Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
l
f
j
UNITED ST ATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
PROGRESS REPORT I: PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATI ONS
IN HYDRAULIC LABORATORY OF
FLOCCULATING AGENT NO. 1
Hydraulic Laboratory Report No. Hyd-405
DIVISION OF ENGINEERING LABORATORIES
COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE DENVER, COLORADO
December 1, 1955
.nr\'1111'1\'ll!lmllO . _. ... , f·. , YJl!NM.WfJ~'1'~~ ;, ~. ~.
1$.rod~~io,n .. • ..... • ~· ~· ._ •.• ,• .... _ •.•.•.• ,• -~· .... • .• -:• .• ~:.• .... ;,- . __ .. /_~£ -iA.:~.~ ·
T~ing ~ced"Q.re,, ~· ..•. • ,• .. • ,• .• ,• ,• .• ,. ,.• ,• ... ,• .• ,• .• :· .• ,.:J~ .:.,,'.'.-.{ '.~H.,·J;: Test Results,.-:;,,.~\:-.-,.1~ ~i~ b,,,:1. ·~,t,._.,,.1.;•-~":-.' ,~,i:";.~ ,-1-it:'-.~.·~··;~ •!·Ji "*'~.f• t-:1:» f·w·~~
:: ,. . . . • . . . . - . · " . · L~Q.!. . -~j~ :~;:rit 0.;1; - ~.~r.,::~, .. -1~ . /t "· ('Jl.'est.. a,eries ,JQ.. l .•.• ,• .•... • .• .. .• • .• .. •..• ,• ..... i:• _,,ft#, J-'!~i,.-! -~ .• .t-.Bl fdl'est. Series .No •• ~ .,. .• .• , .... , •..•••. • ,. .• ... .• .• • ,• ••. :,,_ • ..:iM~ ,1.'i¾•·l(t ,t,i.11?113:
Flume Test Flume Test Flume Test Flume Test Flume Test
.• ' .. lo. l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No. 2 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • No. 3 • • . • • • . • • • • • • • . • lo. 4 • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • No. 5 • • • • • • • . . • • • • • • •
I
• • • • • • • • • • .. . . . . • • • • • • • • • •
Conclusions and Recommendations • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Test ·Equipment • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,. • Effect of Treatment Strength on Settling Efficiency
(1/2 percent sediment load) ••••••••••••••••• Effect of Treatment Strength on Settling Efficiency
( 1 percent sediment load) • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Treatment Strength on Settling Efficiency
( 2 percent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on SettlingEfficiency--23M4 Sediment (l/2 per-
cent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • ·• • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on Settling Efficiency--23M4 Sediment
(1 percent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on Settling Efticiency--23M4 Sediment
( 2 percent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on Settling Efficiency--23M7 Sediment
' (1/2 percent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• Effect of Time on·settlingEfficiency--23M7 ~ediment
(1 percent sediment load) •••••••••••••••••• Effect of Time on Settling Efficiency--23M7 Sediment
(2 percent sediment load) • • •• ·• • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on SettlingEfficiency--MClO Sediment
(1/2 percent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on Settling Efficiency--MClO Sediment
( 1 percent sediment load) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Effect of Time on Settling Efficiency--MClO Sediment
( 2 percent sediment load) • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • •
l,<i.fi!l!;;li;'~ 4 6 7 9 9
11
Figure
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
COWtBltl-S...COnt:lnue4
1'1- feet le>. 1 ..•••.•• ·• ...... • • • • • • • • .• • • • ·• · •.• • ,: ,1 ... ten ao. 2 •.•.•••.•••••••..••••••• : •. , ..... ·-·- ···• • ltteat ot ~- OD Settling lfflciency--11:2 &114 Ill~ 8etillen · ·., ,
(1 J91Cellt W1N".t l.oa4) _,. • • • • , • • • • • •· • • • • • • • ,1- feat ,lo. 3 ·• ..• ·• • • • • • • • • • ·• • ·• • • • • • • • • • n.. teat ao.. 4 .• • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • . ... . • ..• • ._ . ,1 ... ten 1o. 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
u.
-1~. 15'
16 .17
.-18 19
UNITED STATES . ,: · •" DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
. ·BUREAU ·OF'BECLAMATION' . ·I
' . Comini'saioneri' s' otfice-1-Denver Laboratory· Rel)ol'!t· ,:No.: 0B¥c1-405 Di vision of Engineering Laboratories ·. ; ~ ·. · ;C'ompfled1 ·by.: :- -T. -JI~ -Rhone: ._ Hydraulic Laboratory Branch Checked end Denver., Colorado ' : - ·-revie\ted by:i December 1., 1955 Submitted by:
E~: J. Carlson H.- ·M. Martin
Subject: Progress Report I: Preliminary Investigations. in ~au11c Laboratory of Flocculating Age~t No. 1
Introduction i··,'', a :·:-. i!i.
During the period of August and September 1955:, a series of··:: tests were made on flocculating Agent No. 1. The tests w~re conducted in· the''Bureiw. -of .Reciemat-ion, !ydraUl:f:c' Laboratory· at the· Denver Federal'- center, ; · · · 0 i - , - -
The purpose of the tests was to determine the feasibility of using a flocculating ·agen:t · as an -aid; in sett·11ng but· suspentled. ~·ed.iment .
.• _.: ff , :, ' f : . j •. ,.,
The tests were performed in two series. In the fir:st. · seriie'sJ three different types of sediment were tested to determine the amount of agent· . heeded to floiieulat"e various concentrat-iOlis . of suspended.
· sediment under quiescent conditions • The second,. series of tests wer~- ' performed in a 1-foot-wide by 1-1/2-foot-deep by 3O-foot-long flume to determine _if''..the treated sediment; would flocculate-when: the.;we.ter· was flowing. Figure 1 shows the test equipment used in both·;sel"'illts. -· .· . ·
The. initial tests on the-flocculating agent-werei performed in the ·laboratory. on three sediment· samples: from canals 1:n the: Middle .... Rio Grande·a.rea.represent:ing.:material,·with: varying amounts of c-le.y, sand., and silt;:: The sediment ·-samples tested were. numbe~ed. as :f'olle3lfs: . 23M4., 23M7, and'.14010. No size ana.J.ysis ot the, MClO '. nu,.ter:tal · ,was · made., but the 23M4 contained -:,4. percent send ,and .. 46 · pel'Celit s'ilt to cla;y end the 23M7 contained 8 percent send end 92 percent silt to clay. ·
. ' . ~-. · • ·. i -· · A testtng procedure · was· established.. by trial.. and error ·-111· '·: :-
order to obtain the b·est results;· once ··thi·s procedwte was s-et it was'· followed .. :111::a.ll ··sUbse·qu~nt :tests·:. ·· · : :··:·~.:
. : . . . . -- . ,•
' .... ·-..
Testing procedure:
(1) Weigh amo~t ~ test sediment, to,.pro~ide desired sediment concentration .
.. . (2)-'., MiK,·s:ed;lment· ;Ln small amount of water t.o i~u~µre ~t ~l cl,ay· p~-ticles go ,.into• suspep.sion.
(3) .. M:I.~ i,n; 'electric IDixer for 3 minutes. '
( 4) Place i~ bottom w1 thdrawal tube and add water ~til tub:e is. ·:f'#lled ·:t;o· 500· cc ~lt. ·
(5)' Turn tube end for end until solution is uniformly mixed.
_(6) Place 1/3 of flocculating agent in tube and turn tube end..· ... for- end J times:. , .
.. ·.·.:;,.
( 7) . ,;Repeat ·No;.: 6 two mor.e ti,m.es. · '!'hie insures go@ dJ.st1."ibution of the flocculant and also provides the time and ~urbulenc.~ ·.necessat"y for floe buildup. ·
,··.:t :-, , .
. ' , , (ij.) .·sJ>J..ace, tub~ .in rack and withdraw appro:ic•teJ.y 50 cc of sample into separate beakers at 45 seconds, 2 minutes, 5 minutes, and -10·- minutes. . .. · ' ·
(-9.); ,Place b~ak~s in ~lectric.·oven overnight to-.evaporate. · wa:ter·.
{ 10) : ·b~termi~e a:mount of sediment. that settled out during . each time interval.by·weighing dried,samplei'
·The ·three sediment samples were tested-at 2, -1, and 1/2 percent EJediment concentrations. For each sediment. concentration., 3 diff'etent ercentages of floocu;Lating 'Agent No. 1 were tried, as well as· one· est wi tliou.:t a ·.f;Locc\llating agent. The concentration of the . locculati~ agent is listed as "pounds per ton;." this re:f'er.s to ounds of :floccu.l;&.tlt- per ton of. · suspended- solid-a.
est Results
The results of each test have been plotted and are shown on. the ttached graphs·. Al.though the results are not statistically 'correct due o the fact that only. one run was made for .each test . c.o~itison, the tests ave established an approximation of the effectiveness 0:f' ·,the . locculating agent. Further tests would be help:f;~ .in. stabilizing :the urves but would also require at least another 5 or 6 days of testing.
2
. .,. · Test Series .wo. l~. Tile· curves :J.ncl.1cate that· under quiescent conditions.:86 tQ. 90 percent-of the· sediment settles out ·wd.thcnn; the · addition of the flocculating agent. The addition of a very small amount of flocculating agent increase·& the<amunt of settling; in the case of the high sand content sediment (23M4)', the quantity settled out increased to 95 percent, while the low·: sand content sediment increased to about 98 percent settled . out •. · The MClO sediment showed an increase from. 90 percent settled out. to. about 98 percent settled out. These percentages are based on a 10-m.inute settling time, P'isures--2;-- 13, and. 4 .• ·,•. "· 4
;\
A plot of the amount of sediment· settled out versus time is shown on Figures 5 to: 13, ·inclusive:. · The plots indicate -that the amO'unt··'Ot· aediment settling out increases with t1m.e·,and al.so, increases as the strength of the- treatment increases •. , There also· seema. to be. a trend in all of the graph" indicating that:··for equal treatment · level.a:, or strength of ·flocculating agent;; · a · higher , percentage of , : the suspended sediment will be r.em.oved·:when·· there· is·,mc,re :in .. :::-·.:·. suspension.
,·: •. ~--,- ;_ •• . • .f . ,··
To summarize: ~--- :-_ ! .. -,, : ': .·. :- ._.-: --~~- =: .. , ·. .'.· . -. : : : . '
·.:; .. ·-' ': , ( l} In.· 10, minutes 80 -tct 90 ·percent of -the ·sediment, settled·. ou.t without the~use of a flocculating agent. :- · · ·· · :v
(2) A very small amoun~ of the flocculating agent increased the percentage of sediment that settled out as follows: in the c·ase of sandy sediment to 95 ·percent, and in the ·case o1'.:,clayey sediment to 98 percent. ·
(3); The percentage of sediment that settJ.es o.ut increases as ··the concentration of the suspended sediment increases.
· · · 'rest. Series No. 2. The·, second ... series of tests were performed in the 1-f'oot-wide, 30-foot-long :.recirculat1,ng flume. ·. These tea.ts were explo·rato:ey in nature due· to .the limitations· ot the -f'lume·. · Five tests.· • were made in the· flume; the first, two. were mainly concerned with, deteniini:ng methods of suspeniting the · secliment ,. adiing the flocculating agent, and measuring the effecti v.ene~s Qf the agent •
. ·., .•.
-· In,-all five tests. the method·· of:.adding ,the secliment· to "the .. flowink water was· the same. The amount of": needed sediment was.,, deter.• .. mined by a percentage· ·of the weight of the water in. the · flume f s:mce,.: the amount of' water in the ·flume.was 103 cubie feet or about .6,430· pounds, enough sediment.was· added.to give·-about a l.percent suspended., .. sedillient concentration by weight. Also added to the flume water were
·3
enough chemicals to.represent-a water hardness similai- to that of the Middle Rio Gr~e. The chemicals added to 103- cubic fee_t o.t water were:
· 490 gr8'1DS of' NaBC03 -2_9 .• 1 grams .of MgS04 329 grams of CaS04 .168.grams_of CaCl4
later increased tp 378 grams
After several minutes of circulation, a sample of the w•ter was taken so that its hardness could be determined.
The, sediment (similar to MCl0· in previous tests) was thoroughly mixed into .a slurry- before it was added to the flume_ water; as the sediment- slurry- was added to the flume water,· the velocity of the flume flow was. increased in order· to keep as mu,ch of the sediment as possible in suspension; atter the sediment was completely mixed in the flume, the velocity was reduced to about o. 75 toot per second.
In the first test two 50-ml samples of water were taken from the downstream end of the flume at 10-minute intervals, one of the samples was obtained near the surface of the flow and the other from mid-depth;. The samples were then- evaporated and the amount of residue weighed and used as a measure ot the amount . ot. suspended sediment. -These amounts are referred to as the percent of the suspended solids in the water.
Flume Test Bo. -1--Two runs were made on the. first flume test. In the initial run the first sediment sample showed about 0.4 percent sediment in both the surface sample and the deep sample. The f'locculant was added about 23-minutes after the. first sediment fJample; 440· cc of· 0.2 gram/liter floceulant solution were added to the .flume flow over a 1-1/4-minute period of time. Ten minutes after the flocculant was added; sediment samples were again obtained,. and at the. end of an additional 10· minute.a a third sample was taken. The ijecond. sediment-Sample showed that the suspended solids had reduced to about 0 .30 percent; the third, sample ·showed a concentration-of 0.30 percent tor the deep sample,. but the surface- 1;1ample had reduced to about 0.24 percent suspended sediment. At.this time an.addJ.tional _4!1() c.c. ot 0.2 gram/liter f'locculant were added to the flow. Three additional samples taken at 10-minute intervals showed that:tbe suspended sediment in the surface sample stayed .c.onstant at a concentration. of about o •. 24- percent., the samples of the deep flow showed .an inc:rease ,to about O .36 percent f'or the first. two samples~- and -the last sample decreased to about O .30 percent. These results are· shown on F:1,gure 14. ·. . --. · _
4
. -,.For the second run ot the :f'irat flume, teat two chpps were made in the test: procedure. The tlocculaut. -,,as add.eel by • :Cl-1'QOn feeder at "- c9nstant rate depending on the water -..elocity,. The . , . second ,change was .to obtain sed1men.t •am.plea. at · both the upet!'eam- and ... downatream,ends,of,tbe·.tlume.,. The size of-the.samples v-.. still 50 ·., ml, and they were obta1De4,,at the surface a.ml at mid-depth. ··
·J'or . the second run the sediment was re•uspended and the no.w . velocity reduced to about 0.2 toot per second. The initial suspended sediment concentrations were as follows:
Surface Mid-depth
Percent of .suspended sediment Upstream Downstream
O.1~, .34~
Ten minutes later the . concentrations were:
Surt~e Mid,-depth
Percent of suspded·sediment Upstream, · . , . Downstream
0.22~ .. .24~
o.16f .. .•. 2~.-
The addition of the tlocc;ula,nt was startecl at :the rate e>.t 32 ml per minute, the strength was 0.005 percent, a very weak solution. After 10 minutes the.sediment concentrations were:
Surface Mid-depth
Percent ot iuspended sediment Upstream Downst:i-e•
. '
Atter anotber 10-minute period the concentrati®S were:
Sllrface Mid-depth
Percent of suap•d lledinlent · Upatreui . -· · . . Downstream
0.1~ -~ o.14~ .. .26~
These two runs of the fir.st -test 1ndic~ted that. tbe tloc.culaa.t would accelerate the rate or increase the amount of settling, but the improvement was rather small, Figure 14.
5
Flume Test No. 2., •'-Before starting the second teat the flume was cleaned and fresh water placed in it, also the · same amounts of chemicals were added in order to· increase the- ·hardness. ·Eighty-six. · pounds of sediment similar to the·Mc1o·was mixed into a slurl"y andadded to the flume water.. The flow in the flume vas kept, ·at abOut 3.25 feet per second velocity· until the silt vas add'ed;, then the velocity- was reduced to about 0.'14 foot per second. The first sediment sample was obtained with tbe ·velocity at 3.25 feet per second.
Surface M:l.d•depth
Percent of .suspended sediment Upstream Downstream
o.a~ .96~
Twenty minutes after the velocity was reduced to 0.14 toot per second another set of samples was taken:
Surf.ace Mid~depth
_ .. P~:r:cent of auspended sediment Upstreu,. ___ · · Downstream
o.6~ -7~
After'a 'time interval.of 11 minutes the third -sample waa·taken:
·surtac·e.· Mid-depth
Percent of suspended sediment Upstream Downstream
o.6~ -~ After this sample had been taken the tlocculant feeder was
started at the rate of 300 cc per minute with a strength of 0.01 pound of tlocculant per ton of solids. There was no visible: flocculation so the treatment rate was increased to 500 cc per minute and finally to 750 cc per minute. This pl'()duced a slight flocculation, but not sufficient; therefore, · the strength of the ·treatment was further increased until it was equivalent to about 0.10 pound of tlocculant per ton ot solids, assuming a silt laad ot about o.8 percent.
After a time interval of about 33 minutes trom when the flocculant was first added a final sediment sample was obtained:
6
Percent of' suspended sediment. Upstream Downstream
. \ -~-... '. , . ~ .; ' . i ~ ~ ' .. ; . . . -~ '.' • _., . : • :· . '; ...
,-s~~$.C~ ·: .
M~d-depth · 0.34._ : -· ·•·
.4~~ ..... '.
When tie-results of' the second test are.plotted, Figure 15, the plot indicates that the f'locculant increased the amount of' sediment that, se.ttled out. -The curves ·shoVed tha1Ptae·amount of'··suspended sediment -.s 'ltveling 'out· or ,tending to remain c.onstan.t but. that. when - , the f'locculant was added the curves steepened, indicating that more, sediment was settling out.
i.:·;;..-..t-;:_;. :•".\ ;_; ./~~1 :: .",:
Flume Test No. 3.--For the third flume test ·the f'lume was. again cleaned and fresh water added; the same chemicals as before were added in order:'tp'·.in,~r~a&f!";·th.e hardnes1:1 0!:_-the water. A series of' baffles was pl~ed :' at t~e upstream en~ of· the flume in order to improve the turbulence necessary f'or complete mixing. Another test change was to ind.uce the f'locculant into the flume f'low:c.through three different source if at the upstream end ;of' the· flume, ,rather than just one source. Eighty pounds of' silt was slurried and mixed with the flume water·,(~=- ' · - . ,.,.,. · '·
For this test 40 pQunds • of' MC2 sediment and 40 pounds of' MC4 sediment were u~~d; .· f'~m appearances. :the MC2 sediment seemed to have a very high clay content, and the MC4 ·was quite sandy. Tests performed with the bottomw-ithdrawal tu~es gave,the following.results tor a 10-minute time in:t~rval (Figure 16): ··
MC2- l!iediment-:..No f'locculant, .. 59/j2 percent. -settled out: FloccUlant at· rate of' 0.044· pound/ton, .90.2 pet-cent $ettled out
MC4 sediment--No f'locculant, 82.7 percent settled out .- Flocculan.t a.t rate of' 0.032· pound/ton, 96.6 .perc-ent settled out.
. -··. ,, ~ ·, ·:··
After the silt slurry was mixed in the flume water the velocity was reduced to about 0.10 f'oot per second. The first sediment sample gave tQ~~ results; ·
Surface Mid-depth
Percent. of suspended sediment Upstre&Dl · Downstream
0.72'1, .-,.6ai
7
Ten minutes .later the concentrations were: :
Surface M14-Aepth
Percent of suspended sediment Upstream Dovnatreaa
o.~ .6~
o.~ .• 70~··
The flocculant feecler was started after this sampling. The strength· ot. the flocculant was ·0.05 pound per ton ot solids and the rate ot feec11ng was 200 cc ·per minute~
Ten minutes after the tlocculant was started the auapenW sediment· concentrations were:
Surface : Mid...d,eptb··
Percent.of suspended sediment. Upstream ·Dovnatream
0.5~ -~ .o.~ -~ After another 10-minute time interval .the concentrationa were:
Surface Mid-depth
Percent of suspended sediment Upstream ·. Downstream
o.4~ .4~
. O.l~ -~ During this period there was visible flocculation 1n the
stream flow and the tlocs were settling ·a1most vertically, however, the appearance ot the water between the floes was still clo~.
The rate of adding the flocculant to the flume was . increased to 250 cc per minute. Ten minutes later the sediment concentrations were:
Su;rtace Mid-depth
Percent of suspended sediment Upstream Downstream
0.2~ .241,
6.16; .241,
The results of this test are shown on Figure 17.
8
• · i - Flume '!'est ·No. 4;--All of' -the prec·eding tests appear ·to give more or less· erratic · results when: plotted' on= graph· paper ·w:1.:-eh the· · suspended 'sed·iment .:coricent·ration= as the ordinf!i.te and·'·time ~s ',the· ·.' abscissa,; .but without exception ·the trend ,"is tor· the suspended sediment concentration to become smaller with time. The amount of' reduction ·of· the suspended sediment was greater when the f'locculant was added to the flow than1:when;ther~=wa1f·no f'looculant added. One test was perf'ormed·:.1n·wbich:'a "4~hour run· was·'made with no f'locculant added to the flow. · · A ·very ·small amount of suspended sediment, same material as used in Fl~ Test No. 3, was in the·· flow at the. start·of' tlie··test •
• _.:·if'·· .• :
The mid-depth sediment concentrations for Flume Test No. 4 were:
Start After; 50 minAf"ter 1 hr 50 min After 3 hr
:;_·Aft~r ~--hr .. ~- min ,.. ..
Percent of' suspended sediment .' Upstream , .. , · · Downstream
o.46~ _,,.281, ·.30; .26~ .. ~;
·~ .. / I
The result's are also shown on Figure 18.
Flume Test No. 5. --For the f'ifth1 ..flume .test the only- change was to admit the water at the upper end of' the flume through a sluice gate. An hydraulic jump formed just downstream ·from the gate at the same place that the flocculant was .introduced,; · The jump was comparatively- short but its mixing action permitted a much better floe to form. The results of' the tests are shown in the following ·chart as well as on the .graph of' Figure 19. ·
. Percent ot susl)ended · sediment Upstream : Downstream
Start' - Surface o. 7·41, · -0 •. 561, ~ '. Mid.;depth · · .Bo~ .81J
· , . . :. After· ·10 min Surface· .-11; .• 65;. Mi-4-,depth .·.7~ .• 74~
After 20 min Surface .65~ .• Q21, Mid-depth .68; .6~
After 30 min Surface .61~ .54~ Mid-depth .70; .68;
9
The addition .of thc:t floc,~ulant was begun 35 min~te.s ·after the start of the test. During 35 m1nutee .. 0.09 gram.· ·of the tl.occul2'!lt mixed in 3,100 cc of water were added :·to the flume fl.ow.. During the per1Qd . the flocculant was being added, the suspended sediment ·conce~tration., were as follows: · · · ·
After 45 ~ · ·,Surface. Mid-depth
After 55 min Surface Mid-depth
After 65 min · · · Surface Mid-depth
Percent of suspended. s~d~t Upstream .Downstream
0.63;, • 65;,
o·.6~. .64;, .
.6~
.60;, -~ .60;,
.45;,
.44j, -~ .4~
Even after the flocculant was not being added the . percentages of suspended sediment continued to diminish:
Percent of aus:2!nde4 aedilllerrt !!J?stream Downstream
After 75 min Surface 0.35;, 0.3·3;, •Mid-depth .3a;, ... .36;, ·
After 85 min Surface .33;,. .31;, Mid-depth .31;, .37j
After. 95 ,min· . Surface. .31;, .30;, Mid-depth .33;, .35;,
A:f'ter 105 min : . Surf~e .2a;, .2:{j, 'Mid-depth .3~ .31;,
The graph of Figure 19 shows the effect of adding the flocculant quite plainly. The amount of suspended, sediment had almost attained equilibrium when the addition of the flocculant · was started. A:f'ter the floes had a chance to form. the quantity of suspended sediment started to diminish and continued to do so until after the flocculant was stopped, at which point the amount of suspended sediment again attained an equilibrium state.
10
Conclusions and Recommendations
After analyzing.the results of .the fl9cculant tests the following conclusions and recommendations are presented:
( 1) The floccu.lant used in these tests was successful in accelerating and improving sediment removal.
(2) The flume tests showed that better flocculation was obtained when some turbulence was introduced. Since it is doubtful..,maximum mixing and flocculation was obtained in any of the flume tests, further laboratory tests should be made to determine a relationship between turbulence level and mo~t effective time of floe buildup to give the maximum amount of settling. Equipment which was used on a previous sedimentation study can possibly be used to giye this relationship. ·
(3.) After successful laboratory tests are made, one or more field st~es will be necessary in order to correlate the laboratory results with prototype use.
11
A. General view showing the 1-foot by l ½-foot ' by 30-foot long recirculating fiume used in Test S~ries No. ~-
B. Bottom withdra.W'al tubes used in Test Series No. 1.
SEDIMENTION STUDY Using Flocculating Agents
Test Equipment
Figure l
F-1 G U'R'E· 2
Sediment settled ·in percent'-ot··Gll"ig1ml.'l014i:· , ,, ·.· =\,;;
'I 'Y\ ... ·., .. . . ) 1.i. ... C n ............. ·-· ... . . .. .sle. . ij ·
) ,.
.... , . : ····. '... ,,: ~-··.
:0
.• ..•. ' • ........... . .. ,11 . -~
. ··- . ·• . ' 0 .p ,;i, . --- _,. .
! ' . . ·, ! .
•• ••• •L • •
\Q
-··-.'"- ' . . ,. --. . .. • ...... · ...... -~·- o·
SEDIMENTATIOI: ST.UDI i ·. • .. ·. Using noooulating Agents· C :··
C: f4
i~ ;slil 8~ -iE· ct-S ~-
C'~ ij
f ij ~ QI
I I
! I
I I
I I
'
~ -2.3M ' Se1 imel lt
iv V' A
I I' ~n 10 l edil ant 1.-o\
~ ~ - - -
I """""' . If
'iG ~ (-2 ~14. edil tient
I ~v . ~ ..
l ,
I/ )L ",
/~ -' I , , I
1%' ~e,1.il !lent lOOA I I , :; j
I ,_ I .
r I .
I I ,
Iota I Se tt]j M' 1 LDa 10 .. ·-·~ I 1D b pttc:l '8
. - .. tul: ~-I
- --• - -- - - - 0.05 · 0.<X> 0.07 0.1 >8 0.09 0.10 • .o3 14
Treatment strength i.-i poun1s or fioccul.ant per ton or suspended sediuent
EFFECT OF TREATMENT.STRENGTH ON SETTLING EFFICIENCY
0.11
"Tl
Ci)
C
5 ~ XI
IT1
I O,I {ll CD
i i:; ct-m CD ~
~ Q
-Q .S:'-.. i;
i 8 g. a, ij !Jo
.l'I - ~ ~ µ
g s.
-s
O! o. l2
;I
i~ ~~ i; d=O i;:~
CJQ'. (/J
=ii ·e,~ i;s· . tr .. ~ .
,:;o'w-),, • . .---•·; .,,:. :_ ·_i_·:· ... . :, I-'
.v Vl . - .. m ' 23'7 ~mi.2• i.~ici ..:,,;-nt . . .. . .... .. , _ .:J
·rr-v·- ~ /: ~ ~
ll / / l~-;...;: ;.ec11,..... . . . . . ... ! ·t;... /;- '/· ~. - ii
~ / · ·i I · . -"~ . --L---~~ ~ -
,_:,.1· ,: ·p
·/--'-V . .i_ t.. . "'~- l . 2· t, --------------+--~--------- c+ .... r:n~,J-· I ··1 · t · ·1 · I I 1 -1 ··1 12% ~8*ntl14 I I I I I · · 1- · J .. J. ~
~., .
' ··v·r .. --1,· ""."
·\:-_.,
ij .... , D~ 17. .... - t /· .. [
. - . lfl j .... tl., ...- , ._ 110 cc . .• • . • • • ., talla• L ... ,. -c .. -~ ·•.-•-,.~_-,-_ • • .. :., •
r I •·. · • ip I I I
• 111,,
~ 0 0.01 0.02 Oo0.3 0.04 · 0.05 · o.06 ·0;07 O.OS . 0.09 ; . 0.-:111 O~ll "11· -Tree.tr.lent strength in pounds of f'locculant per ton of suspended aol.i.ds <i'>
i EFFECT OF TREAT1<£I1T STRbGTH OH SETTLING EFFICIENCY m ..
FIGURE 5
100 90 - ' -
' ,t .\ l'I ., . ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' --
' \ . \ I
\ \
' \ \
' \ ' \.. "' \
\
\ ~ r-\ 0
-s. '° r-1 . .. 0
60 70 6o so
---
·- ,_,
g _i ~ , ... r-1
~ 'C 1= ' Q)
' Cl) ~
:\ d
~ !i • 0
' l ti'\ ~ ' C\l . - '
I I
' ,_.
l ... -e 1' . ~ ' \\ 0
\ -~
\ \\ i \ ·, -
\
\ ' !~ v
\ ~ ' l \ ' \ I\::, \\
' "' ~' \ ... -
~ ~
~ ~. (IQ
' ~ It._ 0 • ....
SEDIMENl'ATIO.N STUDY Using Flocculating Agents
IJJ 30
-
O·
l ...,. I ~
I :
I
J. ' .
!
SEDIMEI~ATION·- STUDY Using nocculating Agents
FIGURE 6.
0
FIGURE 7
Sediment settled -·in% or original load.
1 )0 CD 80 ~o 60 ~, J )
... ~
-· .1\ ., .
' I
'' \. 1 ' , \i -e
' ' \ 1 \ 0 ~1 0
t""I I ,..
~\ i i1 1'\\.~ ~ :!1 :-.....
\\ ('\~ ~
'" 1~, ~ ' -· 1 J'' ii! I., .... l .. \ ~
' ~ 0 \' \
/ 8
I~ ... ~ ·~
0
\ \~~ . Ir\ ·~~
' \ ~~ ('- ' ~, I\__ ~ .. ~ -0
~ ~~ r\. \, ..
' ~ ' I'
... ,'" ' .,.,,
l '-f . ...,.,.,
' ' SEDIMEN:rATION STUDY
Using Flocculating Agents
·10
co
''°
N
r-4
--
FIGURE 8
100 .. c:n.· . ~ l; . --~ D.: .. , .. 60: . .. ... q J '.) ~ n . ..
·, . .. . . . . . .
. . .. . . . ,.,
. .. . '
\_ . .. .. ...
T 1 I .. I ' I
-•
I
I I \ I of ...
I II
\ i. I L ••
i\ \ 0 ..
~ ~~ l ..
.. .
I 1 ! r~ \ ~ ... \ .:, ;,:_;
I ·J \\ Cl)
I, t/1 .. .. -~ .. - . . .. ... 1 ~11= \
. '1
I ): '
\ '° ' -=, - ...
\ 1 0 C'l ~ ~ • \_ \ 0 .. ..... ... .. •' " .. \ ¥ \ \ ,,
\ ,
\ ' . . . ..
I \ \ \ ..
j ' \ \ ' . ~ .. .. -· .
~ \ ' ' ~- '\ f\. ...
' .. ~
·"-. 1:11:r j \. " '\ -A ' . ' ' . .
~ .s ... .. ..... "\
"" ' .......... ~ ~ , ... i-......._ "- .
. "' .... --- -...... ~ -~- ..... ... ~ ... ,' .. • ........... ... ....
~ 0 ... ,•
' - ... _ :;::-..... .. ·'
.. .. ~ ... -- ....
•",\ --~ ... . ,;• -· ----
0 •
SEDn,m::fl'ATION S'rUDY' .. Using. Floccule.ting a~nts
FIGURE 9
Inn
·-~
I I I
' I
I . I
I I
' ' ' I I I
. I
I
I I
t .,, I
\ -~
Sediment settled .;. . in . % Qf . 01·1.ginal load
Cl' ~1 ,, \ " \ e;n
-- "
.
• .. '\
·1
I I
f;1
\ ~ f 1"1
\ E! d
\ 17 .. ~
~
J ~ l.. n
~ \ .
·O
,. [', \ '\ ·,
\ .
. [~ ' .. ', ' s ~ ' _.:,
~- ~
~ _ .. 1! -~
·,·
•.
'.
. . .- ..
..
\ -r \ 1 ' 0 +>] 13 ~ .
\~ ~1 ~~
rn i •r
t'--')
\ i,i:i I
~~
\ ..
\ .. '\
\ ., , .... i\ " ' f'-.. r\. ... '\ ' .. r--.. "--- "r--,......_ ... ,. ' ... "'--
~ ......... .:..
..... ...... ..... ....
f'-..-.. .....
i-.._
~ ---r-- lo....
SED:o-tENl'ATION STUDY Using_ Floooula tinJ Agents
I. L . '
-
..
~
"' I'., r---.....
. -. ~-
--
,, . '
-
-~
ti'\
"' N
- ...... ~ -- ~- ....
0
l
SediJnent ~til,1.d'."' ,µ1 .~-::;rc,q1~t ~i' origi:i~ lp'.ic:l . ' •• '~ .••• ,,., • ' 4 •• •. • ,. • • • • ~
00 C_)
'
·-· I~
\: .\ I
' .. l
-~
1! \ I \
I
.I \ ~ \ ·, \ I
,I ! .. \ ~ -. g ··\. \ • ~-
~
' I\. ' '\ ~
; Q : " ~ '
-s .. ~
.
.... ..
... .
80. 70 60 59· :
' ' '.
; .
\ : ~ '.
' i:: -\ ·L
q ~ iii.
~ . :J ~
_ai
\ -- . 8 c--. .,a. ' -
'.~
.
\ ~·~ ....
~ : ,\
' ., " \. \
\ \
\
' " ' ' 1, \ .. '
...._
\ ' ', ~
....... ... ~, \. '- ~ ... '
~~ ' ', ~J ' ', '. ' ...... ~
.... -~ .... ., ' ~ ,- , .
~ ~ .·· . -
. .. , .·,
• ~ _1
..
SEDDlE!f.r.l\.i.:roN. STllDI :· Using Flocc:rulutilig Agents
' . : . : .
~I) J()
.... ...
.. •.
'.
' .
.. - ;
;
. ' ..
'
' ..
·"
.
-
~ .... ~ ...
111,,..
~ ~ ........... ' ~ --..
FIGURE 10
..
,... .
o-
FIGURE II
Secllineiit 'Settled . in percent · of orig:l.mil load ·' ·
HY'I C "\ H) , n " r\ 1 n JI'\ ·o
'
' . - .. -
·1
I I ' ..
I
I .1 I --g
0 -~ ~:
' - iii r
Cl0 '
~ ~ 1 • I I _.,.
' ~> --o,
' - r-4
'' ~, '
.JJ :s:~ ~ .~
\' \ -'..o -=.I
'\ ' -. 0 l ~, ~
;t \\ \ ~-
8 \ . . \ ·\ _..;, I
=II= ' '~ 'CQ \\ d .\~ ~~-• r-, 0
~ '. ~ ' !\, \' ' " ~ =ti= :"' ~ ~ '
·~ -~
~~ ~ 0 ·' ~~ N
'() ~ ~ ~ '. '
~ -=-.. r-4 -.-- ..
0
' .
SEDIMEN.rATION STtIDY . ' . . ' .
Using Flocculating Agents
1. Ml
-
\ '
'
Sediment. settled - 1n ~rcent ot orit'intl load C ·"1:_
~" - .
. . ..
.. .... '"'l I ' 1
I
I \ I
\ I ·,,.
\ I I ' I I
' ' ' \ I ~i \ \ ' \ --.. ~
\' " -• \0 . \
~ ·~ \ _,,
I
' ' ~ \ :N
o· \ • 0
.. -
~n 'l '\' f, '\ ,: \
. .
.0 •:I
ii '=' ~·~ i ! ..
\i fO I
0
~ i~~
, . _,,
\
' \ \ ..
\ ,.
;\
' \ ' \_ ' ' ' '·· ....... I
,•.
-" -. ... "' ~ .,
, .. ........ ~
. '..;;: ~ ~ .... --~ ;ti- -
SEOIME)."TlTION STUDY· Using Floooulatlng Agents·
J.,
..
. .. r"':-- ,M__
~ n
! .
-
FIGURE 12
'
FIGURE 13
l 00 90
' ,J .
' I I
' I I
\ \ ' \ I \
'', \ \ ' ' \
I \ I \ .
~\ \
' \ 8 \.. +> ~ \ -4'
~ 0
eu 70. (J() 50 J.D
'
.~
" +) (
ir-i~
.... 't
\ ~~
\ d .~
§l~
\ ' ~ --, 0
~ ,e
~ \- ~ \ l ()
0 . t"I
' ' ~
~ 0 I\ .J ~
"\ ~ \\. \
'~\ ~ '\ , ... ~ ~ ~
0 ',' \.__~ i\ -i.:i ".:':-,.. ' ' ·- '-'""'C;
~ ~ ~ • ... r-.~
~~ 0 '; ........ .... ~ - ..
I
s:~mn-2NTATION SI'UDY Using Flocculating Agents
"l :--- ..... -· .._-~
30
Ci r-i
- s ,_
r:1 ~ ~ s
ro s Q) -- ~ ; ~ ~ ~~
0
"' ! 00 ~
~ ~
~ 0
~ E r:1
('t\
C\I
r-4
---r---. r--
0
FIGURE 14
& ' ~,q il ,/' /· . I · ~0.:: ~ , "~-~ - ·;, . ,;
t::>' . .._,. r ~• &I... a,, t---+--+-----+--t---+J:..-+t . .,~ ....... ----_l--i-,.-----+-~~.t+""',,IIE-+-"""'-+--+--t-~ 0
-~/
l----+--+---+--+----+--+-~'+--+----++--+---t--+----+--t-----t2 / .. - Ol
~ ~ ~__.__+-.,-+-+--++--+-+-----41-.. -+-+-~~---10~ . ~s
~ . . !
.,_-+--.-.-+-+--.,_-+-'"'"M'-+-~-+--t-.~.-+-.~. -+--+--t---t--t-----t~E-t \ Q• al \
.cl
p,, " ,) • ' ~
'tf .
~-..:.
~----+-;-+--+--f-~--+-f-+-f+,1,-+' ""\-~-+---+---+--+---+---I$
. \... • ;• ) t. F 0 ~~--+-~--~--~~j~/-++-~8~-+--+---+--+-----t~ J Add• d r: oa- 11--i // :t 0
'l---+--+---+-.. --+----1-+.v~~-+----+-i,~..-+--~-+----t---t N
t---+--+---+--+----+-.,,__/1----+--+---t--1--~--+---+--t--...-t ~ .? ; .. L
.__ ....... ____ ..__ ....... __ , .• -. ~ •. '"i. r,ri_~-~-'--....L-.....L..~.__..__.....,._.....1..__,,,.,...i..,;--__,o
SED001ll'ATION s·runy Using Ploccul.at,.ng fgerits ·
FIGURE 15
Ill Pree
il: preo fJ PCCt
Si 11.,-t.,,
: i v•
t ~ 1'11 ;.;
ID ! a 11; :s :e, -~ ""' ! I 1l Q)
"t i 6
~ ., I I .... "" ::E: \\ '1 xe
..
a ... , ~,"t 10f' s llSlX ndec se.: I.I-~ &,,. l 1erm int J .2 J .o c.s o.o ( .4 - ,..,, r r.
I I I
IJ I
I ,, 119d
L9ed Ii.ant
i ad
•, stre nrlll or tre:.. /I ,
I I&
--ate or p.dcl: ~g " ' . . ,,
iinf! no ocuJ mt . / J
~-I
I . ~ / J
~El K f I I I I/
I I ) I 1•
I I •
J I I I I
I I I ~.,. I ,J .. , . -
SEDD1:~.NTA1'10N STUDY Using FloecuJ.i.,.tiJlg Agents
I I
I
-4
I i
( .2 C ,...
T
/ I
0 N
0
• ii
FIGURE 16
Sediment settled in F,oent ot original load. , nn C"l s n ~ ~ ;: n '~ J n
' "
.A "" ..'. ... ~ .. l 'i . .
\ ,., ..
' I \ 'S \ ~ IU'
' ' . I ' \ . .
\l,' . 1W I I ~ - \.
' ~I l. '
1:a'· ~ II
;· .... \ ... - l I -\ t-
' \ I .. \ . ' ~ \
l. . Ii.. I
~ ' Yd . \ ~
\ \ . \ .\
\ l L
' \ ..,. ~
I ,P. ' \
\" )J ' ",\ \
\ i=i t "'" --4' fl)~ • , .... \
~ Y!- "' I
' \
I \ \ ., ' ~
... \ - . - \· \ ..... ~
It~ , . I\.. - ... • . .. ·, "'
~ ""'\\· N 0 .....
' .... r--.... 1 ... 1, ..... ~
... ""-' ' :-,......._ r---.__ , .. - i--....... .... -- i-....._
,., .... .. r,t- .
.. 0
SEDDl:111'.l'fIONSTUDY ... Using Floocul.ating A.gents
FIGURE 17
Amount of suspendPi scd:hnent, in percent' 0.70 a.tin
St ren U1 c r ·!;i ii O!''.''.:! ;ed
., G
1· !I ; i ~ ~ c.ii': ~ -'11 ii ~·-- i\J ri ~ ,,
I
I I I I
I ' I I
I I
/ .
I I . ,
I I I .J. ...I. .( , r1 -
\ ,~/ II 'I
I j
/ '\ , , \ ~ I
' ..I. ... -
:~ ... ) - , . , .. ~,, Q ,n ··.·. ,,
..
--
., .. , ,~ .
,/ ,/ I
\ " ~ I, \ ,,
. ,· \ e.-1.t1· ·mt . I/
.,
' ,, ' .
1fj .) ' 1,, : V' ,.,,
. , I V I I ,• ./ I . "
I , ./fr I I
I . / / j
i/~ ';ti"', IU
J Q -~ s::11
I a, -~
V. I / g~i "' --~ l!! / ~~
J-
/" X
/ /~ Flo t,O\ll int' --"
..
I I I -
SEDlMEt-.TATION 'STUDY Using Flocculat,i~ A.gents
.
J I
I
• 0. , (i
~k ' j
····Sw --
C
t1 (!)
-t.:t ('f'\
j • g 0 ~
-~ ~
! ~l E-4
';.J E-t
~ !• 0
N
,. -... ..
0
F'IG:UftE' 18 ...... - • •4 ...... ~ .. _,._., •• • ., ... '·"" ..... ~ ·;,-....... ... .. ;:•• ,r •· .•
J\.mount of suspel',lda-1 aodinrmt, in peroont
o.30 · . . . 0-20 o , n
- . ,,~...:.-,. . ... -., ... ,. . . i , .. - ..
.cl
~ i rit
11
I
!l---+--+---+---+-:-1--r__.t---+----+----t-~--i ~ I
,.:, -~ "1 .
~ '" .;i ~ ,.:g ·~ ....
~ 0
lll
~ g "i ()
i ~-:.... '.;J -~ ~
Ill
I • I :
.J _, : · . '
Cl)
1 '.I
I. ' . '7 .l
! -..:!' • 0 & ~ ,!f ti
8 .. J ~ ri _e-. ii;!
i
l. l!
SZDil·t::.'ffi\'!IOll ~'TUDI _. t1~1ll(; F1:oc~tine 'lgents
•. , '• • . , ., •. : • , • ·.·,: 1 . ;i .. , ., 1 ~ : - -. •
FIGURE 19
Amount of suspended :.tedimo~t, iu .percent c.ao 0.10 o.60 0.50 0.40 0~30 0.20 0.10
~ ~, ,,/, ,./ '11
.. ., .
.. : I•
: ; ..
!J -· -'*
1~ 0,
g• ~ .I r !7 . C mj I lh /2_
,, • I I) ... f ~ ~
~ ~-·; .! ) ... --
t~ ~.5 J '., . . A . ~- .
Ill~ 1 ~)( I . ,. J. .1 .. . ... r, ,1
.. / ,
_J . I• .. • '?," . \ !tot cad rlo" M,1<> --:t /,
, /" \. ../. ,./
/: "' 1!'.J - /
~-if"'
. .J
:/' ,,
/" ;-""'~ -·~ -, .. V
.... L1 1·J /
; ·1, . " I \" I , I itar tad ~oc bu:Li o.t
" ..
. ' ' I . ' . ;A . .... -. . .., ..
I J 11 I I V
ill ' '..,/ rr, ·r ' )'1 .' .
I// I / J
~,..' -~ -
~ I , 'I~ i ..
"
SEDIMElf.l'ATION STUDY Using Flocoule. ting Agents
,..,
0 ~
§
-~
-co
.. ~
' -D
0 in
-..:,,
-tr\
-N
,_ In
'-
Interior - Reclamation - Denver, Colo.
