Using CFD Modeling to Improve the Inlet Hydraulics and Performance of a Storm-Water Clarifier
Publication: Journal of Environmental Engineering
Volume 134, Issue 9
Abstract
The feasibility of high-rate treatment of storm water achieving total suspended solids (TSS) removals in the range from 60 to 80% was studied using an available clarifier. The clarifier ( long, wide, and deep) was fitted with a removable lamella pack and had a limited flow capacity (surface load rate of ). To achieve the desired removals of TSS, the clarifier required polymer feed , which caused maintenance problems during intermittent storm-water treatment—laborious and costly cleaning of lamella plates after individual storm events. This problem posed the following challenge: was it feasible to avoid costly maintenance by removing the lamella pack and at the same time to retain the high TSS removals by improving the clarifier hydraulics by internal structural changes? The purpose of the paper is to evaluate such changes by focusing on different inlet configurations designed using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. This analysis resulted in adopting a U-tube duct inlet (inserted into the outer box of the original clarifier) with two special features: (1) three horizontal slot openings releasing flow into the clarifier and (2) a narrow slot opening in the bottom U bend allowing removal of grit. The flow release slots in the rising leg of the U tube were fitted, along the upper edge, with horizontal trailing plates protruding into the clarifier and forcing the flow to move horizontally. This clarifier design performed well, but storm-water grit accumulated at the bottom of the U tube, which had to be cleaned out after individual storms to avoid plugging. This issue was resolved by allowing grit to move into the sludge storage compartment of the clarifier through a narrow tilted slot opening in the U-tube bottom. The final clarifier design with polymer feed, without lamellas, produced TSS removals comparable to those in the original lamella clarifier (almost 80%), but at a higher surface loading rate ( , which was limited by the feed pump capacity). CFD modeling, in comparison to conventional methods of hydraulic design, served as a flexible and powerful tool providing distinct advantages with respect to the speed, efficiency and reduced cost of analysis, and a better understanding of the clarifier operation.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The support received from Environment Canada’s Great Lakes Sustainability Fund (GLSF), Sandra Kok (GLSF, Environment Canada), Mingdi Yang and Patrick Chessie (The City of Toronto), and Bill Warrender and Brian Taylor of the NWRI Research Support Branch is greatly appreciated.
References
Adamson, A., Stovin, V., and Bergdahl, L. (2003). “Bed shear stress boundary condition for storage tank sedimentation.” J. Environ. Eng., 129(7), 651–658.
Bretscher, U., Krebs, P., and Hager, W. H. (1992). “Improvement of flow in final settling tanks.” J. Environ. Eng., 118(3), 307–321.
Deininger, A., Holthausen, E., and Wilderer, A. (1998). “Velocity and solids distribution in circular secondary clarifiers: Full scale measurement and numerical modeling.” Water Res., 32(10), 2951–2958.
Dochain, D., and Vanrolleghem, P. (2001). Dynamical modeling and estimation in wastewater treatment processes, IWA, London.
Kinnear, D. J. (2000). “Evaluating secondary clarifier capacity and performance.” Proc., 2000 Florida Water Resources Conf., April 2000, AWWA, Tampa, Fla.
Kluck, J. (1996). “Design of storm water settling tanks for CSOs.” 7th Int. Conf. on Urban Storm Drainage.
Krebs, P. (1991). “The hydraulics of final settling tanks.” Water Sci. Technol., 23(4–6), 1037–1046.
Krebs, P. (1995). “Success and shortcomings of clarifier modeling.” Water Sci. Technol., 31(2), 181–191.
Krebs, P., Armbruster, M., and Rodi, W. (1998). “Laboratory experiments of buoyancy-influenced flow in clarifiers.” J. Hydraul. Res., 36(5), 831–851.
Krebs, P., Vischer, D., and Gujer, W. (1995). “Inlet-structure design for clarifiers.” J. Energy Eng., 121(8), 558–564.
Marsalek, J., and Doede, D. (1997). “Hydraulic assessment of the plate clarifier, flow capacity and outflow zone velocity field.” NWRI Technical Note No. AEPB-TN-97-002, National Water Research Institute, Burlington, Ont., Canada.
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. (2003). Wastewater engineering treatment and reuse, 4th Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ministry of the Environment (MOE). (2003). Storm-water management planning and design manual, Toronto.
Ott, C. R. (1995). “Numerical approach to clarifier operation according to flux theory.” J. Environ. Eng., 121(7), 544–545.
Pollert, J., and Stransky, D. (2003). “Combination of computational techniques—Evaluation of CSO efficiency for suspended solids separation.” Water Sci. Technol., 47(4), 157–166.
Ueberl, J., and Hager, W. H. (1997). “Improved design of final settling tanks.” J. Environ. Eng., 123(3), 259–268.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1983). Final Report of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, Vol. 1, Washington, D.C.
Wood, J., He, C., Rochfort, Q., Marsalek, J., Seto, P., Yang, M., Chessie, P., and Kok, S. (2005). “High-rate storm-water clarification with polymeric flocculant addition.” Water Sci. Technol., 51(2), 79–88.
Zhou, S., and McCorquodale, J. A. (1992). “Modeling of rectangular settling tanks.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 118(10), 1391–1405.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2008 ASCE.
History
Received: Dec 18, 2006
Accepted: Feb 25, 2008
Published online: Sep 1, 2008
Published in print: Sep 2008
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.