.6)
(0.0)
(0.0)
8
5
29.9
5.1
2.7
2.1


(5.8)
(2.2)
(1.0)
(0.7)
table continued..
-------
TABLE C.6. continued
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9	3
10	4
11	4
12	5
13	6
14	4
15	3
16	3
16.3
(1.8)
1.0
(1.0)
16.9
(9.1)
8.7
(2.5)
34.3
(8.4)
—
36.6
(7.3)
—
16.9
(3.9)
—
31.1
(3.8)
—
7.9
(5.4)
—
46.7
(3.4)
—
0.7
0.3
(0.1)
(0.5)
6.0
1.3
(2.4)
(1.5)
—
3.2
—
(0.5)
—
11.7
—
(1.3)
—
13.8
—
(9.8)
—
18.0
—
(2.1)
—
3.6
—
(3.1)
—
4.9
—
(1.6)
2.6	2.7
(1.3)	(1.3)
1.9	2.8
(2.0)	(1.9)
2.3
(1.9)

1.9
(2.5)

1.8
(0.6)
1.0
(0.7)
6.6
(1.7)
2.7
(1.2)
4.2
(2.3)
3.0
(3.7)
8.7
(3.3)
3.8
(1.1)
4.8
(2.8)
1.6
(2.3)
3.2
(1.3)
1.5
(0.6)
-------
TABLE C.7. SOLUBLE ORGANIC NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
of Deter-
Unit 1

Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
2
35.4
9.7
4.6
2.2


(3.9)
(3.0)
(0.2)
(0.3)
2
3
35.3
17.6
9.0
4.1


(2.7)
(7.1)
(5.1)
(1.0)
3
3
29.6
23.0
22.7
24.1


(7.4)
(10.1)
(8.1)
(4.1)
4
2
37.7
9.6
8.1
4.9


(3.0)
(7.6)
(3.5)
(3.4)
5
6
29.5
5.1
4.1
5.0


(6.0)
(5.3)
(4.5)
(4.3)
6
6
33.7
3.1
2.5
4.5


(6.1)
(2.0)
(2.1)
(5.4)
7
2
33.4
2.1
1.1
0.6


(1.3)
(0.7)
(0.0)
(0.0)
8
5
28.3
4.8
1.8
1.5


(6.0)
(2.7)
(0.7)
(0.6)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.7. continued
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number rainations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9
3
16.4
(1.9)
1.7
(0.3)
0.1
(0.1)
0.2
(0.3)
2.1
(1.4)
2.1
(2.1)
1.6
(1.3)

10
4
18.3
(8.0)
4.2
(1.7)
1.3
(1.5)
1.4
(1.6)
3.9
(5.0)
2.1
(2.4)
1.1
(2.3)

11
—
32.1
(8.6)
—
—
3.0
(1.0)
—
—
1.1
(0.6)
0.6
(0.4)
12
4
33.1
(8.2)
—
—
10.1
(3.2)
—
—
3.3
(1.1)
1.7
(0.7)
13
5
15.9
(3.9)
—
—
8.0
(3.2)
—
—
2.9
(1.9)
3.6
(6.8)
14
6
28.0
(3.3)
—
—
11.3
(4.0)
—
—
5.5
(2.7)
1.9
(1.1)
15
4
5.0
(2.2)
—
—
0.8
(0.6)
—
—
1.0
(1.1)
0.8
(0.9)
16
—
49.4
(6.6)
—
—
2.9
(1.7)
—
—
2.4
(1.2)
2.1
(0.6)
-------
TABLE C.8. AMMONIUM NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit 1
Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
2
1.2
23.0
28.7
25.6


(1.7)
(3.2)
(0.0)
(3.3)
2
3
0.9
9.7
21.5
23.7


(0.9)
(10.8)
(7.7)
(4.9)
3
3
3.7
6.7
8.2
7.4


(1.3)
(3.9)
(4.1)
(4.7)
4
2
0.7
11.6
17.7
18.9


(1.0)
(10.2)
(3.2)
(1.1)
5
8
8.1
26.2
24.9
22.9


(7.8)
(4.6)
(6.0)
(5.0)
6
6
7.6
31.6
32.0
28.0


(6.4)
(2.7)
(1.9)
(3.2)
7
3
2.4
20.7
17.2
12.0


(2.3)
(12.0)
(10.5)
(12.0)
8
5
5.1
27.3
27.3
25.2


(1.8)
(3.8)
(3.6)
(3.2)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.8. continued
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9
3
13.1
(11.5)
29.9
(3.2)
31.0
(4.7)
27.5
(5.2)
32.4
(7.6)
26.5
(3.6)
23.0
(4.3)

10
4
0.6
(1.3)
24.9
(2.5)
27.7
(3.0)
29.2
(3.5)
28.9
(4.2)
27.0
(2.6)
28.5
(3.6)

11
6
4.0
(5.5)
—
—
31.0
(3.0)
—
—
29.8
(2.6)
29.2
(2.5)
12
5
2.4
(1.4)
—
—
23.4
(5.5)
—
—
26.8
(4.9)
29.8
(4.7)
13
6
0.9
(1.0)
—
—
5.2
(2.8)
—
—
7.4
(2.7)
8.7
(2.3)
14
4
3.5
(1.8)
—
—
21.2
(3.4)
—
—
28.4
(3.0)
31.3
(3.3)
15
4
15.0
(10.8)
—
—
21.4
(8.0)
—
—
22.7
(6.3)
21.5
(7.5)
16
4
7.7
(6.6)
—
—
47.8
(9.9)
—
—
47.0
(8.9)
46.5
(9.2)
-------
TABLE C.9. SOLUBLE AMMONIUM NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.


Number






Condition
of Deter-

Unit 1

Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
1
0.4
23.5
28.1
24.2


(0.0)
(1.4)
(0.0)
(0.0)
2
3
0.6
14.3
23.0
24.6


(0.6)
(13.9)
(9.9)
(4.7)
3
3
3.7
10.5
7.1
5.4


(3.7)
(6.2)
(4.1)
(2.4)
4
2
0.6
18.3
17.1
20.5


(0.8)
(7.1)
(3.5)
(0.9)
5
8
9.8
27.4
26.7
23.1


(10.5)
(4.1)
(5.0)
(5.7)
6
6
7.0
32.6
31.6
27.6


(5.5)
(4.1)
(3.4)
(3.7)
7
3
1.7
20.9
22.1
11.9


(1.6)
(12.3)
(7.9)
(10.8)
8
4
5.4
26.6
27.1
25.6


(1.9)
(4.0)
(3.2)
(3.4)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.9. continued
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number rainatlons Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9
3
13.3
(11.8)
29.9
(3.3)
30.4
(3.7)
26.5
(6.2)
32.7
(5.8)
27.2
(3.1)
23.9
(2.3)

10
4
0.4
(0.9)
24.1
(1.0)
27.7
(2.6)
28.9
(2.8)
30.2
(2.0)
26.7
(1.2)
28.7
(2.7)

11
6
3.6
(5.1)
—
—
29.9
(2.8)
—
—
29.5
(2.2)
28.3
(2.2)
12
5
3.9
(4.5)
—
—
20.6
(2.8)
—
—
26.5
(4.6)
29.3
(5.1)
13
6
1.1
(0.9)
—
—
55.8
(1.7)
—
—
7.4
(2.7)
8.7
(2.3)
14
4
3.4
(2.0)
—
—
20.3
(3.8)
—
—
27.3
(1.8)
30.2
(4.0)
15
4
14.4
(9.5)
—
—
19.9
(8.0)
—
—
19.3
(6.7)
20.7
(6.3)
16
4
7.1
(8.3)
—
—
45.2
(8.2)
—
—
46.7
(6.9)
44.7
(8.9)
-------
TABLE C.10. TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit 1
Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
3
35.9
36.
35.1
31.4


(4.0)
(3.2)
(1.6)
(4.2)
2
3
39.1
32.9
31.4
29.1


(3.0)
(8.0)
(6.2)
(5.0)
3
4
32.5
32.7
32.1
33.0


(6.5)
(6.3)
(4.7)
(5.0)
4
2
33.6
31.3
27.8
25.6


(2.8)
(1.1)
(4.5)
(2.3)
5
6
37.4
36.5
31.6
29.2


(4.1)
(3.0)
(6.4)
(4.1)
6
6
41.2
38.6
35.6
31.8


(3.3)
(4.3)
(3.7)
(3.8)
7
2
37.0
29.0
21.4
25.2


(1.6)
(6.9)
(12.0)
—
8
5
35.0
32.4
30.0
27.3


(4.9)
(4.8)
(3.7)
(3.4)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.10. continued

Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit 1


Unit 2

Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A
Point B
Effluent
Effluent
9
3
16.3
(1.8)
1.0 0.7
(1.0) (0.1)
0.4
(0.5)
2.1
(0.7)
2.1
(1.3)
1.5
(1.9)
	
10
—







11
5
38.6
(3.1)
—
33.8
(3.4)
—
—
32.3
(2.1)
30.2
(2.3)
12
5
36.6
(7.3)
—
11.7
(1.3)
—
—
6.6
(1.7)
2.7
(1.2)
13
6
16.9
(3.9)
—
13.8
(9.8)
—
—
4.2
(2.3)
3.0
(3.7)
14
4
34.6
(3.3)
—
39.3
(5.4)
—
—
37.0
(4.1)
35.1
(3.6)
15
3
19.6
(11.5)
—
23.3
(10.1)
—
—
26.9
(10.2)
22.3
(1.1)
16
3
56.1
(4.6)
—
55.3
(10.1)
—
—
52.0
(15.3)
51.4
(8.3)
-------
TABLE C.ll. SOLUBLE TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL
BRACEHOUSE PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN
PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
2
36.1
33.5
33.7
28.4


(4.4)
(4.2)
(1.2)
(3.2)
2
3
35.9
31.8
30.4
28.7


(2.3)
(6.9)
(4.4)
(4.4)
3
4
35.1
34.0
29.8
29.5


(4.7)
(5.0)
(6.2)
(4.9)
4
2
38.2
27.8
23.3
25.4


(2.2)
(6.4)
(3.2)
(2.5)
5
6
37.9
33.6
31.9
28.8


(5.9)
(6.7)
(7.2)
(3.7)
6
6
40.7
34.8
34.1
32.8


(3.2)
(4.0)
(5.0)
(5.9)
7
2
36.0
29.8
28.8
21.6


(0.6)
(4.2)
—
—
8
5
33.7
31.6
28.7
27.2


(5.2)
(4.9)
(3.7)
(3.1)
table continued...
-------
TABLE C.ll. continued

Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit 1


Unit 2

Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A
Point B
Effluent
Effluent
9
3
16.4
(1.9)
1.7 0.1
(0.3) (0.2)
0.2
(0.4)
1.8
(1.2)
1.8
(1.6)
1.0
(1.3)
—
10
—







11
5
36.3
(6.1)
— —
33.1
(3.6)
—
—
30.7
(2.2)
29.1
(2.4)
12
5
33.1
(8.2)
—
10.1
(3.2)
—
—
3.3
(1.1)
1.7
(0.7)
13
6
15.9
(3.9)
—
8.0
(3.2)
—
—
2.9
(1.9)
3.6
(6.8)
14
4
32.5
(1.6)
—
35.9
(5.3)
—
—
32.8
(4.1)
32.1
(3.6)
15
4
19.4
(10.6)
—
20.8
(8.0)
—
—
20.3
(7.0)
21.5
(6.9)
16
3
57.6
(5.0)
—
50.3
(8.9)
—
—
50.6
(8.7)
49.9
(8.3)
-------
TABLE C.12. NITRATE NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
—
2.1
0.3
0.0
0.0


(0.6)
(0.3)
(0.0)
(0.1)
2
—
2.1
0.7
0.1
0.1


(0.8)
(0.2)
(0.2)
(0.2)
3
—
1.5
1.3
0.7
1.3


(1.5)
(1.6)
(0.7)
(1.0)
4
—
2.3
1.1
0.7
0.6


(0.6)
(0.9)
(0.6)
(0.5)
5
—
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.0


(0.9)
(0.0)
(0.0)
(0.0)
6
4
3.7
0.0
0.0
0.0


(2.1)
(0.0)
(0.0)
(0.0)
-------
TABLE C.13. SOLUBLE NITRATE NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mf;/*) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
—
2.3
0.5
0.1
0.0


(0.6)
(0.4)
(0.2)
(0.0)
2
—
1.8
1.4
0.3
0.1


(0.2)
(0.3)
(0.5)
(0.2)
3
—
2.0
0.4
1.1
0.6


(2.1)
(0.6)
(1.0)
(1.0)
4
—
2.0
2.7
0.7
0.7


(0.3)
(2.9)
(0.8)
(0.6)
5
—
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.0


(1.2)
(0.0)
(0.0)
(0.0)
6
4
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0


(1.8)
(0.0)
(0.0)
(0.0)
-------
TABLE C.14.
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/Jl) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USINC SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Condi-
tion
Number
Actual
Mass
Loading
Rate
kg/ha-d
No. of
Deter-
mina-
tions
Unit 1
Unit 2
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
1
17.7
2
17.4
16.4
17.2
16.3



(0.9)
(0.8)
(0.6)
(1.6)
2
13.5
3
13.3
8.0
9.2
9.5



(0.9)
(2.4)
(2.2)
(2.5)
3
16.2
4
15.9
16.0
14.7
14.8



(0.3)
(0.9)
(1.4)
(0.5)
4
13.7
3
13.5
13.0
11.0
12.1



(1.2)
(1.7)
(1.4)
(1.5)
5
7.2
8
14.2
14.2
13.2
13.3



(1.8)
(1.7)
(2.1)
(2.8)
6
14.1
6
13.9
14.4
13.5
13.9



(1.8)
(1.6)
(1.8)
(3.0)
7
7.2
3
14.1
10.8
9.5
6.6



(1.1)
(3.7)
(6.4)
(6.1)
8
29.5
5
14.5
14.7
14.9
14.8



(2.4)
(2.3)
(2.8)
(2.4)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.14. continued
Actual
Mass	No. of
Condi- Loading	Detec-
tion Rate	mina-
Number kg/ha-d	tions
Unit 1
Unit 2
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
9
13.5
3
13.3
(3.0)
11.6
(1.3)
11.6
(1.4)
12.9
(3.0)
11.0
(3.0)
10.0
(4.0)
10.1
(4.6)

10
27.7
4
13.6
(1.3)
12.8
(1.6)
12.7
(2.0)
13.5
(1.8)
12.3
(2.2)
13.8
(1.8)
13.1
(2.4)

11
10.7
6
15.8
(3.7)
—
—
15.6
(3.2)
—
—
14.6
(2.9)
15.4
(3.8)
12
12.3
5
12.1
(2.8)
—
—
11.8
(3.4)
—
—
11.3
(3.4)
11.2
(2.6)
13
12.2
5
6.0
(1.5)
—
—
5.6
(1.6)
—
—
4.9
(1.5)
5.4
(1.7)
14
45.6
4
11.2
(5.2)
—
—
12.6
(2.8)
—
—
12.7
(1.1)
12.7
(3.1)
15
5.7
4
8.4
(4.8)
—
—
7.6
(2.7)
—
—
8.2
(3.2)
8.9
(2.3)
16
—
3
14.7
(3.0)
—
—
15.0
(1.7)
—
—
18.2
(2.6)
15.5
(4.6)
-------
TABLE C.15. SOLUBLE PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Actual




Mass
No. of


Condi-
Loading
Deter-


tion
Rate
mina-
Unit 1 Unit 2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Effluent
1
16.9
2
16.6
16.6
15.4
16.4



(2.1)
(0.4)
(2.8)
(1.7)
2
10.9
3
10.7
10.5
9.3
9.5



(4.9)
(2.8)
(2.1)
(1.4)
3
16.0
4
15.7
14.8
14.9
14.5



(1.9)
(0.9)
(1.0)
(0.7)
4
14.3
3
14.1
12.6
13.1
11.9



(0.3)
(0.9)
(2.3)
(2.3)
5
7.2
8
14.2
14.3
13.7
12.8



(1.6)
(1.6)
(2.7)
(2.6)
6
15.1
6
14.8
15.8
14.1
13.6



(1.1)
(2.3)
(1.5)
(2.0)
7
7.4
3
14.5
11.5
8.4
7.0



(1.7)
(3.9)
(5.2)
(6.3)
8
29.3
5
14.4
14.5
15.0
15.0



(3.1)
(2.3)
(2.6)
(2.2)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.15. continued
Actual
Mass	No. of
Condi- Loading	Deter-
tlon Rate	mlna-
Number kg/ha-d	tlons
Unit 1
Unit 2
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
9
9.9
3
9.7
(2.9)
12.8
(0.7)
12.7
(3.0)
12.5
(3.6)
10.6
(2.1)
10.8
(4.8)
10.2
(5.1)

10
27.1
4
13.3
(1.7)
12.4
(1.2)
14.1
(3.4)
14.1
(2.0)
12.1
(1.8)
13.2
(1.4)
13.2
(2.5)

11
11.3
6
16.6
(3.4)
—
—
16.0
(3.1)
—
—
15.0
(2.7)
15.2
(4.1)
12
13.4
5
13.2
(2.5)
—
—
11.3
(2.8)
—
—
11.5
(4.4)
10.9
(4.2)
13
12.0
-
5.9
(1.3)
—
—
5.6
(0.8)
—
—
4.9
(1.4)
5.7
(1.5)
14
50.1
4
12.3
(6.1)
—
—
13.3
(2.9)
—
—
12.9
(4.5)
12.8
(1.9)
15
6.2
4
9.2
(3.4)
—
—
8.4
(3.3)
—
—
9.9
(2.5)
9.8
(2.8)
16
16.9
3
16.6
(4.3)
—
—
17.4
(0.6)
—
—
16.2
(5.4)
16.5
(2.0)
-------
TABLE C.16. pH AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER.
STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit 1

Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
3
6.3
6.6
6.8
6.9


(0.2)
(0.0)
(0.2)
(0.1)
2
3
6.6
6.6
6.7
6.9


(0.4)
(0.3)
(0.2)
(0.2)
3
4
6.7
6.8
6.9
7.0


(0.1)
(0.0)
(0.1)
(0.2)
4
4
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.9


(0.2)
(0.2)
(0.3)
(0.2)
5
6
6.3
6.5
6.8
7.1


(0.2)
(0.1)
(0.2)
(0.1)
6
5
6.8
7.0
7.2
7.4


(0.1)
(0.1)
(0.1)
(0.1)
7
3
7.1
7.1
7.3
7.4


(0.3)
(0.2)
(0.1)
(0.2)
8
6
6.9
7.0
7.1
7.2


(0.1)
(0.2)
(0.1)
(0.2)
table continued..
-------
TABLE C.16. continued
Number
Condition of Deter- 	 Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number mlnatlons Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9
4
6.8
(0.2)
7.0
(0.2)
7.2
(0.2)
7.3
(0.2)
7.3
(0.1)
7.3
(0.1)
7.3
(0.1)

10
3
6.5
(0.2)
6.5
(0.1)
6.8
(0.1)
6.9
(0.1)
7.0
(0.1)
7.1
(0.1)
7.2
(0.2)

11
5
6.6
(0.2)
—
—
6.8
(0.1)
—
—
7.0
(0.2)
7.1
(0.2)
12
4
7.0
(0.2)
—
—
7.4
(0.3)
—
—
7.8
(0.2)
7.8
(0.2)
13
6
7.1
(0.1)
—
—
6.9
(0.2)
—
—
7.5
(0.1)
7.7
(0.1)
14
4
7.0
(0.1)
—
—
6.9
(0.2)
—
—
7.4
(0.1)
7.6
(0.1)
15
4
6.9
(0.2)
—
—
7.6
(0.1)
—
—
7.8
(0.1)
7.9
(0.1)
16
3
6.8
(0.2)
—
—
7.7
(0.2)
—
—
7.9
(0.1)
8.0
(0.1)
-------
TABLE C.17. FILTERED pH AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC
WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.

Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit 1

Unit
2
Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A Point
B Effluent
Effluent
1
2
3





4
—




5
6
6.5
6.7
7.1
7.2


(0.3)
(0.1)
(0.2)
(0.1)
6
5
7.0
7.1
7.5
7.4


(0.1)
(0.0)
(0.1)
(0.1)
7
3
7.2
7.2
7.4
7.3


(0.1)
(0.2)
	
(0.1)
8
5
6.8
7.3
7.2
7.3


(0.3)
(0.2)
(0.2)
(0.1)
table continued.
-------
TABLE C.17. continued
Numbe r
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
9
4
6.8
(0.1)
7.1
(0.2)
7.3
(0.1)
7.3
(0.1)
7.3
(0.1)
7.3
(0.1)
7.2
(0.1)

10
3
6.6
(0.2)
7.0
(0.3)
7.0
(0.1)
7.1
(0.2)
7.2
(0.3)
7.2
(0.2)
7.2
(0.2)

11
—
6.8
(0.2)
—
—
7.0
(0.2)
—
—
7.2
(0.2)
7.2
(0.1)
12
—
7.2
(0.2)
—
—
7.9
(0.5)
—
—
8.3
(0.3)
8.3
(0.3)
13
—
7.2
(0.2)
—
—
7.5
(0.4)
—
—
8.0
(0.2)
8.2
(0.2)
14
—
7.1
(0.1)
—
—
7.4
(0.5)
—
—
8.0
(0.3)
8.0
(0.1)
15
3
7.4
(0.2)
—
—
8.0
(0.4)
—
—
8.4
(0.4)
8.1
(0.2)
16
3
7.1
(0.1)
—
—
8.1
(0.1)
—
—
8.3
(0.1)
8.3
(0.1)
-------
TABLE C.18. DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATIONS (mg/fc) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
¦p-
ro
¦p-
1
4
8.47
0.8
0.03
2.35


(1.0)
(0.4)
(0.06)
(1.18)
2
3
10.2
3.9
1.22
2.08


(0.5)
(0.7)
(0.79)
(1.05)
3
2
10.5
3.7
3.10
3.20


(1.3)
(1.0)
(2.68)
(2.54)
4
1
7.5
4.0
1.2
2.60
5
9
8.0
0.2
0.2
4.7


(1.2)
(0.3)
(0.4)
(2.1)
6
—




7
4
7.2
1.8
3.5
7.0


(1.3)
(1.3)
(1.8)
(0.9)
8
—




9
—




10
—




11
4
7.6
1.0
0.4
1.0


(0.6)
(0.6)
(0.1)
(1.2)
12
13
14
15
16
1.2
(1.5)
0.4
(0.2)
2.8
(1.7)
5.6
(0.6)
-------
TABLE C.19. TOTAL SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/fc) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
3
660.0
(45.8)
450.0
(130.0)
786.7
(706.1)
393.3
(51.3)


2
4
652.5
(60.8)
497.5
(22.2)
425.0
(31.1)
380.0
(38.3)


3
4
642.5
(86.6)
630.0
(73.5)
572.5
(64.0)
570.0
(60.6)


4
3
723.3
(49.3)
703.3
(317.8)
560.0
(98.5)
443.3
(25.2)


5
6
7
8
616.2
(160.0)
530.0
(169.4)
311.2
(107.0)
358.8
(79.7)


8
9
10
—






11
6
428.3
(40.7)
—
—
440.0
(427.0)
258.3
(66.2)
253.3
(30.1)
12
5
420.0
(40.6)
—
—
338.0
(44.9)
388.0
(179.6)
278.0
(99.6)
13
3
383.3
(141.5)


336.7
(176.0)
240.0
(88.9)
233.3
(76.4)
14
15
16
-------
TABLE C.20. TOTAL VOLATILE SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
3
433.3
(41.6)
223.3
(124.2)
580.0
(711.9)
176.7
(25.2)




2
4
450.0
(62.7)
290.0
(21.6)
202.5
(9.6)
160.0
(31.6)




3
4
427.5
(58.5)
410.0
(59.4)
360.0
(61.6)
350.0
(58.9)




4
3
476.7
(35.1)
450.0
(315.7)
310.0
(69.3)
193.3
(37.9)




5
6
7
8
452.5
(90.4)
390.0
(182.0)
173.8
(82.3)
215.7
(60.0)




8
9
10
—








11
6
238.3
(45.4)
	
—
235.0
(435.0)
	

90.0
(34.6)
81.7
(36.0)
12
3
213.3
(11.5)
	
—
133.3
(11.5)
	
	
150.0
(46.9)
110.0
(17.3)
13
4
207.5
(66.5)
	
—
160.0
(42.4)
	
	
120.5
(5.0)
87.5
(23.6)
14
4
120.0
(51.6)
	
—
127.5
(60.2)
	
——
105.0
(61.4)
67.5
(38.6)
15
4
110.0
(21.6)
	
—
127.5
(79.3)
	
——
182.5
(29.8)
220.0
(89.1)
16
4
445.0
(242.8)

__
176.7
(110.2)


187.5
(164.4)
110.0
(106.8)

-------
TABLE C.21. SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Condition
Number
of Deter-

Unit
1

Unit 2

Unit 3
Number
minations
Influent
Point A
Point B
Kf fluent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Effluent
1
3
2.7
(2.3)
21.3
(7.6)
20.7
(11.4)
5.3
(4.2)



2
4
4.0
(2.8)
27.8
(7.5)
11.0
(6.8)
9.5
(4.1)



3
4
2.0
(2.8)
10.5
(4.1)
11.0
(10.1)
12.0
(7.8)



4
4
1.0
(1.1)
11.5
(3.4)
22.0
(10.6)
11.5
(5.5)



5
8
4.5
(5.2)
14.2
(4.6)
14.0
(5.3)
7.8
(4.8)



6
7
8
9
10
—







11
6
4.3
(2.0)
—
—
7.7
(3.0)
— —
6.8
(1.8)
8.0
(10.1)
12
4
7.0
(4.8)
—
—
21.0
(14.1)
— —
14.0
(6.9)
9.5
(6.4)
13
3
8.0
(3.5)
—
—
17.7
(7.6)
— —
10.0
(6.0)
8.0
(5.3)
14
3
5.3
(2.3)
—
—
17.7
(15.0)
— —
13.3
(8.6)
11.7
(5.5)
15
—







16
5
11.2
(6.8)
—
—
33.8
(25.8)
	 	
53.3
(14.0)
40.4
(15.7)
-------
TABLE C.22. VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE
PILOT SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
3
2.7
(2.3)
21.3
(7.6)
18.0
(8.7)
5.3
(4.2)




2
4
2.0
21.7
(8.5)
7.2
(5.7)
8.0
(2.8)




3
4
1.5
(1.9)
9.5
(3.4)
10.0
(8.2)
11.0
(6.8)




4
4
0.5
(1.0)
7.0
(6.2)
14.5
(5.0)
8.5
(4.1)




5
6
8
4.0
(4.7)
13.2
(4.3)
12.8
(5.4)
6.5
(4.2)




7
8
9
10
—








11
6
3.7
(0.8)
	
—
6.3
(3.0)
—
—
6.0
(2.0)
2.0
(2.0)
12
4
5.5
(3.0)
	
—
17.5
(15.3)
—
—
9.5
(5.0)
8.5
(5.3)
13
4
4.5
(2.5)
	
—
17.8
(10.4)
—
—
14.2
(7.0)
9.8
(6.6)
14
3
4.7
(3.0)
	
—
13.0
(10.4)
—
—
12.3
(8.5)
9.3
(4.2)
15
3
44.7
(7.7)
	
—
9.3
(13.6)
—
—
14.5
(20.5)
5.3
(9.2)
16
3
6.3
(3.5)
::
—
20.2
(15.6)
—
—
37.3
(16.8)
24.5
(13.2)
-------
TABLE C.23. ZINC CONCENTRATIONS (mg/A) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
-p-
ro
vo
Number
Condition of Deter- 	Unit 1	 	Unit 2	 Unit 3
Number minations Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent Effluent
1
2
3
4
5	8	0.76	0.21	0.14	0.09
(0.25) (0.05) (0.11) (0.01)
6	4	0.35	0.17	0.11	0.10
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
-------
TABLE C.24. CADMIUM CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Condi-
tion
Actual
Mass
Loading
Rate
No. of
Deter-
mina-

Unit
1

Unit 2
Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent
Point A
Point B
Effluent
Point A Point B Effluent
Effluent
1
.112
3
0.11
(0.03)
0.04
(0.02)
0.02
(0.01)
0.02
(0.02)


2
.112
3
0.11
(0.03)
0.07
(0.02)
0.02
(0.02)
0.01
(0.01)


3
.061
1
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.02


4
5
.168
6
0.33
0.10
0.06
0.05



(0.24)
(0.02)
(0.01)
(0.02)
6
.214
6
0.21
0.10
0.06
0.05



(0.06)
(0.04)
(0.01)
(0.01)
7
.076
4
0.15
0.08
0.06
0.06



(0.04)
(0.02)
(0.02)
(0.02)
8
.305
8
0.15
0.12
0.10
0.09



(0.03)
(0.03)
(0.03)
(0.03)
table continued...
-------
TABLE C.24. continued
Condi-
tion
Number
Actual
Mass
Loading
Rate
kg/ha-d
No. of
Deter-
mina-
tions
Unit 1
Unit 2
Influent Point A Point B Effluent Point A Point B Effluent
Unit 3
Effluent
.193
-p-
0.19
(0.15)
0.13
(0.05)
0.10
(0.04)
0.09
(0.04)


4




0.08
(0.04)
0.07
(0.03)
0.06
(0.04)

10
.509
3
0.25
(0.11)
0.15
(0.08)
0.12
(0.05)
0.11
(0.06)
0.10
(0.06)
0.10
(0.05)
0.11
(0.06)

11
.020
6
0.03
(0.02)
—
—
0.01
(0.02)
—
—
0.01
(0.02)
0.003
(0.01)
12
.183
5
0.18
(0.04)
—
—
0.14
(0.04)
—
—
0.10
(0.03)
0.05
(0.01)
13
.122
5
0.06
(0.03)
—
—
0.04
(0.01)
—
—
0.02
(0.01)
0.02
(0.02)
14
15
16
-------
TABLE C. 24. SOLUBLE CADMIUM CONCENTRATIONS (mg/£) AT VARIOUS POINTS IN THE CORNELL BRACEHOUSE PILOT
SYSTEMS USING SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER. STANDARD DEVIATIONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES.
Condi-
tion
Actual
Mass
Loading
Rate
No. of
Deter-
mina-

Unit 1


Unit 2

Unit 3
Number
kg/ha-d
tions
Influent
Point A Point B
Effluent
Point A
Point B
Effluent
Effluent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

__







11
.014
6
0.02
(0.02)
—
0.01
(0.01)
—
—
0.01
(0.01)
0.01
(0.01)
12
.173
5
0.17
(0.05)
—
0.09
(0.05)
—
—
0.04
(0.01)
0.03
(0.02)
13
.122
5
0.06
(0.01)
—
0.03
(0.01)
—
—
0.02
(0.02)
0.01
(0.01)
14
16
-------
50 0
5"-i0
>-iB 0
1-.5 0
BB8
30 0
SU0
•1 BQ
•1S0
E 0
0
0 10 E0 30 L-i 0 5 0 B0 70 B 0 3 0-100
IK
.. V

\ .<
a
A H
' ^ 1
l	
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.3 Chemical oxygen demand concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point B
in the Cornell NFT in PEase 0. First
day of analysis was December 5, 1979.
i
in'-i i-'j
- £ -£i j-
0 '
.50 0 4-
I
EL- 8 4-„
l E 0 ^
i
•1 cz; 0 4-
E0 --
.--3
i3-a—-3_

l~'i -i-
-I
0 "1 0 20 13 0
0
50
T-V'
3 0 3u -'1 00
TIME, days
Figure C.4 Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 5, 1979.
U34
-------
- ?¦
T/\
50 0
B1-! 0
LiB0
350 --
30 0 --
E^0..
••130-
1 50 --
E0-

a s
_-a. / \
\/
13"	s
•o"
0
0 -10 50 30 Li 0 5 0 B0 70 30 30 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.5 Soluble oxygen demand concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 5, 1979.
By 0
5i-i 0
L-.B 0
L-i5 Q --
riS 0 --
30'0 -tf],
iti
E1-. t:i -L
¦1-3 0}
1 e 0 •!•

~
2

• 1 I
~-j' >
a	l
i '

•-! "I

1- tl
Sj'tJ	r-hj
S I 00
TIME, days
Figure C.6 Soluble oxygen demand concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point A in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 5, 1979.
U35
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.7 Soluble oxygen demand concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point B
in the Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day
of analysis was December 5, 1979.
5f 0
5i-iQ
1-13 0 --
>-12 0
35 0 -¦
3O0
SL-10 -¦
-1 S3 u1
•13 0 --
50 --
0
3—^.
f
*3-
R""*

•y
Pk /
.-d ^
"'as
"s-er"
0 -10 EU 30 "-i0 5Gi E0 70 B0 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.8 Soluble oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 5, 1979.
U36
-------
5 0
L-lS
*—I 0
35
30
E5
E 0
1 5
'I 0
5
0
0 -10 E0 30 L-i0 5 0 E0 ?0 50 50 '100
A
-• X	--h' \	Pv
' X	rJ3'	\	>'	ja
l " ~ —Q- ''
H	(1111(1	H
TIME, days
Figure C.9 Total nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
E 0
L-,0
35
30
E5
E0
•1 5
1 0
5
Q
0 'I© E0 30 L-i 0 5 0 50 70 5 0 50 100
TIME, days
Figure C.10 Total nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
U3T
-------
5 0
^5
L-i 0
35
3 0
as
a a
-1 5
•1 0
5
0
0 "10 20 30 1-10 50 E0 70 30 30 100
TIME, days
Figure C.ll Total nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
-1 0
J

r : -J
TIME, days
E'3 -1 ui-1
	
Reproduced from
best available copy,
Figure C.12 Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
i+38
-------
50
h5
l-i 0
35
30
55
20
•1 5
1	0
5
0
0 'I© 20 30 l-i0 50 G0 70 50 50 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.13 Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.
50
L-i 5
1-10
35
30
25
2	0
•1 5
1 0
5
0
0 "10 20 30 !-l0 5 0 50 70 B0 5 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.14 Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.
R
U
- ¦ V
Xi V
VC3''
JBf
/


-I	1-
t	I
U39
-------
50 T
'-i 5 1
I
L-i 3
35
3 3
T
a—
--a"' \
i
ef" L-:*——"9.
^		a
UJ	i
2 0 -I
1 5
•1 Q +
3 -j	1	1	i	f	1 t	H
I
I
I
-t-
33 i-!*-: !aW ta3 'r -J 3<-i 3 0 ¦] fc!j
TIME, days
Figure C.15 Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
b 0 -i-
-I .'j I
L-.0
35
- - a.
3h3--.
3
•23''"
—3 ,ET"
£T
: 3 -L
1 5 ¦
1 0
5
0 -I	1	t	\	I	1	!	1	1	1-
Hl! • | '^i £53 3 0 *—1 kii ^ i J ^3 y "? w 3 3 3 U i 'ct 0
TIME, days
Figure C.16 Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.

-------
l-i -J 'tL .

25;
3 0 i
1
"I
•1 0 -j-
s +
1
0 4-
0
—3'
rr~
3
bS
^'3-„
0
50 3y
it)
!a o
a iTi .-1 utui
TIME, days
Figure C.17 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.
E 0
L-S '
r
a	ft	b
30 -¦
E 0 4-
•15-
-1 9 !
E i
.-a \
a.
t
I /	'
: t	1
a
k
!
3
•jJ -	—'-J *—' K^l 'zz •-1 C3 rlj V V J 3 III 5^ '"i
TIME, days
Figure C.18 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point A in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
UUl
-------
50
•-i 5
L-,0
35
30
35
30
-1 5
1 0
5
0
0 'I© 30 30 *-10 50 G0 70 30 30 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.19 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point B in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
5 0
L-i 5
L-i 0
35
30
35
3 0
•1 5
•1 0
5
0
0 10 30 30 L-10 5 0 E0 70 B0 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.20 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.


m.

Cr"
"GJ .53-—-Q
\ x-"
ta
1+42
-------
30 1 00
TIME, days
Figure C.21 Soluble total Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
5 0 		
•	i

i— i-H
i s 4
r
i
TIME, days
Figure C.22 Soluble total Kjeldahl nitogen concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point A in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.
U43
-------
50 -j-
«-iS --
L-10 --
35
30 --
55--
30-.
15-
-1 0--
5 ¦¦
0
0
w
A

*10 30 30 ^0 50 50 70 B0 50 A 0fcJ
TIME, days
Figure C.23 Soluble total Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration
of synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
50
*i5
>-10
35
30
35
30
-1 5
•1 0
5
0
f "1 fcJ 30 3bJ '-10 5 0 E0 70 3 0 50 100
TIME, days
Figure C.24 Soluble total Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was Dec-
ember 7, 1979.

-------
50
00
6
z
I
u
o
06
O
hd
•10 3td 30 *—i kJ 5tl Em 70 B0 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.25 Organic nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
5 0
60
a
z
I
o
OS
O
L-J
EEIy 231 '—1 0

r 'cj
3 0 3 0 -1
TIME, days
Figure C.26 Organic nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
UU5
-------
si
01-
!
—-a
'.-J
—'a--
i,
¦.¦J
y
•1 !:-j 20 By L-i9 5u by r"y By 3 0 -1 yy
TIME, days
Figure C.27 Organic nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
5 0
y By ?y BG By -i mm
TIME, days
Figure C.28 Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 7, 1979.
kkS
-------
0 -10 20 30 L-i 0 50 SfcJ t7© ~ 0 9 0 -1 U0
TIME, days
Figure C.29 Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 19 79.
5 0
hS-
!—10 --
3 5--
30-
/ I
3 5--	/ l|
!	
-------
00
a
z
i
u
o
OS
o
hJ
o
to
S8i
3 E
2 -i-
i
25-
SQ --
1 5 --
•1 0 --
^ it

-a	bh
i£
/I
i
13-—
'1
I
-H

W '113 2^J 30 *-i fcJ 5Eti 7ti BQ 3u 1 tiid
TIME, days

CO
6
z
I
u
o
oS
o
o
to
Figure C.31 Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
5 0
1 td 20 « 30 L-i 0 S tl E0 70 0 0 30 '1 £
TIME, days
Figure C.32 Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
UU8
-------
I—! 0
3E
3S
EB
ah
EG
'1 S
-1 E
B
0
0 10 E0 30	50 E0 70 B0 E0 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.33 Ammonia nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
L-.0
3E
EE
EB
Eh
50
•1 S
•1 E
B
i-.
0
0 10 50 30 Li0 50 E0 70 B0 90 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.34 Ammonia nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.




A

XT3''
a?

i 	
\
1
\ / \
\ /
*a
i i i i i
P
""X
1 1 1
kb9
-------
1-10

a i-i -¦

00

a
a 0 - -
z
1
-1 s..
CO

§
1 a --

B -¦

--
G -1t) E0 3G i—10 5 0 E0 70 B0 E30 -10y
TIME, days
00
0
Figure C.35
i—10
Jb-
35 -
EB -k
ai-i --
E 0 +
•1 B
•1 a +
z
i
aT a +
z
4"
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was December
7, 1979.
' .3
P
<^S3r"
3-~
•1 0	3'"I 1-1 V-J !:J (3 0
TIME, days
¦'-j a u
! 0 1
Figure C.36 Ammonia nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 7, 1979.
U50
-------
fcj
•1 0
20 3tJ '—iU St-J ES 7Q B0 3 0 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.37
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
oo
E
Z
I
o
L,0
3E --
32 --
SB --
E >-ic —_
50 -¦
•1 5 --
•1 S --
a -•
i-i
0	
0


p
.a
\
ta
"10 5 Id 30 L-ttJ
i id SfcJ 70 B 0 9u 100
TIME, days
Figure C.38
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
^51
-------
0 E?Q 3ti L-iO btt E0	Bti 3tJ -100
TIME, days
Figure C.39
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
TIME, days
—			aaitfy
Figure C.40 Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
U52
-------
1 0 T-
1
I
3 f
5 1
3 -
'h.
J. "
i


!3
a
. I
1 0

:Q ay 3 0 1 yi
TIME, days
Figure C.41 Nitrate nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
3 f
S3
5
^3
I
i
4.
I—-EL.
a
—i-

i3-..
/ a—Q
-T-l£	h-
I	I
W 10 SO 30 Md :3ti b0
TIME, days
r0 Bu 9 0 1 y8
Figure C.42 Nitrate nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was December
7, 1979.
453
-------
1 --
0 »
,J3..
i a
o"S7"~~R-a o
or
-t-d~—y-
13 I
0 -10 E0 30 1-10 5 0 E0 70 B0 3 0 -11)0
TIME, days
Figure C.43 Nitrate nitrogen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
1 0
J"
B-a
TIME, days
3 0 -1 00
Figure C.44 Nitrate nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.

-------
TIME, days
Figure C.45 Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.
1	0
~
B
"?
S
5
L-t
3
2
•1
0
0 1 G 20 30 i-i0 5 0 50 "7Q 3 0 3 0 -1 08
TIME, days
Figure C.46 Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 7, 1979.
^55
-------

¦•1 0

~

B

7
~oo
E
5
Z
5
1
|
L-.
I

o
3
z

~J
a
o

to


1
W-
~ 0 'I 00
Figure C.47
TIME, days
Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.

1 0

3


co
B
E

*
7
z

I
E
I
fO
o
5
z

P-J
i-i
o

w
3

a

-1
1 0
30 i-. 0 5 0
TIME, days
3fcJ 1 00
Figure C.48 Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 7, 1979.

-------
20
1 a
1 s
•1 L-,
1	a
•1 0
B
E
i-i
2
0
0 '10 20 30 L-i0 50 E0 70 50 90 '1 fclfcl
TIME, days
Figure C.49 Orthophosphate concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
20
t B
•1 E
1
-1 2
1	Q
B
E
L-.
2
0
0 10 20 30 l-i0 5 0 E0 r"0 3 0 9 0 -1 W0
TIME, days
Figure C.50 Orthophosphate concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
-------
E 0
•1 a
1 B
1 l-i
•1 a
-1 0
B
B
"-I
E
0
0 '10 E0 30 Li 0 5 0 E0 70 B 0 3 0 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.51 Orthophosphate concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
E 0 ,	
a
i
i
t
I
i	1			1			1	1
TIME, days
Figure C.52 Orthophosphate concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
U58
-------
3 0
•1 B
1 E
•1 L-,
•1 a
'1 0
B
E
i-.
a
0
0 '10 E0 30 i-i0 50 E0 70 B0 30 100

A
A /
I	I
V
V"
V
i	t	1	1	1	1	i	1	»-
TIME, days
Figure C.53 Soluble orthophosphate concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
i^r	V r
L
K, j
B ..	\
M
1-1 --
a --
0 -I	1 I	1	1	1 I	1	1 I	
0 -10 30 30 1-10 5 0 EQ 70 B0 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.54 Soluble orthphosphate concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
NFT m Phase 0. First day of analysis
December 5, 1979.
r'
J3-
(a.
¦+! _-EJ
! \



\ ^
\





1 »
»
i i » i i i
U59
-------

•1 l-. or
00
a
i E --
cu
••1 0 --
i
-------
B5 0
7B5
-SB0
53 5
5-1 0
L-i2 5
3h0
555
1 7 0
as
0
0 '10 20 30 ^-10 50 50 70 B0 50 100
TIME, days
Figure C.57 Total solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
•1 1 Q 0
~30
BB0
770
BE 0
55 0
•—i1—10
330
550
•1 -1 0
0
0 10 30 30 L-i0 5 0 50 70 BO 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.58 Total solids concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was December
5, 1979.
U6i
-------
•1 70 M
1 530
' -E0 -r I	V
i	y
1 13Q4- /	\
1 0C0 ¦¦ ,1
BE Q -¦ .1
/ \
^ SB 0 --
oo
6
5 1 0 - - i1
n I
£ 3^0
1 7 0-
is-
-q q—a"
.13-"
	-Q
J3—EU
n

0 '10 20 30 >-10 5.0 50 70 E 0 3 0 100
TIME, days
Figure C.59 Total solids concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
60
6
C/3
H
E00 --
EEI5 ¦¦
S-1 0 --
UES*
BM-J --
	
:di
0

=:ta :=a
•17 0-
as -
-a-a—cT
0 4-
H	1	1	I
-)	1	1	I-
i--1 • ¦] r_l 2 ¦_! 31J ^—1 0 ^3 I-1.1 ^3 7 3 !'-J ri ' '1 Ll^
TIME, days
Figure C.60 Total solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
4d2
-------
05 0
7ES-.
BS0 ¦¦
sas..
5-1 0
M25|
3Li0 !i
255 -¦
¦170-
as-
ja.
'Q"
Pv
'""d

a
0 10 20 30 "-.0 50 E0 70 30 30-100
TIME, days
Figure C.61 Total volatile solids concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0, First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
050
755 --
EB0 --
535--
51	0 -¦
Mas --
31-10
S55
¦'1 7 0
0 5
4A
t-i
\ /
a
M

,aEr"
T3-"
I I,
I I
23
0 -1 9 50
—I	1	1	1	1	1	1	
3 0 HO 5 0 E0 70 B0 3 0 -1 00
TIME, days
Figure C.62 Total volatile solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
U63
-------
-1 70 0
•1 53 0
•1 35 0
1 '13 0
•1 Q30
B50
EB0
5-1 0
3Li0
-17 0
0
0 -10 30 30 L-i 0 50 50 70 3 0 30 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.63 Total volatile solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
B5 0
7B5
G3 0
53 5
5-1 0
L-i35
3>-i0
35 5
17 0
B 5
0
fcj 1 y Et.1 3k) '-i 0 5t) 50 70 B 0 3 0 -1 00
TIME, days
Figure C.64 Total volatile solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
U6U
-------
E50
755
EB0
535
5-1 8
>-tS5
3«i 0
355
•1 7 0
B 5
0
0 10 30 30 l-i0 50 50 70 50 30 100
TIME, days
Figure C.65 Total fixed solids concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
55 0
755
SB 0
535
5-1 0
1-.E5
31-10
E55
•1 7 0
35
0
0 -10 E0 30 >-10 5 0 50 70 B 0 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.66 Total fixed solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
P ~ —.

--S-—_r3__a-ae'
_-a
-i	1	i	t	t	i	1	1	1-
465
-------
1 70 0
1 530
1 3E0
1-190
1 03 0
550
55 0
5-1 0
170
0 'I© 20 30 *-i0 50 StJ 70 50 50 10bJ
TIME, days
Figure C.67
Total fixed solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
B5S
EB >d --
535 ..
70-
t.i
-•a-. .
-e-er"
[a...
_cr

"-12T

.-•¦a
1 U 30
3a >-10 5 0
TIME, days
Gy 7t3 3 0 5 0 I QkJ
Figure C.68 Total fixed solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
U66
-------
jy

E7
--
5L-.
-•
a-1

1 B
-•
•1 3
--
•i a
--
3
-¦

ci
a
)

d
+
.3-
0 +&¦
0
-t-
-h
C3
I l,
I '
1
\ ,P-
£3—d
	1	i	
R.
13-3.
i '"ct—i tin—a-
-t-e-
10 S0 30 L-i 0 5 0 E0 ?tt By 3 tJ 1 yy
TIME, days
Figure C.69 Total suspended solids concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
TIME, days
Figure C.70 Total suspended solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
U6T
-------
1-,0-p
3B--
0 -I	1	t	1	i	i	1	i	1	1	
0 10 20 30 L-i0 50 E0	70 B0 3 0 A 00
TIME, days
Figure C.71 Total suspended solids	concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First	day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
30-r
57 --
Eh --
0 I	I	I	I	I	I	1	>	*	I
0 10 20 30 '-i© 5 0 E0 70 00 3 0 100
TIME, days
Figure C.72 Total suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was December 5,
1979.
H68
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.73 Volatile suspended solids concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
a a r
32 f
sal •
i
E'- i
EE 0 i
' 1 rz3 -4^
•I
•1 a 13
B
"-a
¦	i
Li
-4—	—4-

V
	iSS_i
0 10 EQ 30 >-10 5l.-1	70	"5'? ¦' H.:l
TIME, days
Figure C.74 Volatile suspended solids concentration of
snythetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 5, 1979.
469
-------
00
e
Vi
w
>
L-,0
3E--
32 --
SB --
2<-.
E0
'1 5
1 E
5
0
.5?
r
\
/
\/ \
a
\
I

"A
\K
\ i ^
V
I	I	t	t	I	1	I	1	1-
0 'I© EG 30 1-i0 50 E0 70 0 0 3tl '100
TIME, days
Figure C.75 Volatile suspended solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.

30 -p

a?..

3L-. --

E-1 --

1 B --

•1 5 -¦
00
S
'1 E --
vss,
3 -¦
E
3 -
I
/ \

, - f\I
/ V / V /


\ / X I
"a
r
0
-I	1	1	t
¦H	1-
0 10 E0 30 1-10 5 0 E0 70 0 0 3 0 100
TIME, days
Figure C.76 Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the Cornell
NFT in Pbase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
Uto
-------
'ri
— L.,
5 f
• i ^ -i-
-X.
• li' bn '-j :;i r '•_¦• ¦ i: 3 ••_' ! '¦-i * .'J
TIME, days
Figure C.77 Fixed suspended solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in Phase
0. First day of analysis was December 5, 1979.

TIME, days
Figure C.78 Fixed suspended solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point A in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 1979.
U71
-------
1—( 0
35
35
SB
Ei-.
E0
•1 E
•1 E
B
Q
0 '10 20 30 '-i0 50 E0 70 B0 30 '100
TIME, days
Figure C.79 Fixed suspended solids concentration of
synthetic sewage at Point B in the Cornell
NFT in Phase 0. First day of analysis
was December 5, 1979.
30
E?
5i-i
E-1
-1 B
'1 5
1 E
3
E
3
0
0 -10 30 30 >-i0 50 E0 70 00 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.80 Fixed suspended solids concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT
in Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 5, 1979.
i
-------
E1T
i a i.
i s i
eh=j
-1 0 • -
0 B -
0E-
Qi-i ffl
B-
rr~
0 E 4ji
0 4—
0
&—si

Ei-. 3E l-i 0 »-.B EE E'-
7 E B0
TIME, days
Figure C.81 Cadmium concentration of influent synthetic
sewage to the Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First
day of analysis was December 7, 1979.
20
O a IE El-. 3E mil L-iB
TIME, days
E !~i
EG
Figure C.82 Cadmium concentration of synthetic sewage
at Point A in the Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 7, 1979.
-------
0 = 20
0 a 1 B
0 a 1 E
0 a '1 l-l
0 a 1 2
0 „ "1 0
"m 0 n 0 B
e
" 0 a 0 E
Q
W ~tJU
0 »y3
0
0 B -IE 21-. 35 *-i 0 I-.B EE Eh 75 B0
TiME, days
Figure C.83 Cadmium concentration of synthetic sewage
at Point B in the Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 7, 1979.
0.E0
0 „ "1 B
hi a 1 E
0 = m
0 a -1 a
si s o -1 0
00
E 0 ~ 0 B
8 t1 a 0 E
0 a 0 1-1
0»05
0
O B -IE E1-) 3 2 h0 hB EE Eh 7 2 BS
TIME, days
Figure C.84 Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 7, 1979.
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.85 pH of influent synthetic sewaee to the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
TIME, days
Figure C.86 pH of snythetic sewage at Point A in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
V75
-------
5 4
0
	1	I	I	1	1	1	I—
'11) 20 3tJ 1-i0 5 0 B0 70
t	i
B9 90 1 00
TIME, days
Figure C.87 pH of synthetic sewage at Point B in the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
•1 0 y
"1 0 -.
~ --
~ --
a -¦
B -¦
E -•
E --
E -I	1	1	1	1 i	1	1	1 i
0 -10 30 30 l-i 0 S0 E0	70 B0 3 0 100
TIME, days
Figure C.88 pH of effluent synthetic	sewage from the
Cornell NFT in Phase 0.	First day of
analysis was December 7,	1979.
kl6
-------
B
~r
7 i
			— ^	j'Srj	_ 		
I	^
t
1
H	1		1	I-
M ••']	31: J 1 1^.1 lz3 0 fcu f 0 Q 0 9 L_1 '1 t-1 M
TIME, days
Figure C.89 Soluble pH of influent synthetic sewage to
the Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
-1 0
•1 ©
3
~
a
B
7
7
B
E
3
0 10 EEQ 301 L-i 0 5 01 E0 70 BQ 30 100
TIME, days
Figure C.90 Soluble pH of influent synthetic sewage at
Point A in the Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First
day of analysis was December 7, 1979.

ET
UTT
-------
p..
' *			_s	/
7 ..	"--ei	^3"
E --
5
Q -10 E0 30 ^ 0 50 50 70 B0 30 100
TIME, days
Figure C.91 Soluble pH of synthetic sewage at Point B in
the Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
1 0 -p
'10-
3 --
3 --
B --
3 -¦
5 -¦
5 -¦
5 	1	1	h-	1	1	1	(	(	1	
0 -'10 30 30 1-10 5 0 50 70 30 3 0 100
TIME, days
Figure C.92 Soluble pH of effluent synthetic sewage from
the Cornell NFT in Phase 0. First day of
analysis was December 7, 1979.
1+78
-------
•1 0 0 - -
~ E --
?a --
E0 -¦
3E --
Sy 'i0 EG By I yy -1 2ti 1 '-iw 1 Ed '1 By 2ut
TIME, days
Figure C.93 Minimum daily air temperature in the Cornell
NFT greenhouse in Phase 0. First day of
measurement was November 12, 1979.
u
W
H
-1 E 0
1 0 B 4-

l
k,LMUll ^
zmw&mr #n.
;M '—iill EEif'-il 3 >-1.1 *1 LJ 1 ilE1"1 '—ikJ ¦] E kJ 1 E 'J
TIME, days
Figure C.94 Maximum daily air temperature in the Cornell
NFT greenhouse in Phase 0. First day of
measurement was November 12, 1979.
U79
-------
'1 5
1 (
1 a
•1 -i
3
B]
E
5
3
a
0
0 7 -13 50 SB 33 33 <-tE 53 53 E5
TIME, days
Figure C.95 Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 18, 1979.
-1 5
1 L-.
•1 a
•1 -1
3
B
E
5
3
a
0
Q 7 "13 a0 as 33 33 UE 53 53 E5
TIME, days
Figure C.96 Dissolved oxygen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point A in the Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 18, 1979.
U80
-------
13 S0 EE 33 33 i-iE 53 53 E5
TIME, days
Figure C.97 Dissolved oxygen concentration of synthetic
sewage at Point B in the Cornell NFT in Phase 0.
First day of analysis was December 18, 1979.
V
TIME, days
53 E5
Figure C.98 Dissolved oxygen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the Cornell NFT in
Phase 0. First day of analysis was
December 18, 1979.
USl
-------
50 0
SMS
>-iB kJ
Li50
350
no
a 30 0
*
o EI-.0
o
100
• 1 2 0
5 ^
0
0 S0 1-.0 50 B0 -100 '1S0 me '1E0 -100 S00
TIME, days
Figure C.99- Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
influent synthetic sewage delivered tc
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980•
MA A
l \

_i	1	t	>	i	1	t	•-
E; I d >.1 ' I i V < 1 .i''j ' I '-f1J • 'I L= 'il' "IG'J
TIME, days
Figure C.100. Chemical oxygen demand concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
482
-------
50 0
5U0
H3 0
^lE 0
bD 2B 0
a
*	30 0
o
8 E^0
-1 ~ 0
•1 a 0
5 0
0
0 20 "-10 50 3 0 -100 1 E0 -1 L-10 "ISO 130 E00
TIME, days
Figure C.101. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point B in
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19» 1980.
50 0
5>-t0
*—iB 0
L-.E0 .
*	3E0
*	300
o i—'t—< 0
o
•1 B 0
1 E 0
E0
0
0 E0 *-(0 50 0 0 -10 0 '1 S0 '1 L-l© '15 0 '100 E00
TIME, days
Figure C.102. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
h A
U83
-------
2Q Q
•1 BQ -¦
•1 E8 ¦¦
• m 0 - -
•1E0--
'100 ¦¦
B 0 - •
EQ --
t-,0
E0
0
/
A

/
/
/
""
\ /
V
v
0
-10
a© as 30
TIME, days
35 i-i0 L-i 5 50
Figure C.103.
E0 0
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent .synthetic sewage at Point A in the
second unit of the two unit reed canary
grass Cornell KFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up of
titer second unit was September 5, 1980.
1 B0 --
1 E0 --
1 L-10 --
1 E0 --
1 m 0 - -



-o
ei
-1 5
T3
E8 S5 30
TIME, days
35 Li 0 L-i 5 5fc.i
Figure C.104.
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage at Point B in
the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT unit in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
U8U
-------
-1 B 0
1E0
1 1-10
•	1 a 0
•	1 0 0
B0
E 0
L-10
E 0
0
0 5 -10 "15 2 0 as 30 35 L-i 0 i-i 5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.105. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
P
/
U85
-------
EG 0
5L-I0
L-.BQ
I-.E0
3E0
30 0
ah©
iae
-1 2 a
5 0
0
0 50 L-i© E0 BQ '100 '1 Sp 'I *—10 '1 E0 1 B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.106. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of influent synthetic sewage delivered to
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
'—1 £3
!-iS0
35 £1
30 0
E3U0
1 a p|
150
¦f
i
r
>jj .'3 a '3
- 1^3 1.
$ \
i'a
\ |3-cpsi3
a	±
T3~
1 i-O ~
-a
33
lil
L-i0 50 Bb 1 0 hi 1c:a 1 *-10 ¦1E0 '1S0
TIME, days
!00
Figure C.10T. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A in
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
U86
-------
B0 0
S1-! 0 - -
l-iBS • -
^aa
3E0 --
30 0 - ¦
B1-! 0 -•
1 El 0 4
• 1 a 0
5 0
0


! ca«j q
bJ 'Ja
° as—_
3
& £50'
R
-—€) ? C
—j£_
0
J0
1-10 B0
B0 -1tJ0 1Et3 -1 l-i© -1E0 -1B0 E00
TIME, days
Figure C.108. Soluble chemical oxygen demand, concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point B in
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
S0 0
5I-.0
^0
^ L-|E 0
tjo
s 350
g" 30 0
o
o
M i a 0
1 50
E 0
0
01 E0 L-I0 E0 0 0 -10 0 't 20 '1 '—10 -150 1 B 0 S00
TIME, days
Figure C.109. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage from the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19, 1930.
US7
-------
50 0
-1 B 0
• 1 5 fcj
me
to
5 1 a q
g '10 0
o
J BQ
o
M 5 0
L-,0
5 0
0
0 5 10 '15 50 55 30 35 US >-.5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.110. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point A in
the second unit of the two unit reed canary
grass Cornell KFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up of
the second unit was September 5, 1982.
50 0
¦10 0
-1 E 0
^ m 0
5sD
e -1 a 0
§ '10 0
O
^ B0
o
w 5Q
1-10
EQ
0
0 5 -10 15 5 0 5 5 30 35 h0 "iS 50
TIME, days
Figure C.lll. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point B in
the second unit of the two unit reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up of
the second unit was September 5, 1980.
U88
-------
SQ0
•1 BQ -¦
=>< 1 E y - ¦
a -m0..
q" -1E0--
o
o _
-1 0 0 - ¦
J
°	r-, -
cn B 0 - -
B0
1-10
E0
0
0 5 -10 -15 20 25 30 35 h0 u.5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.112. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell RFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up of
the second unit was September 5, 1980.
U89
/
-------
h5
1—1 0
35
3 0
25
E 0
•1 5
-1 0
5
0
0 -15 30 i-i5 E0 75 50 -1 05 -1E0 -135 -150
TIME, days
Figure C.113. Total nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage delivered to the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, I960.
(i "3.
K I
p--f3
\T\
EJ

""Y
[I fa
I
I	I	1	I	1	1	1	1	1-
M
•15 30
Figure C.llU,
L-i5 E 0 7 5 30 1 05 130 13 5 150
TIME, days
Total nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point A in the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
1+90
-------
c
0 15 30
Figure C.115-
L-,5 E0 75 50 '1 05 -1S0 -135 150
TIME, days
Total nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point B in the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of zhe second unit was September 5,
1980.
V X A
v* r~°
0
30 "-iS E0
75 30 -1 05 -1 20 13 5 1 50
TIME, days
Figure C.116. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
U91
-------
I-.5 --
>-10 --
* 50-
•15-
-1 0 - -
5 -¦
0 H	>	I	1	I	1	I	1	I	1
0 5 "10 -15 2 0 3 5 30 35 >-.0 >-.5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.117. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage at Point A in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up of
the second unit was September 5, 1980.
U92
-------
TIME, days
Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage at Point B in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 195 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
U93
-------
5 0
no
a
s
Eh
0
-10 15
20 25 30
TIME, days
35 10 Li 5 50
Figure C.119.
Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage in the second, unit of
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
U9U
-------
\ iW
0 15 3Q i-<5 B 0
75 30 -1 05 -1E0 -13 5 1 50
TIME, days
Figure C.120.
Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage delivered to
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
i-Q. Q-q	S.
^ ^	- 1 'b?	.a ft
/\
"4 \j ^

5 0
¦-i 5 -t-
1-10
35
3 0
35
3 0
1 5
-1 0 --
5 --
0 "15 30 1-.5 E0 7 5 30 -1 05 130 "I 35 1 50
TIME, days
Figure C.121. Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point A in
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
^95
-------
ckl3 W-G)

0 IB 3& I-.5 B 0 75 30 105 150 135 150
TIME, days
Figure C.122.
Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point B in
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
oj
—,
30-
60

y
as-
a
se --
0
15-



10-

5 -

0-
0
Figure C.123.
30 Li5 E0 75 30 10B 150 135 -150
TIME, days
Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980,
U96
-------
5 0
tJD
a
a
Eh
~q
O
CO
50
Figure C.12U.
to
S
&
Eh
~J
O
cn
TIME, days
Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage at Point A in
the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19» 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
50
50
TIME, days
Figure C.125-
Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage at Point B in
the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT. First day of
analysis was March 19» 1980. Start-up of
the second unit was September 1980.
U97
-------
50
M5 --
t-,0 - .
35-.
: 25-

-1 0 -•
0
0 S 10 15 EG 55 30 35 ^0 hS 50
TIME, days
Figure C.126. 'Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1930-
U98
-------
50 T
L.5 --
L-tQ
^ 3B
s
. 30
23
r, E5 +
o
cc
o
E0-.
•1 5 -¦
•1 0 -•
0
Q--SJ
y
!4 t
a
•15 30 Lt5
5 0 75 30 'I 05 1
TIME, days
!0 -135 150
Figure C.127.
Organic nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.

50 t

«i5 ¦¦

1—10 -¦


tin
35 --
a

r\
30 -¦
s

o
35 -•
M

3
C
30 ¦¦
O

o
•1 5 --

"10ii


5--

0 -¦

0
-15 30 i-i5
E 0 r" 5 50 -1 05 -1 3 0 13 5 '150
TIME, days
Figure C.128.
Organic nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 19, 1980.
1+99
-------
he
S
o
o
«
O

30 L-iS
Figure C.129.
E0 75 3%^ 05 -120 -135 '1 50
TIME, days
Organic nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point B in the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.


M
1 5 30 L-(5
BQ 75 30 -1 05 120 -13 5 -150
TIME, days
Figure C.130.
Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
500
-------
1 0
S
o
o
o
~
~ -•
7 --
B -¦
5 ¦¦
i-i -•
3 -¦
a ¦¦
[j
•1 --
0-
0
-1 0
20 SS 30 35
TIME, days
•-10 Li 5 5fcJ
Figure C.131.
Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage at Point A in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
s
o
M
o
o
15 50 as 30 35 «-.0
TIME, days
5 50
Figure C.132.
Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage at Point B in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
501
-------
1 0 y
3 --
B ¦¦
7--

0 5 10 15 50 55 30 35 L-.0 "-.5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.133. Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage in the second, unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
502
-------

co •1 a
>-i5 E0 ?5 30 -1 05 120 135 150
TIME, days
Figure C.13^. Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.

5 0 -r

I-.5 --
c*
1-10 -
to

1=1
35 --
3
30-
O

H
F3
35 --
<

u
re
2 0 --
o

j
•1 5 ¦¦
o

Ui
•1 0t,

5--

0 --
•15 30jy( «-.5 50 75 30 -1 05 -120 135 150
TIME, days
Figure C.135.
Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
503
-------

50 75 30 -1 05 -1S0 135 -15Q
TIME, days
Figure C.136. Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
iQ
I-.5 --
1-10 --
35 --
30-
35 --
3 0 --
•1 5
-1 0
A /I
^		
0 -15 30 L-i5 E0 7 5 30 1 OS 130 135 -150
TIME, days
Figure C.13T* Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage from the
reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
50U
-------
Q
M
-10 -15
Figure C.138.
t	i
50 a5 30
TIME, days
35 10 m
50
Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September
1980.
M
A 0
•15 E0 55 30
TIME, days
35 L-.0 L-i 5 50
Figure C.139.
Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5
1980.
505
-------
'1 0y
a..
B -¦
0 5 'IQ -15 50 25 30 35 L-i0 •—15 50
TIME, days
Figure C.lUO. Soluble organic nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage in the
second unit of the two unit reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
506
-------
50
i_, 5
1_,0 ..
35--
a*
w 3 0 4-
\m
0 50 i-i0 B0
Figure C.lUl.
00 -100 1 50 -1 Li© 1E0 1By 500
TIME, days
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell TIFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 19, 1980.
to
6
-3"
S3
25
1-.0--
0 50
Figure C.1U2.
_t	
50 B0 -100 -1 50 1 M0 1E0 '1 B0 50©
TIME, days
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 19, 1900.
507
-------
vs.
30

50-
20 i-i0 B0
»	t	
B0 -100 -130 1i-r0 *1 B0 -1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.1U3.
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 19, 1980,
50
'-i a - •
H0--
35 --
30 4
ftp
A
t hi


20 --
1 S--
¦ 1 0 - -
/

0
H—F3	(-
kil 20 1-10
Figure C.lUU,
5u B 0 '100 -120 1 Ma ¦ 1 E 0 '100 200
TIME, days
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 19SO.
508
-------
1-10
aat a
Figure C.1U5.
32 -1-1 5 -13B -1 B-1 -1 B1-! 207 E3Q
TIME, days
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the second unit of the two unit
reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September
1980.
h0
fl

4
0 23 i-iE E3 3 2 1 -1 5 -1 3B -1 E1 10^ 207 230
Figure C.1U6.
TIME, days
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5
1980.
509
-------
35 -•
35 --
'1 B ¦¦
-1 a --
l-i -¦
0 23 l-iE E3 3Bj1j1_5 13B -1 E-1 1BI-. E0? S30
TIME, days
Figure C.lUT. Ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage in the second
unit of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell UFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1990.
510
-------
50
;r V, U*
0 20 L-i0 B0 B0 -100 'I 2tl -1 L-i0 'IE© -1 Bk) S00
TIME, days
Figure C.1U8. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
L
0 Bfc) L-it) EfcJ
B0 -100 '1E0 -1 '—10 1 B0 -1B0
TIME, days
WW
Figure C.1U9.
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
511
-------
50
30 II fei

J
Figure C.150.
-i	1	1	1-
3 0 -100 ¦I E0 -1 •—»0 1 E0 '130 200
TIME, days
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19> 1980.
5 0
L-lE -¦
L-t 0 - -
35.
b0
s 3 0
S 25--
K
3
03
: W ...
-1 5 • ¦
1 G +
* \ }
\!
U 20 '-.t:
Eh 1 ~ jm | i_i i '-im | 5y 'l Bb 2-oi-j
TIME, days
Figure C.151. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage from the
reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
512
-------
/ I ^ w
h—a
kJ
S3 i-E E3
3S -11 5 -13B -1 E-1 -IB1-! S07 E30
TIME, days
Figure C.152.
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell KFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
L-.0
31-.--
3-1
SB-
s
i
+
Q	L-iE 53 3 3 1-1 5 1 3B 1 E1 -IB1-! 207 E30
TIME, days
Figure C.153. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
513
-------
r\r~
T
8 S3 1-1E E3
ga 115 13B -1E-1 1BhS0? S30
TIME, days
Figure C.15U.
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage in the
second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
5lU
-------
60
s
a
i
on
0 S
Figure C.155-
•1 0 -1 S 1 l-i
TIME, days
Nitrate nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
May 13 , 1930.
h0
C5
z
I
cn
o
a
0 E
a -1 0 -1 a
TIME, days
IL-, -1
-1 a E0
Figure C.156.
Nitrate nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
May 13, 1980.
515
-------
•10 'IS
TIME, days
50
Figure C.157-
Nitrate nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the reed canary grass Cornell TIFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
May 13, 1980.
TIME, days
Figure C.158.
50
Nitrate nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the reed
canary grass Cornell NET in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was May 13, 1980.
516
-------
0 E
L-,
Figure C.159.
• 1 0 1 E
TIME, days
•1L-,
•1 E
-1 3 EG
Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
May 13, I960.
Figure C.lbO.
1 0 "1 E
TIME, days
•11-. 1 S 1 E
EG
Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
May 13, 1980.
517
-------

1 0

3

B


00
7
a


G
s

1
B
m

0
s
I-.
~J
0
a
CD


a

-1
0 a 1-1
Figure C.l6l.
b 1 0 _ -i a m
TIME, days
•1 E -1 B 20
Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
May 13, 1980.

'1 0

3

B
(JO

g
T7
«s

3
I
B
on
0
B
3

hJ

0

CO
3

a

•1
0
10 1a -m
TIME, days
-1 B -1 B B0
Figure C.162.
Soluble nitrate nitrogen concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage from the
reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was May 13, 1980.
518
-------
EG
-1 B
•1 E
1 i-.
-1 E
-1 Q
a
E
s
Q
Q EE S0 75 -10 0 -1E5 -1S0 -1 7S E00 EES E50
TIME, days
Figure C.163. Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of influent synthetic sewage delivered
to the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19» 1980.
E 0
•1 B
•1 E
•1
•1 E
•1 0
B
E
Li
E

ft fl

¦i/V
IP 19
a 4'
x4
rp 11
wf'9

a
05

•323
I	t	I	I	t	I
I	I
0 EE E0
Figure C.16U.
75 -10 0 -1 ES '1 A 75 Sidtj EES E5tJ
TIME, days
Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
519
-------
E0
•1 B
•1 5
•1
•1 a
1 0
B
E
>-i
E
0
0 E5 50 75 -100 1E5 '150 -1 75 200 2E5 E50
TIME, days
Figure C.165. Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of influent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the reed canary grass Cornell NTT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
E0
1 B
-1 B
•1 l-.
•I E
•1 0
B
E
E
0
0 E5 50 75 100 -12 5 150 -1 75 500 55 5 550
TIME, days
Figure C.166. Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage from the
reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980
- R

9 Ftp
i ^ j 'i
\ I *


i%]
a^
t h.
\ fi
,U I Q
1/
H	1	1-
H	1	I
520
-------
E0 y
-1 B--
1 E ¦¦
0	I	I	I	1	1	I	1	t	t	
0 5-10-15 50 55 30 35 >-.0	50
TIME, days
Figure C.167. Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point A
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-
up of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
0
•1 0 -1 5
50 55 30
TIME, days
35 L-i 0 L-i 5 50
Figure C.168. Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage at Point B
in the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
521
-------
r
0
-10 is a
0 B5 30 35
TIME, days
•-10 '-i 5 50
Figure C.169.
Orthophosphate phosphorus concentration
of effluent synthetic sewage in the
second unit of the two unit reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. Firsr day
of analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
0 25 50 75 1vj0 125 150 i 75 20 tJ 2d5 25ti
TIME, days
Figure C.1T0. Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus con-
centration of influent synthetic sewage
delivered to the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
522
-------
ee
R rt„ \
8 E5 50
Figure C.1T1.
75 -10 0 -1 55 -150 -1 75 E00 EE5 E50
TIME, days
Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus con-
centration of influent synthetic sewage
at Point A in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT unit in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
c i tn
n
/
0 E5
50
Figure C.172.
75 -10 0 -155 1 50 1 75 200 EE5 E50
TIME, days
Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus con-
centration of influent synthetic sewage
at Point B in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
523
-------
20
-1 a
1	E
1	L-.
-1	a
•1	0
B
E
L-.
a
0
Mir
\
b a
f
A
0 EE 50
Figure C.1T3.
75 -100 -1E5 -150 -1 75 200 225 250
TIME, days
Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus con-
centration of effluent synthetic sewage
from the reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19 > 1980.
M
•10 -15 20 25 30 35 U0
TIME, days
50
Figure C.IT^.
Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus con-
centration of effluent synthetic sewage
at Point A in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
52U
-------
EG
-1 a..
•1 E -¦
•1 L-.
-1 a
•1 0
B
E
i-i
2
0
0 5 10 -15 20 55 30 35 >-.0 L-.5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.175. Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus con-
centration of effluent synthetic sewage
at Point B in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, I960. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
2 0
1 B
-1 E
•1 l-.
1 E
-1 0
B
5
i-.
E
0
0 5 -10 -15 S0 E5 30 35 >-.0 >-i5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.176. Soluble orthophosphate phosphorus concen-
tration of effluent synthetic sewage in
the second unit of the two unit reed
canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
/
A
0—	B-	Q
-I- \
1 V
/
/ \
/ k"
till	1	1	t	t
525
-------
-
IB S >-i 3 0 3B
TIME, days
>-i5 1-.B 5i-i E0
Figure C.177-
Cadmium concentration of influent synthetic
sewage delivered to the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
-1
0 iB0
0 o B 0
0.70
0 a B 0
IP 0.50
rtf" 0 B I 0
o
0=30
0 ~ 2 0
0,10
0
0 B -15 1B Si-. 30 3E L-.E >-tB 5<-. S0
TIME, days
Figure C.1T8. Cadmium concentration of influent synthetic
sewage at Point A in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
526
-------
•1
0 .30
0 aB0
0o?0
cj 0 ~ E 0
S 0 = 50
0 »h0
o
0 D 3 0
0=50
0.-10
0
0 E -15 'IB 51-. 30 3E I-.E hB 5"-. E0
TIME, days
Figure C.179. Cadmium concentration of influent synthetic
sewage at Point B in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
1
0 a 3 0
0=30
0a?0
oi 0 n E 0
g 0-50
Tj 0 a *-1 0
O
0=30
0 a 3 0
0='10
0
0 e ia -1 b a>-. 30 3E i-.a >-.b 5>-. e©
TIME, days
Figure C.180. Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the reed canary grass Cornell
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 19» 1980.
527
-------
Q ~ Li 5
3^0
Q .35
0-30
0.S5
0 .20
0.1 5
0 a'l 0
0 .05
0
0 15 30 I-.5 50 75 30 -1 05 120 135 150
TIME, days
Figure C.l8l. Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage at Point A in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 19
1980. Start-up of the second unit was
September 5, 1980.
y o50
0 .1-15
0 D I 0
0 d35
0.30
0 .35
0 oE0
0 = 15
0 . 1 0
0.05
0
0 -15 30 L.5 G0 7 5 30 1 05 1S0 -135 150
TIME, days
Figure C.182. Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage at Point B in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was March 19
1980. Start-up of the second unit was
September 5S 1980.
\
528
-------
0 = 50
0 .>-.5 ..
0 a L-l 0 - ¦
0.35..
M)
S
0 .30 -¦
„ 0 oE5 -¦
° 0.50-
0.15-
0c1 fe) ¦ ¦
0 .05-
£U^Sr^.

0
0 -15 30 L.5 B0 75 30 1 05 -130 135 -150
TIME, days
Figure C.183. Cadmium concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage in the second unit
of the two unit reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was
September 5, 1980.
529
-------
a
p,
0 20 1-10 50 B0 -100 '1 E0 1 t-10 -1B0 '1B0 E00
TIME, days
Figure C.18U. pH of influent synthetic sewage
delivered to the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT -in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
•1 0 f
•1 id f
3 L
3 1
w _
P< a

. A'
-a

;u :
j i >i' i£i
1 tl •-!:
TIME, days
Figure C.I85.
pH of influent synthetic sewage at
Point A in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
530
-------
as
p<
		^ -3
r
^	1_
dQ ^0
Figure C.186.
	1	i	1	1	!	H	1	!
E0 B0 ;1 01-9 1 E0 I L-i0 'i EG 1 5 0 300
TIME, days
pH of influent synthetic, sewage at
Point B in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
I I ' T
El
a
% a
4-
1
r
13*
,--3 ?
a




a-3""
iiu'

3 -1	1	!	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
i.-j 30 i-ifci Bid Bid '1 fe.1 W -'1 i LifcJ • 1 fca y -I 2 U 3idid
TIME, days
Figure C.I87. pH of effluent synthetic sewage from
the reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980.
531
-------
1 0
sc
ft
u
•10 -15 S0 35 30 35 1-10 I-.5 50
Figure C.188.
TIME, days
pH of effluent synthetic sewage at
Point A in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell
NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980. Start-up
of the second unit was September 5, 1980.
1 0 j-
3 -¦
5 --
K 5 -¦
ft
l-l..
3 ¦¦
3 -•
•1 --
0 -I		1 I	1	
0 5 10 15 30 35 30 35 L-.0 i-i5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.I89. pH of effluent synthetic sewage at
Point 3 in the second unit of the two
unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
532
-------
H	1	I	I	1	<	1	1	1	
0 5 10 15 50 55 30 35 "-.0 I-.5 50
TIME, days
igure C.190. pH of effluent synthetic sewage in.the
second unit of the two unit reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was
September 5 , 1980.
533
-------
y ffcJV	^
'K pa	JmJ
\ '
a'
Q EQ '—10 E0 00 -1Q0 -1 EG 1 i-iQ "1S0 1B0 S00
TIME, days
Figure C.191. Soluble pH of influent synthetic sewage
delivered to the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
'1 0
3
a
7
E
5
0 E0 L-10 E0 Ski 1 yu 1 Ey 1 *—-1 bay 1 By Efti
TIME, days
Figure C.192. Soluble pH of influent synthetic sewage
at Point A in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
ci S -J3--
---a
53H
-------
0 50 L.0 B0 00 '100 "120 1 L-.0 -1E0 -1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.193. Soluble pH of influent synthetic sewage
at Point B in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
1 0
t	I	H
0 20 L_,0 E0 B0 100 -120 1 I-.0 1 B0 1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.19U. Soluble pH of effluent synthetic
sewage from the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
535
-------
0 t	I	I	t	t	t	t	t	t	t
0 5 '1Q -IB 59 25 30 35 >-.0 ^5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.195. Soluble pH of effluent synthetic sewage
at Point A in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
1 0
~
B
"?
E
5
i-i
3
-1
0
0 5 10 -15 20 25 30 35 ^0 1-.5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.196. Soluble pH of effluent synthetic sewage
at Point B in the second unit of the
two unit reed canary grass Cornell NFT
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
March 19, 1980. Start-up of the second
unit was September 5, 1980.
536
-------
SC
ft
iJ
O
za
0 5 -10 -15 E0 E5 30 35 I-.0 h5 50
TIME, days
Figure C.197. Soluble pH of effluent synthetic sewage
in the second unit of the two unit
reed canary grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was March 19, 1980.
Start-up of the second unit was September 5,
1980.
5 37
-------
H	1	t	I	I	I	1	I	1	1
0 E "12 1B E"-. 3 0 3E ^a >-iB 5^ E9
TIME, days
Figure C.198. Zinc concentration of influent synthetic
sewage delivered to the reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was March 19» 1980.
E
E
a
•1
-1
0-1 0 0
0 ~ B O
kJ ~ E 0
0.^0
0 =50
0
0 E 12 -1B EE *-1 3 0 3E 1-.E 1-.B E"-. E0
TIME, days
Figure C.199- Zinc concentration of influent synthetic
sewage at Point A in the reed canary
grass Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was March 19, 1980.
538
-------
00-
a«-t 30 3E
TIME, days
EG
Figure C.200.
Zinc concentration of influent synthetic
sewage at Point B in the reed canary grass
Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was March 19, 1980.
E
a
a
1
•Si i
60
S 0-100
*
tS 0 n B 0
t) nEt)
0 ~'-10
0 a E 0
0
0 5 -ta -1 s a>-t 30 3E i-.a ha s>-. E0
TIME, days
Figure C.201. Zinc concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the reed canary grass Cornell
NFT in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was March 19, 1980.
539
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.202. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
-j	
5-0 j
!—i 3 fci - -
h5 0 •-
3E0 • •
20 0 --
i
5<-10 (-
^ •
1 30
1 a 0 +
a i, 5
LH53 A
hi
S0-1-
ttr
i
..-3
I 'V '3
i|
~
"r
!i,
sit /
' i \ *
ra ;
iS
I

iiS 23 i£l tateJ 3y I ' 'Jtl 1 EHsii.s -1 ii£l 1 1 3y eSte.1t1
TIME, days
Figure C.203. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
5^0
-------
60
E
P
O
u
5y m
L-( 5 0 • ¦ -
L- 0 0 - -
350 --
30 9 -
E50 --
13
E0 0 -r
I
1 5 0 - J,
•1 0 0 --
/ ''
! id

o__
=e|
0

-1 -1
c3—
-!S2S£EB6S-Ha-
33

15 b:Ld
r t*
SB 3 3-1 -1 0
Figure C.204.
TIME, days
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
oo
E
O
o
u
50 0
S1-! 0 -¦
<-iB0 --
<-.3 0 -
35 0 --
30 0 --
Eii 0 - -
1 B0ii
1.2 0
5 0
0
0


A

l a
f ."J
t
a.
fl
I

-0 '-id Eu Su 1 fcj 0 '1 30 '1 L,0 150 1B0 300
TIME, days
Figure C.205. Chemical oxygen demand concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
>hi
-------
B00
'-.~0
>-iE Q
350 -¦
30 0 -¦
a^0-
1 B0 -¦
-1 E0 • ¦
50 i
M
5?
E0 1-10 E0 00 -100 -1EQ -1 L-i0 -1E0 1 30 E00
Figure C.206.
TIME, days
Chemical oxygen demand concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.

to
e
a
o
u
o
CO
'."J
i. i
f [r
— —d
I50i
L*i
= i-n
r
I—
cr'J L10 St1 Ew	*'	1i b "Li '! "• S':J0
Figure C.207.
TIME, days
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the first unit of
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5^2
-------
k_1
b'-iy
—i El ki*
'-,5 0
350
30 0
em3
•1 3 0 4
.¦¦) 3 0 .||	—
E0
CP
"1 /1
i? Lg
9
f/l
,' i2 i
P.
/
tp
1
&
-4-
-+-
_12L
. W
\/
ill
0
/ t
iS a
'"ffl
-+-
-H
-+-
•d 5y 1-iQ E0 B0 -1 0W -1 2t) -1 •—10 1 S0 -'130 200
Figure C.208.
TIME, days
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the first unit of
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1,
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981,


S0 Jj
1
2~>,Z3
ig3B»-+THi—h
L_, L.
I=:
lis 2 -'1 1'
TIME, days
Figure C.209. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the second unit of
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5^3
-------
EG 0
b^U
¦-.5 0
L,5 0
35 0
308
EL,0
1 B0
120
A P?! v R,<
^ \/\ ^ A
0 20 >-10 E0 B0 -100 -1S0 1 l-(0 -1 50 -1 BfcJ 5a0
TIME, days
Figure C.210.
Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the second unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
By 0
5*-i0 -¦
L-.B0 --
LiE0 --
35 0 -¦
30 0 -J-
ai-i0
1 B 0 - -
-1 5 0 --
0
f'
I / l!3
*0%
a
K

-? & V-g1^


y,
M
h—a—h£-
0 20 1-10
50 B0 100 120 "1 L-10 '150 -1B0
TIME, days

Figure C.211. Soluble chemical oxygen demand concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the third unit in
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
-------
5 0

3L-. ¦¦

30-


ftfl
EE-
s

#>
22 --
2

H
1 B -¦

-1 "-I --

-1 0 --

0
^ U Ja"1
3-1 -1 QL-i -1 -1 r -1 30
TIME, days
Figure C.212.
Total nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5Q
¦-i 5
L-.0
35
^ 30
6 25
£ 20
•1 5
1 0
5
0
0 13 2E 33 52 E5 ?B 3-1 -10m-1? 130
TIME, days
Figure C.213. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5^5
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.214.
Total nitrogen concentration of influent synthetic
sewage to the second unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
50		
L-.0
35
301
55
^ E0
eo
6 1 5
i -is
5
0
0 -13 EE 33 55 E5 7B 5-1 10-1-1 7 130
TIME, days
Figure C.215. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5 b6


-------
50
5 •-
0	t	i	1	i	1	i	1	1	1
0 -13 SE 33 53 E5 7B 31 -10H 7 -130
TIME, days
Figure C.216. Total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
oo
S
o
LA
0
-13 EE
33 53 G 5
TIME, days
7B 3-1 1 01—. "1 "1 7 1 30
Figure C.217. Soluble total nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the first unit
of the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase
1. First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5^7
-------
50	
<-.5
l-i 0
35
30i
55
50
-1 5
•1 0
5
0
0 -13 55 33 55 E5 7B 3-1 10L-. A 1 7 -1 30
TIME, days
Figure C.218. Soluble total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.

50

55 33
BE 77 35 33 1-10
TIME, days
Figure C.219.
Soluble total nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5U8
-------
50
1—10
^ 35
6
. 30
Z1
H 55
I 20
•1 5
•1 0
5
0
0 13 EE 33 5E E5 7B 3-1 10i-i ^17 '130
TIME, days
Figure C.220. Soluble total nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
0
•1 3 EE 33
E 5 7 B 3-1 -1 0"-. 1 1 r 1 30
TIME, days
Figure C.221.
Soluble nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
5^9
-------

ft

a
R,
'D1
/ ^
fij
a
J if
.1
\ {
0 -1B 3B S1-!
th
30 "10B -1 SB -1 "-.i-. -1EE 1E0
Figure C.222.
TIME, days
Organic nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
3B --
32 ¦¦
EB
^ Si-.-
60
6 E0--
*
f 1 B --
c_>
M
% "1 E ¦"
o
§ B
T
~ 5s!
y\ *
/ k
i

I
\	P
* i1 -«d"
0 -1B 3B B1-! 7 3 3 0 '10B -1 EB	-IBS 1B0
TIME, days
Figure C.223.
Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
550
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.224. Organic nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
E 0		
1 B
1 E
•1 l-i
•1 2
1 0
B
E
L-.I
a
0
0 'I? 3>-i E-1 EB BE -103 -1 -13 -13E -153 -170
TIME, days
Figure C.225. Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981

551
-------
5 0 j-
1 B
1 E
•1 i-. --

0 -1B 3E 51-. ?S 30 1 0B -1 BE "1!—11—i 1E5 '1 S0
TIME, days
Figure C.226. Organic nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic Sewage from the third unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
E Q
L-iB--

00
6 3B
2= 30-
u
T !? q^.
*11 ¦
V

El-,.. 
-------
*—I 0 T"
3E--
35-
ES --

0 -1 B 3E B1-! 72 30 -1 0B -1 EE mh 1BE -1 B0
TIME, days
Figure C.228. Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the first unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
TIME, days
Figure C.229. Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the second unit
of the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
553
-------
OC
o
0
01
o
>J
o
w
0 -IB 3B 51-1 7i
30 -1 03 "1 BE -1-1 E2 -1 B0
TIME, days
Figure C.230.
Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the second unit
in the three unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1,
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
60
B
55
I
U
M
z
<
a
as
o
>J
o

0 -1B 3B
TIME, days
4	1 '-T3-H
30 "10B -1 SB -mi-t 1BE -1B0
Figure C.231.
Soluble organic nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the third unit
of the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981,
55^
-------
00
a
z
i
ro
0 -13 SB 33 SB E5
TIME, days
7B 3-1 101-. -1-1 7 -130
Figure C.232. Ammonia nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
00
6
Z
I
X
z
I 0
354-
33
SB
Ei-.
E 0
•1 B
•1 a
-¦ <¥ fVsj
n B
V

I
I \
V
'¦!
a
r\
di
Lp.
\J W
TIME, days
Figure C.233. Ammonia nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
555
-------
1
)	t
1-1 SB 33	55 SB 77 BB 33 HQ
TIME, days
Figure C.234.
Ammonia nitrogen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
TIME, days
Figure C.235. Ammonia nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
556
-------
1-10
0 13 EE 33 55 E5 7B 3-1 -10l, -1 -1 7 -130
TIME, days
Figure C.236. Ammonia nitrogen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
E0
-1 B
•1 E
aT s
z
~J 5
S	1
a
0
0 13 EE 33 5 3 E5 7B 3-1 10^-1 17 130
TIME, days
Figure C.237. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the first unit in
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
557
-------
(10
s
z
I
ci
re
z
eJ
o

0 13 SB 33 5 a E5 73
TIME, days
3-1 -1 0L-, -1 1 7 -1 30
Figure C.238. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the first unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
u::
i
I
~ i ;
1? —If
t	I :
^ 1-|!
Z	' i
a I
° s
W	H
)
\
f .... i	i ¦— ¦>	—-f—	!•	'
•IH I-! £2 23 1—ii 55 b^c: r~? S3 S3 1-1 id
TIME, days
Figure C.239. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the second unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
556
-------
L-iG
2B- ft/
\ 0 bj
TIME, days
Figure C.240. Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the second unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
L-10
3 E
3S
20
EU
60
6
.R /
..ff a
20 -¦
f IB
CO
•1 a
o a
to

Ps-3
¦' b-
t/\J
/ fis
J
^ I1
TIME, days
Figure C.241.
Soluble ammonia nitrogen concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the third unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
559
-------
30
E 7
2L-.
2	1
•1 B
•1 5
-1 E
I
3
E
3
0
0 -13 SB 33 55 E5 7B 3-1 10^ M? -130
TIME, days
Figure C.242. Orthophosphate concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit of the three
unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
3 0-i	
27 ..
2Li-
••'I
15';i4 —__ ~	.
H /V1'
3 -	^ \	j *
r-	Q	/
\ ;;
0 -I	* 1	> 1	1 1	1 1 >	
0 13 E5 33 5E ES 7B 31 -10 117 130
TIME, days
Figure C.243. Orthophosphate concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
-¦ J
\
~
\ A
G? pi \
Q	I.
H


560
-------
"
~ ~ -1 '1 0
TIME,, days
Figure C.244,
Orthophosphate concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
3 0
TIME, days
Figure C.245. Orthophosphate concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
561
-------
i ^'V
Q -13 EE 33 S3 55 7B
TIME, days
3-1 -10L, -M 7 130
Figure C.246. Orthophosphate concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit in the
three unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
30
33 5 3 5 5
TIME, days
1 QL-. -M 7 -130
Figure C.247.
Soluble orthophosphate concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
562
-------
3 0
0 13 EE 33 SE E5
TIME, days
7B 3-1 -1 Q"-, -1 -1 ? 1 30
Figure C.248. Soluble orthophosphate concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the first unit
in the three unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
3 3 1 -1 0
TIME, days
Figure C.249.
Soluble orthophosphate concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the second unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
563
-------
3 0
1 5 M

' 'h $
3-1 -IQ1-! 1 -1 7 -1 30
•13 EE 33 S3 E5
TIME, days
Figure C.250. Soluble orthophosphate concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
30 n

33 52 E5
TIME, days
3-1 1 0
-------
'£2 U

0 0'f y> 3	jz, !'
' l
. laji |	-v1	r 3—tq
¦®	{ —i I J i
	i	.Si	I	I."
JZ/'J l-J
i	1^1	j ,1	||'
i	~ti	. 3 ll
r	I
I
J
i_j ^ I -1 •—(^-1 ~'j:.! £3 0 '1 0 0 * ' r2?':J I '—(! 5 l-J *1 E3 0 lEf y
I
0 4
TIME, days
Figure C.252. Total solids concentration of influent synthetic
sewage to the first unit in the three unit
Cornell NTT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
1 0M0 		
I
3~ri i.
... - |
30 0 |
i
70 0 -
E0 0 -
E0 0 • ¦
1-10 0 -i-
'•h-i
360 -pT,
SQ 01 -¦
¦i y 8 -¦
O --

J34?
I

a—

i
!3
3—53
I |

1A
a
¦i
¦_i EU0 iti Eu 3u '1 tif 1 20 1 10 1 Ed 1 By 2t)y
TIME, days
Figure C.253. Total solids concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the first unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
565
-------
00
S
to
H
1 50 0
•1 35 0 --
•1EQ0--
1 05 0 - ¦
50 0
750 4
50 0
L-iS'-J
30 0
•15 0 --
0
Q
10 20 30 1-0
0 50 70 By 3 0 -1 tn-1
Figure C.254.
TIME, days
Total solids concentration of influent synthetic
sewage to the second unit of the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
60
e
w
Eh
•'1 00 0
I
~ 0 0 4-
50 0
7 0 0 - -
50 0 ...
50 0 --
1-10 0 ..
30 0 J?
p5?.
raj L	
J© 0 + yd ^
iH
• 1 0 0 +
0

^ L-lV'
-a i i
Figure C.255,
>-i0 50 By iW0 150 1 10 -1 Em -1B0 E'.-ii-J
TIME, days
Total solids concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the second unit of the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
566
-------
1 80 0
BQ 0
B00
70 0
B0 0
50 0
00
6 10 0
H 300
20 0
1 0 0
0
0 20 L-i0 B0 B0 '10 0 -150 '1 L-i© -1 E0 -1 B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.256. Total solids concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the third unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 1, 1981.
1 00 0
30 0
~ 0 0
700
50 0
50 0
"m 1-10 0
e
30 0
t/3
> —, _ _
h sy u
1 0 0
0
Q 20 *-10 E0 BQ -10 0 "120 1 1-.0 1E0 1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.257. Total volatile solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
F
~	I

a


567
-------
-p-
5G 0 !
i
EQ0 -f-
70 0 --
50 0 --
50 0 --
L,00 ..
30 0 -¦
50 0 --
i -J 0 -L '
ifl.

P-	1, *
r	a

0 Ea i-i0 5u aa 100 -120 -1 m? 1t.0 IB0 E00
TIME, days
Figure C.258. Total volatile solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
i-, M 0
3B0-.
35 0 -¦
500-
B1-! 0
E0 0 - -
-1 B 0
•1S0
B0
Li-S^
-- V
H
a- <1 \
6
L-10 - ¦
0
0

•10 50 30 >-10 5 0 E0 70 B 0 3 0 100
Figure C.259,
TIME, days
Total volatile solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit of the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
568
-------
60
s
to
>
H
•1 0H 0 —
i
30 0 ~.
£30 0 -
73 0 --
i
50 0 --
5 01 0 f
L-. 0 0 .1
!
30 0 --
20 0

0 0 t / "-P-
- i *
0 -I	—H	
¦a1?
'l
-El.

tar
'its
:~n
—t-
0 EG L-I0 E0 du -10 0 1 Eu -I •—<0 -1E0 --1B0 500
TIME, days
Figure C.260. Total volatile solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
1 ! I
CO
6
GO
>
H
TIME, days
Reproduced from 0^%
best available copy.
Figure C.261.
Total volatile solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
569
-------
-1 00 0
30 0 --
BQ O --
70 0 --
5 0 0 - -
50Q --
l—10 0 ..
30 0 --
Ji
aoy ad I
-1 Q 0 4-
0 -I	1	1-
0 EQ "-iQ

—^ JA

i ^
tab
Eu a0 -10 0 -I 20 -1 t-,0 1E0 -1B0 500
TIME, days
Figure C.262. Total fixed solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 1, 1981.
bO
6
w
P*
H
• 1 00 0
50 0 -¦
E30 0
70 0
50 0 --
50 0 ¦ -
1-10 8 ...
~3 0i 0 - -
•1 0 8 \
5?
i\
cs—
-a5? p
I • '
d '•? p"
' >n
. j
-1

0 20 '-10 E0 3 0 "1'6 0 120 -1 1-.0 •'! !31.1 lb'd ayw
TIME, days
Figure C.263. Total fixed solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
570
-------
50 0 J-
L-.B0 --
'—100 -¦
350-.
300-
E50--
500 El
-1 5 0 - -
1 0 0 - -
50 -¦
0--
0
'o-a. Bi
a
A


-t-
•10 E0 30 h0 50 50 70 50 30 '100
Figure C.264.
TIME, days
Total fixed solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
M
T~
I
d:d0 |
I
B0 Fi |
706 1
U 4
a
n
M
TIME, days
Figure C.265. Total fixed solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
571
-------
C/3 .. .
H	. .... ¦
;. . •:. i. "'
:='!j	E3 :li •':/ : V ¦	0	rr' jt-il
TIME, days
Figure C.266. Total fixed solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit of the three
unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
TIME, days
Figure C.267. Total suspended solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
572
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.268. Total suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
L-,0 T
3E -¦
BE-
SS-.
E0 --
Q -10 20 30 L-<0 B0 E0 70 BfcJ ¦ 3h -1
Figure C.269. Total suspended solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
TIME, days
573
-------
M
e
co
w
H
' 1 0 0
B 0
E0
7 0 .i.
5 0
5 0 -
i—.0 --
3 0 --
50-13
L 3 !3
0
~
eg
-A' \r
ti ifi
—i	y	
1
0 5h-J Liti SO Bu '1 0 0 120 -I L-itJ -1E0 -1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.270.
Total suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
-1 9 0
3 0
B 0
7 0
5 0
^ 5 ©
60
B L_, y
H
5 0
1 0
0
0 50 L_I0 EO B 0 -10 0 -150 1 L-.0 1 E 0 -1BQ 500
TIME, days
Figure C.271. Total suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.

-fei-



ESGj
-sj
!
.a
I. J
i
5TU
-------
•1 0 0
0 ae '-10 E0 B0 100 -150 1 L-10 -1E0 130 E00
TIME, days
Figure C.272. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the first unit in
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
•1 0 O
30
B0
"7 0
Ea 0
^ 5 0
to
6 L-,0
£ 3 0
>
50
1 0
0
f	i—if Ey B f 1 y0 1 Efc) '1 L-i0 1 E0 1 B0 B00
TIME, days
Figure C.273. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the first unit in
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
575
-------
I—.0
30 -1 00
TIME, days
Figure C.274.
Volatile suspended solids concentration of
influent synthetic sewage to the second unit in
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
1 Q0
0 2fcJ	EkJ B 0 -10 0 -120 -1 t-.0 -1E0 -1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.275. Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the second unit
in the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
576
-------
•1 0 0
~	0 --
~	0 --
7 0 ..
E0 --
1 50-
« i—i y ..
wa
CO
> 30-
20
-1 0
0
iafW-T

H	&—h
\ N
¦®ei	1—
0 E0 L-.0
Figure C.276.
E0 B0 -10 0 -120 -1 Li0 150 1 B0 200
TIME, days
Volatile suspended solids concentration of
effluent synthetic sewage from the third unit in
the three unit Cornell NTT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
oo
E
w
ui
h
Ba-
0 50
Figure C.277.
* 0 5 ti B y 11 hj '-zJ i EE ti *1 '-i f -*1 E tj 'IS y E 0 ti
TIME, days
Fixed suspended solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
577
-------
1 Q 'r"_l
BO --
~ Q --
7 0..
E 0 --
5 0 --
Li0 .
30 -
50 -¦
1 10
- ,J3 PI
y ilnl iisuii o-
133s?
f	—ggfci—-""P

a eu "10
Gfc.1 B 0 '1 00 -1 20 '1 L-itJ '1 1=3 0 '1 E 0 2tJ0
TIME, days
Figure C.278. Fixed suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
-1 0 -p
~
B --
E
0 10 50 30 ^-10 5 0 E0 70 B0 3d -100
TIME, days
Figure C.279. Fixed suspended solids concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
578
-------
CO
co
pf
• i 0 0 -p
30..
~ © -
7 3 • -
513 --
_ 0 '•
i_,e
3G-
50 --
•I 0 ..
= lTi
00
B

f itoOuBEma-
.3^ ,
—•-fl gj ij |—fesgja-

0
20 L-i0
E0 E0 1 My ''1 :zZ'1 I—irli '1 ~ tl I Id 0 Et'tl
TIME, days
Figure C.280.
Fixed suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
•1 £

3 0
* f
oo
g
in
co
TIME, days
Figure C.281. Fixed suspended solids concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
579
-------
0 a 5 0
Id ~Ll5
0 o l1 0
0.35
klJ ~ 3 0
0.ES
o*
"m 0 o 2 0
6
«0o 1 5
c
U fcj a 1 0
0.05
0
0 -15 30 >-15 E0 75 30 -1 05 -120 -135 -150
TIME, days
Figure C.282. Cadmium concentration of influent synthetic
sewage to the first unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.

ik'
f5*
I %
p
I	I
\
\ ,sl I
iS rod
Al
\	k
<* 'J
I O
n
o
i
"1 0 +
IEl_
_.='£r\ '-I	;-]	-
	'a	 !1. _ ; .1.
•'/—T-	,	.	I	,
0 i £ ~'.j '-i5 5 0 ~5 E0 -i Z-E 150	-150
TIME, days
Figure C.283. Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the first unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
580
-------
0.S5
0 .S3-
0 a a 0 ¦ -
0.17-
0 .'1 5 ¦¦
0.i a--
0 . '*1 0 -¦
0 .07 --
0.05--
0.0Sjf'
0 --
0

\ / \ .a.
-to—ftr i o~ i

30	•-( 0 50 E0
TIME, days
-t-
70 B0 30 -100
Figure C.284. Cadmium concentration of influent synthetic
sewage to the second unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
a oi-j
H
J .3 ^ J i-
I
0 n 3 E: I
i
• J o '.J j"
'—
f 0=as|
O* 0 n 2 0 j-
O
0 j'ISt
0 a -1 © L

.a
TIME, days
Figure C.285. Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the second unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
581
-------
0 o 5 0
0
0 ~ 1-10 -¦
0=35 --
0=30 --
0,E5-
60 m ~ EE y ••
s
Q
o
0 a 1 5 --
0 a-1 0 --
0a0SnErc?
!*>
qi to
J


0
0
b^ap-T"
-15 30
	1	h-
"-,5 S0
—I	t—
¦y
7 5 30 -1 05 1 5 0 -1 35 1 50
TIME, days
Figure C.286. Cadmium concentration of effluent synthetic
sewage from the third unit in the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 16, 1981.
00 o
qsi
AfVtrf
0 15 30 i-,5 E 0 7 5 50 "1 05 "1 3 0 -13 5 "1 50
TIME, days
Figure C.287.
Soluble cadmium concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the first unit in the three
unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First day
of analysis was February 16, 1981.
582
-------
00
6
Q
U
iJ
o
w
f a ' 1

A
~
-a-a
'^GeT3
-1 S 30
h3 0 7 5 Shi
TIME, days
•1 Q5 -1 2 0 -1 3 5
50
Figure C.288. Soluble cadmium concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
60
s
Q
o
hJ
O
w
0 D 5 5 -|	
0.53-
0.S0"
0 ¦ "1 ? - .
a 0-i 5--
0 D-1 a ¦¦
0.10-
0O07--
0 o 0 5 - ¦
0.0a!^
0	
0
—ioooDiy i
•10 30 30
i-i 0 50 E0 70 a 0 3 0 -100
TIME, days
Figure C.289.
Soluble cadmium concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
583
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.290. Soluble cadmium concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
0 . ^ :=j -	j
0^0}	i
s.asj	;
0.30|	I
0 3 E S 4	j
0 a 2 0 i
_ I
U a 1 ••-
0 n 1 0 -
0 a 3 5 • -	a
0 mdq -n——		i
0 *1S 30 L-i5 E 3 -E 30 1 0S 1E0 13 5 -1 3Q
TIME, days
Figure C.291. Soluble cadmium concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit in the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 16, 1981.
58U
-------
I 0 ..
TIME, days
Figure C.292. pH of influent synthetic sewage to the first
unit in the three unit Cornell NFT system in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was February
16, 1981.
	1	1	i	y	» , , —I	i	1	i	i
3'd* '¦-i I—' I lii*-*_! 1 '—i! bz -iJ *'! 5 i^.1 EE'cmJ
TIME, days
Figure C.293. pH of effluent synthetic sewage from the first
unit in the three unit Cornell NFT system in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was February
16, 1981.
585
-------
TIME, days
Figure C.294. pH of influent synthetic sewage to the
second unit in the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 16, 1981.
-1 Q
_._a- :%ELaCr E

0 ay L-iQ EG BQ 10a 1 50 -1 "-iQ -1E0 -1B0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.295. pH of effluent synthetic sewage from the
second unit in the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of analysis
was February 16, 1981.
586
-------

W 20 *-10
EQ B O -1 0fcJ 1 20 1 'iO '1 E0 -1 BtJ 200
TIME, days
Figure C.296.
pH of effluent synthetic sewage from the third
unit in the three unit Cornell NFT system in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was February
16, 1981.
x
a
TIME, days
Figure C.297. pH of filtered influent synthetic sewage to the
first unit in the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was February
16, 1981.
58?
-------
I 0
•1 0
3
3
B
B
X ?
a.
T7
bi
S
5
0 EG L-.0 50 B0 10 0 1 S0 1 i-i0 -1E3 -1 ~ 0 200
TIME, days
Figure C.298. pH of filtered effluent synthetic sewage from
the first unit in the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 16, 1981.
tPI
A
i \
a
rj'^ >T
y i 11
i iaa
ft !
—a i
iisE#. }
"4
rj
j

~
a ca
i
¦x
a.
i _
'I 'V
•'! 1

-3 3-3
3 3
TIME, days
Figure C.299.
pH of filtered influent synthetic sewage to
the second unit in the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 16, 1981.
588
-------
1 0 j
¦10..
~ A \
1
I la? psj ,i
k
--Vj
1 b CEW-si

tei
n
4 nf£r-~
V
f 2Q L-I0 E0 B 0 *1 tl 0 1 E0 "1 L-t0 '1 E0 '1 ~ 0 E00
TIME, days
pH of filtered effluent synthetic sewage from
the second unit in the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 16, 1981.
Figure C.300.
t.1 2W '—i 0
50 B0 1 k) hi '1 E0 1 L-itl '1 Ed 1 B'J 2tltl
TIME, days
Figure C.301.
pH of filtered effluent synthetic sewage from
the third unit in the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 16, 1981.
589
-------
-IMZ, days
igure C.302. Dissolved oxygen concentration of
influent sewage delivered to the first
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT
system in Phase 1. First day of
analysis was February 19, 1961.
!
1
i
f
' 3 o 3 12 13 " 3 r3 1 '-i rzi "P~
TIMS, days
Figure C.303. Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point A of the first
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1981•
590
-------
w
s
o
Q
bD
E
o
Q
S3 E
Figure C.30U.
•1 E -15 -1B E1
TIME, days
3Q
Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point B of the first
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1961.
0
Figure C.305.
3 -13 -15 1B 31 Sh 3? 3Q
TIME, days
Dissolved oxygen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the first unit of
the three unit Cornell NFT system in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1981.
591
-------
to
E
O
Q
8
-1 a
ai-. a? 30
¦15 -1 a a-i
TIME, days
Figure C.306. Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the second unit of the
three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 19, 1961
to
G
o
Q

15 1 a a^
TIKE, days
ai-. a? 30
Figure C.307-
Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point A of the second
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1981.
592
-------
-1 0
a
B
T7
* B
60
e 5
° u
Q H
3
S
-1
0
0 3 B a -15 -15 IB a-1 Sh a? 30
TIME, days
Figure C.308. Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point B of the second
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19» 1981.
-1 0
3
B
7
c* B
s ^
o" ^
Q
3
a
•1
0
03 B a -IE -15 -1B a-1 Eh S7 3©
TIMS, days
Figure C.309* Dissolved oxygen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the second unit of
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 19, 1981.
593
-------
¦£»
0 3
Figure C.310.
3 -1 S -15 -IB E'l S1-! S7 30
TIME, days
Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage to the third uhit of the
the three unit Cornell NFT system in Phase 1.
First day of analysis was February 19, 1980.
-1 0
0 3
Figure C.311
•1 a 15 -1 b
TIME, days
El ah
30
Dissolved oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point A of the third
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1980.
59^
-------
to
s
o
Q
Q
Figure C.312.
1 a is -ib
TIME, days
-1 s>-. a? 30
Dissolved, oxygen concentration of influent
synthetic sewage at Point B of the third
unit of the three unit Cornell NFT system
in Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1901.
0
•1 a i 5 -1 a a 1
x —' i£j 9 day s
ai-i
7" 30
Figure C.313.
Dissolved oxygen concentration of effluent
synthetic sewage from the third unit of
thecthree unit Cornell NFT system in
Phase 1. First day of analysis was
February 19, 1931•
595
-------
-1 1 0
Tj
I
cS
<=*
(n
O
Sh
W
CIME, days
Figure C.31^. Evapotranspiration from the three unit
Cornell NFT system in Phase 1. First
day of measurement was February 17, 1981.
596
-------
so
0 EG 1-1 1 Ey S3 -10 9 120 I L-i0 Sy l eifc?©
TIME, days
Figure C.315. Incident solar radiation at Ithaca, NY,
over the Cornell NFT experimental period.
First day of measurement was October 1,
1979-
ir\
o
H
X
>-3
h -f
E-"
H
§
cc

:2
-7T '7i
73 '-v
-i..-

	 ^ i7j ...	".w
"" J ¦	inr1	'
:	.	.'I	^ W. : \	1 «

i.:.j . i-J •- -1
':-2 '
- v			——	-	
200 220 2U0 260 280 " 300 320 3^0 360 380 U00
TIME, days
Figure C.315- (continued) Starting date of this figure
is April IT, 1980.
597
-------
3 0 T
a
f f
G
' UOO b2Q U60 kQO~ 500 520 5^0 ?60 580 600
TIME, days
Figure C.315. (continued) Starting date of this figure
is December 3, 1980.
598
-------