REMOVAL OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS IN GROUNDWATER

USING TRICKLING FILTER

A Seminar Paper

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Course

Industrial Waste Management and Control

By:

Bill Andre B. Aganus

May 2017
 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

May, 2017

ENGR. CAESAR POBRE LLAPITAN

Instructor
Chemical Engineering Department
Cagayan State University

Dear Engr. Llapitan:

I am submitting herewith a design of groundwater treatment for the “Removal of

Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Groundwater Using Trickling Filter” as a partial fulfillment of
the subject, Industrial Waste Management and Control.

The objective of this sutdy is to design a feasible treatment plant in treating groundwater
using trickling filter by the removal of soluble nitrogen and phosphorus to meet the required
parameters for groundwater by Philippine Nastional Standards for Drinking Water. Discussion
and the process calculations are also indicated.

Truly yours,

Bill Andre B. Aganus

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page

Letter of Transmittal i

Table of Contents ii

List of Tables and Figures iv

Chapter I INTRODUCTION 1

A. Laws Governing the Protection of Groundwater 1

B. Environmental Impacts 2

C. Importance of Groundwater Treatment Plant 3

Chapter II PROCESS DESCRIPTION 6

A. Principles and Function 6

B. Advantages and Disadvantages 6

C. Key Components 8

1. Distribution System 9

2. Filter Media 9

3. Underdrain 9

4. Ventilation 10

5. Domes 10

D. Trickling Filter Classification 10

1. Standard Rate Filter 11

ii
 2. Intermediate Rate Filter 12

3. High Rate Filter 12

4. Roughing Filter 12

5. Super High Rate Filter 13

Chapter III Trickling Filter Design and Operating Parameters 15

21

A. Factors Affecting Trickling Filter Performance 15

1. Hydraulic Loading 16

2. Mass Transport 16

3. Depth 16

4. Cross-Section Area 16

5. Void Ratio 16

6. Specific Surface Area 17

7. Media Type and Size 17

B. Design Parameters 18

Chapter IV. Case Study 22

A. Design Calculation for Nitrate Removal 24

B. Design Calculation for Phosphate Removal 27

Chapter V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 30

A. Summary 30

B. Conclusion 31

iii
REFERENCES 31

iv
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1. Summary of Parameters for Philippine Water Quality Standards ....................................... 3

Table 1.2. Physico-chemical parameters of Groundwater Samples ....................................................... 5

Table 2.1. Classical typologies of trickling filters .................................................................................... 11

Table 3.1. Properties of some filter media.................................................................................................. 18

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1. The components used as part of modern trickling filter systems ....................................... 8

Figure 2.2. Typical Trickling Filter ............................................................................................................ 14

v
 Chapter I

Introduction

The Philippines obtains its water supply from different sources. These include:

rainfall, surface water resources, i.e. rivers, lakes, and reservoirs, and groundwater

resources. In terms of groundwater, the country has an extensive groundwater reservoir

with an aggregate area of about 50,000 sq km (Greenpeace Southeast Asia, 2007).

Groundwater is used worldwide for drinking water production. Groundwater is

the most important component and constitutes about two thirds of the freshwater

resources of the world and accounts for nearly all usable freshwater (Verangel, 2016).

Natural groundwater is generally considered to be of constant quality and hygienically

safe.

The groundwater composition varies enormously and is influenced by a complex

of factors such as the quality of the infiltrating water, the interaction with the percolated

solid layers, redox conditions, temperature and microbial activity (Hema, 2016).

Groundwater affects by the infiltration of fertilizers. The groundwater is gradually

degrading on the increase amount of fertilizer intrusion could also degrade drinking

water.

In trickling filters which are packed bed reactors, the effluent flows downward

thus trickling on the surface area of the packed bed particles whereas the organic and

nutrients are assimilated by the biomass growing on the packed bed media. This is the

basic principle underlying the high water treatability of this biological treatment method.

1
Trickling filters, trickling bio filters and tower filtration technologies are regarded as

well-established treatment technologies for municipal wastewater. Unlike the other

conventional treatment technologies, trickling filter do not require high investment in

mechanical or energy demanding equipment and does not require much human

attendance for operation and maintenance of the systems. It is therefore expected to

provide rural areas with high-quality effluents using cost-effective technologies.

Trickling filters also encourage oxygenation and removal of carbon dioxide from the

water which is important in the case of using the treated effluent for aquaculture (Habte,

2014).

This paper aims to design a trickling filter in removing nitrogen and phosphorus

content of groundwater.

1.1. Law Governing the Protection of Groundwater

The Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004 defines water quality as the

characteristics of water that define its use and measured in terms of physical,

chemical, biological, bacteriological, or radiological characteristics by which the

acceptability of water is evaluated, to classify water resources and their beneficial

use. A number of ambient standards for measuring water quality have been

formulated by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). DAO

34, issued in 1990, includes classifications for both surface and coastal water. For

each classification, current beneficial use (e.g., drinking water, etc.) is given. It also

contains water quality criteria for each class appropriate to the designated beneficial

use.

2
 Table 1.1. Summary of Parameters for Philippine Water Quality Standards

Parameters Groundwater Standard

Based on Philippine
National Standard for
Drinking Water (PNSDW)
Ph 6.5-8.5

Temperature(oC) NA

EC (µS/cm) NA

TDS (mg/L) 500

TSS (mg/L) NA

TS (mg/L) NA

DO (mg/L) NA

BOD (mg/L) NA

COD (mg/ L) NA

Nitrate (mg/L) 50

Nitrite (mg/L) 3

Phosphorus (mg/L) NA

Potassium (mg/L) NA

1.2.Environmental Impacts

To increase crop yield, growers supplement soil nutrients by adding chemical

fertilizers and organic fertilizers such as animal manures and crop residues. Because

excess nutrients can move below the root zone, managing plant nutrients is an

important part of protecting groundwater quality.

3
 Due to the intensive use of chemical fertilizer and water in agriculture, this leads

to both higher production cost and greater risk of environmental pollution. High

application rates of water and NPK fertilizer lead to excessive leaching of them,

making most of it unavailable to the plants and results in contamination of

groundwater (Mashali, 2013).

1.2. Importance of Groundwater Treatment Plant

Groundwater is a vital source of water throughout the world. It is estimated to

make up 98 per cent of the earth’s available freshwater. Put another way,

groundwater is 60 times as plentiful as freshwater found in all of the earth’s lakes and

streams combined.

The main focus of the groundwater treatment plant is to reduce BOD

(biochemical oxygen demand) and COD (chemical oxygen demand) and at the same

time the nitrogen and phosphorus content of groundwater, meeting the desired

composition of groundwater based on Philippine National Standard for Drinking

Water

4
Table 1.2. Physico-chemical parameters of Groundwater Samples (Venkatramanan,2010)

Concentration in mg/L
Postmonsoon Summer Premonsoon
Min Max Ave Min Max Ave Min Max Ave
pH 6.9 7.8 7.3 7.3 7.8 7.6 7.3 7.7 7.5
913. 7419. 3666. 859. 5540. 3297. 5699.
EC(µs/cm) 4 6 7 2 9 9 750.1 7 2824.6
584. 4748. 2230. 549. 3546. 480.0 3647.
TDS(mg/L) 5 5 5 9 2 2127 6 8 2824.6
Calcium 1 17 7.6 0.6 10.3 4.6 0.05 0.85 0.38
Magnesium 1.2 12.8 5.1 1 10.6 4.5 0.35 8.29 3.32
Sodium 2.2 48.1 19.2 1.6 51.3 21 1 41.81 15.86
Potassium 0.2 8.5 4 0.2 9.6 3.8 0.35 5.51 2.46
Bicarbonate 2.6 10.6 6 3.1 7.5 5.2 2.56 6.62 4.64
Sulphate 2.4 20.5 12.4 2.2 19.8 12.6 2.92 17.7 9.7
Chloride 5.3 51.9 21.8 6.2 32.2 18.7 5.24 42.77 18.76
Nitrate 7.3 19.3 12 5.5 12.3 9.6 6.5 12.03 9.54

5
 Chapter II

Process Description

2.1.Principles and Function

The main function of trickling filters is to provide secondary treatment of primary

settled wastewater. They function to remove dissolved organics and finely divided

organic solids using microorganisms attached to the media. The growth on the media

oxidizes organic materials biologically to form a more stable material.

They remove dissolved and non-settleable solids as a result of the growth of

bacteria and other microorganisms on the media. The biological growth of these

organisms uses the dissolved organic material in the presence of oxygen as a food source.

This produces cell mass. Finely divided organic solids are also adsorbed on the cell walls

of the microorganisms.

As cell mass grows a portion is sloughed-off and this material is then removed by

settling in a final clarifier. As with all biologic type secondary treatment systems,

wastewater soluble BOD, and suspended solids (SS) are converted to a settleable biologic

sludge (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1995).

2.2.Advantages and Disadvantages

Some advantages and disadvantages of TFs are listed below (EPA, 2000).

Advantages

 Simple, reliable, biological process.

6
  Suitable in areas where large tracts of land are not available for land intensive

treatment systems.

 May qualify for equivalent secondary discharge standards.

 Effective in treating high concentrations of organics depending on the type of

medium used.

 Appropriate for small- to medium-sized communities.

 Rapidly reduce soluble BOD5 in applied wastewater.

 Efficient nitrification units.

 Durable process elements.

 Low power requirements.

 Moderate level of skill and technical expertise needed to manage and operate the

system.

Disadvantages

 Additional treatment may be needed to meet more stringent discharge standards.

 Possible accumulation of excess biomass that cannot retain an aerobic condition

and can impair TF performance (maximum biomass thickness is controlled by

hydraulic dosage rate, type of media, type of organic matter, temperature and

nature of the biological growth).

 Requires regular operator attention.

 Incidence of clogging is relatively high.

 Requires low loadings depending on the medium.

 Flexibility and control are limited in comparison with activated-sludge processes.

7
  Vector and odor problems.

 Snail problems.

2.3.Key Components

A typical trickling filter consists of a distribution system, filter media, an

underdrain, a ventilation system, containment, and in some cases, a dome. Figure 1

displays the components of a modern trickling filter.

Figure 2.1. The components used as part of modern trickling filter systems

8
 2.3.1. Distribution System

This system provides for even distribution of wastewater over the media.

Modern trickling filters commonly use rotary type distributors which consist of two

or more horizontal pipes suspended above the filter media. The horizontal pipes are

called distributor arms and rotate a few inches above the media, distributing

wastewater through the orifices in the arm. The distributor arms can be hydraulically

driven using the jet-like force of the wastewater flowing out of the orifices to allow

for rotation, or it can be driven by other electromechanical means.

2.3.2. Filter Media

Synthetic fills – such as PVC structured-sheet media – were introduced and

have been the dominant media choice for constructing new filters or upgrading older

rock filters ever since. The weight of the plastic media is only from two to three

percent of the rock media, and the surface area for microorganism growth is from two

to four times greater. The void ratio of plastic media is also much higher, which

promotes ventilation and can often provide a doubling in treatment capacity versus

rock media trickling filters of the same size.

2.3.3. Underdrain

Underdrain systems serve three purposes: 1) collecting treated wastewater for

conveyance; 2) providing support to the media; and, 3) allowing air circulation

through the media bed.

9
 Conventional underdrains can be constructed with concrete piers or beams.

An underdrain system consisting of field-adjustable plastic stanchions and fiberglass

reinforced grating is often used as an alternative to conventional underdrains.

2.3.4. Ventilation

The BOD removal and nitrification in a trickling filter are aerobic processes

that rely on sufficient air flow for optimal performance. Older open trickling filters

rely on natural draft for ventilation, using gradients in humidity and temperature

between inside and outside air to drive circulation.

2.3.5. Domes

Domes are sometimes used in modern trickling filter to reduce temperature

loss in the winter months and control odor. In domed systems, low pressure

ventilation fans are used to maintain air movements.

2.4.Trickling filter classifications

Trickling filters are classified on the basis of their hydraulic and organic loads.

They may be classified as low or standard, intermediate, high, or super high rate (Table

3).

10
 Parameter Low or Intermediate High Rate Super High Roughing
Standard Rate Rate
Rate
Media Stone Stone Stone Plastic Stone/Plastic
Organic Loading* 0.08 – 0.4 0.24 – 0.4 0.4 – 4.8 To 4.8 >1.6 to 3.2
(kg BOD5/m3/d)
Hydraulic Loading 0.04 – 0.15 0.15 – 0.4 0.4 – 1.5 0.6 – 3.6* 2.5 – 7.0*
(m3/m2/h)
Recirculation Minimum Usually Always Usually Not
(%) or it does generally
not exist required
Sloughing Intermittent It varies Continuous Continuous Continuous
Depth (m) 1.8 – 2.4 1.8 – 2.4 0.9 – 2.4 Up to 12 0.9 – 6
BOD removal 80 - 85 50 - 70 65 - 85 65 - 85 40 - 65
**
(%)
Effluent quality Well- Some Limited Limited No
nitrified nitrification nitrification nitrification nitrification
*
It does not include circulation.
**
Including secondary sedimentation.

Table 2.1. Classical typologies of trickling filters (Adapted from WEF 2000; WEF-ASCE

1992,1998)

2.4.1. Standard Rate Filter

Standard rate trickling filters are normally designed for hydraulic ratings of

1.1 to 4.3 m3/m2/d and organic loadings of 0.08 to 0.41 kg BOD/m3/d. These filters

are normally 1.8 to 2.4 m deep and rectangular or circular in shape. They are usually

dosed intermittently by dosing tanks with automatic siphons or by periodic pumping.

The interval between dosing will vary with the rate of wastewater flow, but should be

short enough to prevent filter growths from becoming dry. Some recirculation may

become necessary to achieve this. During normal operation, a thick growth develops

in the filter until a temperature change or the flow through the filter causes a large

portion to slough off. This sloughing usually occurs in the spring or fall and is known

as “unloading.”

11
 2.4.2. Intermediate Rate Filter

Intermediate rate filters are normally designed to treat hydraulic loadings of 4

to 10 m3/m2/d and organic loadings of 0.24 to 0.48 kg BOD/m3/d including

recirculation. In the past, there have been some cases in which the organic loading in

the intermediate range stimulated considerable biological filter growth and the

hydraulic loading was not sufficient to eliminate clogging of the trickling filter

medium. Other plants operating in this range have had few operational problems. In

some cases, intermediate rate filters are actually under loaded high rate filters.

2.4.3. High Rate Filter

High rate filters are normally designed for substantially higher loadings than

are standard rate units. A filter receives a BOD loading from 0.4 to 4.8 kg BOD/m3/d.

These filters are usually 0.9 to 2.4 m deep and circular in shape. They are designed to

receive wastewater continuously. The high rate of application is achieved by

recirculating wastewater that has already passed through the filter, and the heavy flow

of wastewater over the filter medium produces continuous rather than periodic

sloughing of the filter growths. Because the solids are not retained in the high rate

filter as long as they are in the standard rate unit, they are less stable and continue to

exert BOD after they leave the filter. The solids are also much lighter and more

difficult to settle than those sloughed from a standard rate filter.

2.4.4. Roughing Filter

Roughing filters are basically high rate filters treating an organic load of more

than 1.6 kg BOD/m3/d. (It is not uncommon to load roughing filters at rates in excess

12
of 3.2 kg BOD/m3/d). In many cases, these filters are used to pre-treat the waste

before its feeding to an activated sludge plant. Most roughing filters designed today

use synthetic media.

2.4.5. Super High Rate Filter

The major differences between super and high rate filters are greater hydraulic

loadings and a much greater filter depth. Some super high rate filters are designed to

handle hydraulic loads of more than 162.3 m3/m2/d. Most of these filters are in the

form of packed towers with depths to 12 m. It is the use of synthetic media that

permits the high loading rates and greater filter depth. The microbial layer that grows

on the trickling filter media is the most important part of a trickling filter. The

organisms in the microbial layer feed on the pollutants in the sewage and convert

them to solids that will settle out of the sewage. As the microbial layer grows, a

portion detaches or sloughs from the trickling filter media.

13
Figure 2.2. Typical Trickling Filter (EPA, 2000)

14
 Chapter 3

Trickling Filter Design and Operating Parameters

3.1.Factors Affecting Trickling Filter Performance (Hochheimer, 1990)

3.1.1. Hydraulic Loading

Hydraulic loading rates are very important design considerations for trickling.

The total influent flow rate per unit of biofilter cross sectional area is defined as the

hydraulic loading rate and is expressed as flow per unit area (m3/m2/d).

The relationship between filter performance and hydraulic loading should not

be mistakenly considered as synonymous with substrate loading. At a constant

substrate influent concentration, increases in the hydraulic loading rate decreases the

percent substrate removed. For the same conditions, the mass substrate removal rate

increases (Grady and Lim, 1980). This is logical since, as the flow increases, the

residence time decreases in the filter and for a constant concentration, the mass of

substrate input to the filter increases.

Grady and Lim (1980) reported that one manufacturer of random packed

media recommended a minimum hydraulic loading of 29 m3/m2/d (Norton Actifil).

Roberts (1985) reported minimum hydraulic loadings of 32 to 55 m3/m2/d for random

packed media (plastic pall rings). For design purposes, a MWR of 50 m3/m2/d is

considered safe.

3.1.2. Mass Transport

Movement of substrate (ammonia, nitrite, oxygen, etc.) to and wastes (nitrite,

nitrate, etc.) from bacterial cells is often a limiting factor in trickling filter

performance.

15
 The significance of these transport processes is that flow rate of water through

the biofilter becomes important in determining the effectiveness of a trickling filter.

Designs of trickling filters should strive for flow rates that are near the upper

irrigation rate, maximum flow rate in a filter before scouring of the biofilm occurs, so

that maximum mass transport of substrate to the biofilm is achieved.

3.1.3. Depth

Trickling filter depth is primarily determined by available space in which the

filter is being placed and the weight of media. However, no good design information

is available for determining the most efficient depth. Presently, most designs consider

available area, weight of media, and costs for filter containers to determine filter

depth. In trickling filters, depth is usually directly proportional to pumping costs.

3.1.4. Cross-Sectional Area

Cross sectional area of a biofilter is defined as the top area of the filter

container. For systems with multiple filters, the total cross sectional area is

determined by summing the individual areas. The cross sectional area is important in

the calculation of the hydraulic loading rate.

3.1.5. Void Ratio

Void ratio is the proportion of free space volume in a filter to the total filter

volume. In a trickling filter there are voids that are not filled in by the media. High

void ratios reduce clogging and allow for air to move more freely in the filter.

Remember, trickling filters work by allowing a thin film of water to flow across

media surfaces. Filters with low void ratios tend to interrupt this thin flow of water

and trap many solid particles.

16
 3.1.6. Specific Surface Area

Specific surface area is defined as the surface area of a particular media per

unit volume. It is desirable to have a large specific surface area to minimize the

volume of filters required in a particular system.

3.1.7. Media type and Size

There are a wide variety of media types and sizes available for trickling filters.

These include rocks, sand, plastic media (designed for biofilters), packing materials,

and corrugated plastic shapes. Any material that is non-toxic to the bacteria and is

stable in a water environment should be acceptable.

17
 Bulk Specific Surface
Nominal Size Void
Media Density Area
Material m Space
Type Kg/m3 m2/m3
(ft) (%)
(lbs/ft3) (ft2/ft3)
Rock

0.024-0.076 1442 62
River 50
(0.08-0.25) (90) (19)

0.076-0.128 1600 46
Slag 60
(0.25-0.42) (100) (14)

Plastic
0.61x0.61x1.22 24-45 100 and 223
Cross flow (2x2x4) (1.5-2.8) (30, 48, and 68) 95

0.61x0.61x1.22 1442 102 and 131

Vertical
(2x2x4) (90) (31 and 40) 95
flow

0.185øx0.051H 1600 98
Random (7.3”øx2”H) (100) (30) 95

Table 3.1. Properties of some filter media (Daigger and Boltz, 2011)

3.2.Design Parameters

Key design parameters are the organic load, the hydraulic load, the bed height and

the recirculation rate. The organic load is estimated by using (INDITEX, 2015):

QLo
Bv 
V

18
Where:

Bv = organic (nitrate, phosphorus, COD, BOD and TSS) load applied per

unit bed volume (kg/m3/d)

Q = total daily average flow (m3/d)

Lo = organic influent concentration average (kg/m3)

V = bed volume (m3)

Organic loading rate is solved using:

OLR  Lo  HLR

The number of filter units can be calculated as:

Q
n
Qf

Where:

n = number of filter units

The hydraulic load rate is estimated by:

Qf
HLR 
A

Where:

HLR = total surface hydraulic loading rate (m/h)

Qf = flow rate in a filter unit (m3/h)

A = horizontal surface of the bed (m2)

Organic loading rate is solved using:

OLR  Lo  HLR

Where:

19
 OLR = Organic loading rate (g/m2/d)

Organic removal rate can be estimated using:

R organic  (Lo  L)  HLR

Where:

Rorganic = Organic removal rate (g/m2/d)

L = organic effluent concentration (kg/m3)

The volume of the filter can be calculated as:

Af
Vf 
SA

Where:

Vf = Volume of filter (m3)

Af = Area of filter (m2)

SA = Specific surface area of media (m2/m3)

Area of filter can be determined by using the following formula:

Q Lo
Area filter 
S

Where:

S = Removal rate of trickling filter of organic load (kg/m2/d)

20
 The minimum bed height, H, required is given:

V
H
A

Percentage removal of organic load can be calculated as:

Lo  L
% removal   100%
Lo

21
 Chapter 4

Case Study

This section will show an example for the basic design of a trickling filter for a

groundwater treating system. Water quality requirements and design parameters are

conservative. The design example will be for a groundwater system containing 10000 m3.

Media Data

The type of media and its specific surface area will directly affect the filter

volume. Selection of the media should consider specific surface area, weight, void ratio,

cost per unit of surface area (not volume), availability, type of material, and durability.

Parameter Value

Type Plastic Rings

Diameter 2.5 cm (1 in)

Void Fraction 0.92

Specific Surface Area 220 m2/m3 (67 ft2/ft3)

Water Requirements

The following water quality requirements should be followed:

Parameters Groundwater Standard

Based on Philippine
National Standard for
Drinking Water (PNSDW)
Ph 6.5-8.5

Temperature(oC) NA

EC (µS/cm) NA

22
 TDS (mg/L) 500

TSS (mg/L) NA

TS (mg/L) NA

DO (mg/L) NA

BOD (mg/L) NA

COD (mg/ L) NA

Nitrate (mg/L) 50

Nitrite (mg/L) 3

Phosphorus (mg/L) NA

Potassium (mg/L) NA

Design Calculations

4.1.Design Calculations for Nitrate Removal

Filter Surface Area

According to table 3, the maximum concentration of nitrate is 19.3 mg/L. The

nitrate removal rate is 9.20 g/m2/d (Habte, 2014).

Volumetric Flow Rate  Concentrat ion of Organic

Area filter 
Re moval Rate
10000 m3of groundwate r  19.3 mg nitrate / L  1000 L  1 g 
Area filter   
3 

9.20 g / m 2 / d  1 m  1000 g 
Area filter  20978.26 m 2

23
Filter Volume

The volume of media needed is a function of the surface area required and the

specific surface area of the media from media data:

Area of Filter
Volume media 
Specific Surface Area of Media
20978.26 m 2
Volume media 
220 m 2 / m3
Volume media  95.36 m3

The minimum hydraulic loading for a filter ensures that all media in the filter is

continually wetted, thus preventing bacteria from drying out. The maximum hydraulic

loading rate prevents scouring of bacteria from the media in a filter. For randomly

packed media, a minimum hydraulic loading of 30 m3/m2/d and a hydraulic loading of

125 m3/m2/d can be used for design purposes (Hochheimer, 1990).

Organic Loading Rate

Total flow through the filter per day is the volume of the culture system

multiplied by the number of filter exchanges per day. It is desired to have at least 2

exchanges per hour, so the total flow rate is:

Total Flow  95.36 m3  24hours  2 exchanges per hour

Total Flow  4577.28 m3 / d

Organic Loading Rate  Organic Influent Concentrat ion  Hydraulic Loading Rate
mg
Organic Loading Rate  19.3  125 m3 / m 2 / d
L
Organic Loading Rate  4342.5 g / m 2 / d

24
 Using a configuration to filter total system flow, assume 6 filters and then the

flow rate per filter is:

Total Flow Rate

Flow Rate Filter 
Number of Filter Units
4577.28 m3 / d
Flow Rate Filter 
6 units
Flow Rate Filter = 762.88 m3 /d

The volume needed for each filter unit is:

Volume of Media
Volume Filter 
Number of Filter Units
95.36 m3
Volume Filter 
6 units
Volume Filter = 15.89 m3 /d

The dimensions of each filter unit can be calculated from the maximum hydraulic

loading rate. To determine the cross-sectional area:

Flow Rate in Filter Unit

Area Cross-Sectional 
Hydraulic Loading Rate
762.88 m3
Area Cross-Sectional 
225 m3 /m 2 /d
Area Cross-Sectional = 3.39 m 2

Assuming a cylindrical shape, the diameter of the cylinder for each filter unit

would need to be:

4  Area Cross-Sectional
D2 

4  3.39
D2 

D  2.078 m

Thus, if a diameter of 3.0 m is assumed, then the height of the filter unit is:

25
 Volume of Filter Unit
Height 
Area Cross-Sectional
15.89
Height 
  32
4
Height = 2.25 m

Then, the filter dimensions would be:

Height = 2.25 m

Diameter = 3.0 m

Volume = 15.89 m3

Cross-Sectional Area = 7.07 m2

Number of Filter Units = 6

4.2.Design Calculations for Phosphate Removal

Use the same assumptions in 4.1. Assume phosphate concentration of 1.08 mg/L. The

removal rate of phosphate is 1.34 g/m2/d.

Volumetric Flow Rate  Concentrat ion of Organic

Area filter 
Re moval Rate
10000 m3of groundwate r  1.08 mg nitrate / L  1000 L  1 g 
Area filter   
3 

1.34 g / m 2 / d  1 m  1000 mg 
Area filter  8059.7 m 2

Area of Filter
Volume media 
Specific Surface Area of Media
8059.7 m 2
Volume media 
220 m 2 / m3
Volume media  36.635 m3

Total Flow  36.635 m3  24hours  2 exchanges per hour

Total Flow  1758.48 m3 / d

26
 Total Flow Rate  Organic Concentrat ion
Organic Loading Rate 
Volume of Bed
1758.48 m3 / d  1.08 mg nitrate / L  1000 L  1 g 
Organic Loading Rate   
3 

36.635 m3  1 m  1000 mg 
Organic Loading Rate  51.84 g / m3 / d

Assume 3 filter units to be used.

Total Flow Rate

Flow Rate Filter 
Number of Filter Units
1758.48 m3 / d
Flow Rate Filter 
3 units
Flow Rate Filter = 586.16 m3 /d

Volume of Media
Volume Filter 
Number of Filter Units
36.635 m3
Volume Filter 
3 units
Volume Filter = 12.21 m3

Flow Rate in Filter Unit

Area Cross-Sectional 
Hydraulic Loading Rate
586.16 m3
Area Cross-Sectional 
225 m3 /m 2 /d
Area Cross-Sectional = 2.605 m 2

4  Area Cross-Sectional
D2 

4  2.605
D2 

D  1.821 m

27
Assume that the diameter of each filter unit is 2 m. The height will be:

Volume of Filter Unit

Height 
Area Cross-Sectional
12.21
Height 
  22
4
Height = 3.89 m

Then, the filter dimensions will be:

Height = 3.89 m

Diameter = 2.0 m

Volume = 12.21 m3

Cross-Sectional Area = 3.14 m2

Number of Filter Units = 3

28
 Chapter V

Summary and Conclusion

5.1. Summary

Assumptions

The following assumptions were made for the design calculations of trickling filter for removing

nitrate:

Basin Volume 10000 m3

Concentration of nitrate 19.3 mg/L

Nitrate removal rate 9.20 g/m2/d

Hydraulic Loading Rate 225 m3/m2/d

Number of Filter Units 6

Diameter of Filter Unit 3m

The following data were assumed to design a trickling filter for removing phosphates:

Basin Volume 10000 m3

Concentration of phosphates 1.08 mg/L

Nitrate removal rate 1.34 g/m2/d

Hydraulic Loading Rate 225 m3/m2/d

Number of Filter Units 3

Diameter of Filter Unit 2m

29
Dimensions and Parameters of Trickling Filter Nitrate Removal Phosphate Removal

Media Plastic Rings Plastic Rings

Diameter, cm (in) 2.5 (1) 2.5 (1)
Void Space 0.92 0.92
Specific Surface Area, m2/m3 (ft2/ft3) 220 (67) 220 (67)
Organic Concentration, mg/L 19.3 1.08
Hydraulic Loading Rate, m3/m2/d 225 225
Organic Loading Rate, g/m3/d 926.4 51.84
Mass Removal Rate, g/m2/d 9.2 1.34
Number of Filter Units 6 3
Total Flow Rate, m3/d 4577.28 1758.48
Volume of Bed, m3 95.36 36.635
Area of Bed, m2 20978.26 8059.7
Volume of Filter Unit, m3 15.89 12.21
Cross-sectional Area of Unit, m2 7.07 3.14
Flow Rate Per Unit, m3/d 762.88 586.16
Diameter, m 3 2
Height, m 2.25 3.89

5.2.Conclusion

The data were obtained using nitrate and phosphate concentrations of 19.3 and 1.08,

respectively. The nitrate and phosphate removal rate used for the calculations are 9.2 and

1.34, respectively. The number of filter units and the dimensions were calculated: 6 filter

units having diameter of 3 m and a height of 2.25 m for the nitrate removal and 3 filter units

having diameter of 2 m and a height of 3.89 m. It would be suggested that the following data

30
will be scaled down for experiment to determine whether the dimensions are appropriate and

efficient for building a plant-wide groundwater treatment system.

31
References

A.O. Fadiran, S.C. Dlamini and A. Mavuso (2008) A Comparative Study Of The Phosphate

Levels In Some Surface And Ground Water Bodies Of Swaziland. Bull. Chem. Soc.

Ethiop. 2008, 22(2), 197-206

EPA (2000) Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet Trickling Filters. EPA 832-F-00-014

G.T. Daigger and J. Boltz (2011) Trickling Filter and Trickling Filter-Suspended Growth Process

Design and Operation: A State-of-the-Art Review. Water Environment Research,

Volume 83, Number 5

Hema M. And Ilavarasan N. (2016) Assessment of Impact of Fertilizer Intrusion in Agricultural

Land and Ground Water. JCPS Volume 9 Issue 3

H. Habte Lemji and H. Eckstädt (2014) Performance of a Trickling Filter for Nitrogen and

Phosphorous Removal with Synthetic Brewery Wastewater in Trickling Filter Biofilm.

IJAMBR 2 (2014) 30-42

Hochheimer, J.N., and F. W. Wheaton. 1991. Understanding Biofilters, Practical Microbiology

for Ammonia Removal in Aquaculture. Engineering Aspects of Intensive Aquaculture

NRAES-49

Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Philippine Clean Water Act 2004

J.E. Kotoski (1997) Black Earth Creek and Limnology Minifacts and Analysis . Spring Harbor

Environmental Magnet Middle School p.4

32
Jia Zhu and Bryan Rothermel (2014) Everything You Need to Know About Trickling Filters.

Clean Waters Summer p. 16-19

R.F. Follett and J.L. Hatfield (2001) Nitrogen in the Environment: Sources, Problems, and

Management. The Scientific World (2001)1(S2), 920–926

R.F. Roskopf (1972) Trickling filter-activated sludge combinations for domestic wastewater

treatment. Retrospective Theses and Dissertations.Paper 4773

R.G. Stevens, D.M. Sullivan and C.G. Gogger (1993) How Fertilizers and Plant Nutrients Affect

Groundwater Quality

R. Tirado (2007) Nitrates in drinking water in the Philippines and Thailand. GRL-TN-10-2007

S.A. Mashali et al. (2013) Wheat Fertilization with Special Reference to Soil Properties and

Groundwater Composition in Heavy Clay Soil from Egypt

Sayyed Juned A. and Bhosle Arjun B. (2011) Analysis of Chloride, Sodium and Potassium in

Groundwater Samples of Nanded City in Mahabharata, India. European Journal of

Experimental Biology, 2011, 1 (1)

T. Ramkumar et al. (2010) Hydrogeochemical Quality of Groundwater in Vedaraniyam Town,

TamilNadu, India. Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences 2(1): 44-48,

2010

Weren de Vet (2011) Biological Drinking Water Treatment of Anaerobic Groundwater in

Trickling Filters

V.R.K. Galarpe and R.B. Parilla (2012) Influence of Seasonal Variation on the

Biophysicochemical Properties of Leachate and Groundwater in Cebu City Sanitary

33
Landfill, Philippines. International Journal of Chemical and Environmental Engineering

vol.3, no.3

34
 TERM PAPER PRESENTATION

In

Industrial Waste Management and Control

(Written Report)

TOPIC: _________________________________________________________________________________________________

PRESENTER: ___________________________________________

Unacceptable Marginal Exceptional

Criteria Score
(1) (3) (5)

Organization Little or no structure or organization; no Material are generally organized well, but Organizes written materials in a logical

subheadings or proper paragraph structure paragraphs combine sequence to enhance

&

used multiple thoughts or sections and the reader's comprehension

Style
subsections are not identified clearly
(paragraphs, subheading, etc.)
(2)

No grasp of information. Clearly Uncomfortable with content. Only basic Demonstration of full knowledge of the
Content
concepts are demonstrated and interpreted. subject with explanations and elaboration.
no knowledge of subject matter. No
&
questions are answered. No interpretation

35
 Knowledge made.

(3)

Application of No application of engineering and/or Serious deficiencies in proper selection and Critical selection and application of

scientific principles use of engineering principles. engineering principles ensuring

Engineering

reasonable results.
Principles

(4)

Design is done Incompletely without the Design is done, but procedures and Supports design procedure with
Documentation
proper equations and equations are not documented or
documentation and references
(2)
referenced
without references

Outside Seeks no extra information other than Seeks information from a few sources - Seeks information on problems from

what is provided by instructor mainly from the textbook or the instructor multiple resources
Resources

(2)

Use of Supporting Graphs, tables or diagrams are used, but Uses graphs, tables, and diagrams, but only Uses graphs, tables, and diagrams to

no reference is made to them in a few instances are they applied to support points-to explain, interpret, and
Graphs, Tables,
support, explain or interpret information assess information
etc (3)

36
 Spelling & Several spelling and grammatical errors. Minor misspellings and/or grammatical Negligible misspellings and/or grammatical

errors. errors.
Grammar

(1)

Figure No figures or graphics are used at all Figures are present but are flawed-axes Figures are all in proper format

mislabeled, no data
Formatting

points, etc
(1)

Inadequate list of references or references
References
in text. Inconsistent or
(2)
illogical referencing system.
Minor inadequacies in references. Reference section complete and
Consistent referencing system. comprehensive. Consistent and logical
referencing system.

TOTAL

Rater: ____________________________________

Signature: _________________________________ Date: _____________________________

37
 TERM PAPER PRESENTATION

In

Industrial Waste Management and Control

(Oral Presentation)

TOPIC: _________________________________________________________________________________________________

PRESENTER: ___________________________________________

Unacceptable Marginal Exceptional

Criteria Score
(1) (3) (5)

Delivery Talk is poorly organized, e.g. no clear Presents key elements of an oral presentation Plans and delivers an oral presentation

introduction or summary of talk is adequately, but "tell them" not clearly applied effectively; applies
(2)

38
 presented the principle of "(tell them)" –well organized

Length and Presentation is inappropriately short or Presentation contains excessive or insufficient Presentation has enough detail appropriate

excessively long; omits key results during detail for time allowed or and technical content for the time constraint
Detail
presentation and the audience
level of audience
(3)

Major difficulties with the mechanical aspects Has some minor difficulties with the Presents well mechanically. Makes eye contact

of the presentation. No eye contact. Difficult mechanical aspects of the presentation. Eye Can be easily heard. Speaks comfortably with

to hear or understand speaking. Reads from contact is sporadic. Occasionally difficult to minimal prompts (notecards). Does not block

prepared hear or understand speaking. Overuses screen. No distracting nervous habits

Mechanics prompts or does not use prompts enough

Script. Blocks the screen. Distracting nervous
occasionally stumbles or loses place; appears
(4) habits (um, ah, clicking
to

pointer, etc.)
have memorize presentation. Occasionally

blocks screen Some nervous habits (um, ah,

clicking pointer, etc.)

Dialect Uses poor English Occasionally uses an inappropriate style of Uses proper American English

English-too conversational
(2)

39
 Visual Aides Multiple slides are unclear or Visual aides have minor errors or are not Uses visual aids effectively

incomprehensible always clearly visible

(2)

Appearance Inappropriate attire, slovenly or too revealing Appearance is too casual for the Professional appearance

(3) circumstances

Listening Does not listen carefully to questions, does Sometimes misunderstands Listens carefully and responds to questions

not provide an appropriate appropriately; is able

and questions, does not respond appropriately to

answer, or is unable to answer questions the audience, or has some trouble answering to explain and interpret results for various
Response to
about presentation material audiences and purposes
questions
Questions

(4)

TOTAL

Rater: ____________________________________

Signature: _________________________________ Date: _____________________________

40