16-Civ-B5 Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment · Undated paper
Question 2 of 5: pH and disinfection; municipal flow projection
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
Notes on this paper
Paper format and reference texts
Paper format. National Examination, May 2019 —
16-Civ-B5 Water Supply and Wastewater Engineering. Three hours;
closed book with one aid sheet written on both sides; an approved Casio or
Sharp calculator is permitted. Question 1 is compulsory and candidates
attempt any three of Questions 2 to 5, so 100 marks are on offer from a
125-mark set. Marks are shown at the end of each question, and the paper
states that clarity and organisation of answers are important. Because the
set is a study resource rather than a sitting, all five questions
are solved here.
Crittenden et al., MWH's Water Treatment: Principles and
Design, 3rd ed. — coagulation, flocculation, filtration,
disinfection chemistry.
Davis & Cornwell, Introduction to Environmental Engineering,
5th ed. — population equivalent, peaking factors, distribution
systems, sewer hydraulics.
Mihelcic & Zimmerman, Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals,
Sustainability, Design, 3rd ed. — mass balances and effluent
loading.
APHA / AWWA / WEF, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater — indicator-organism enumeration, residual chlorine.
Health Canada, Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality
(GCDWQ); CCME, Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines — the
Canadian regulatory frame used throughout.
Check: page 1 of the paper carries the header 16-Civ-B5-May 2019 - Page 1 of 3 and the title NATIONAL EXAMINATION, MAY 2019, so this is the May 2019 sitting. Where the exam says "make suitable assumptions", every assumed value is stated explicitly at the point of use.
Question 2: pH and disinfection; municipal flow projection (25 marks)
Given. Part (a): a free-chlorine residual in a water whose
pH is the operating variable, at 20 °C. Part (b): population
$P = 5\,000$; average daily water demand $q = 450$ L per capita per day; all
other quantities to be assumed and stated.
Find. (a) The chemistry by which pH governs the germicidal
strength of a free chlorine residual, and its practical consequence for
operating dose; (b) the average and the peak wastewater flow.
Part (a) — Approach. Write the two reactions chlorine
undergoes in water, identify which product does the disinfecting, evaluate the
acid–base equilibrium across the operating pH range, and convert the
speciation into the quantity an operator actually controls, namely $CT$.
Part (a) — hydrolysis puts chlorine into the water as
hypochlorous acid. Gaseous chlorine hydrolyses essentially completely
above pH 3:
$$\text{Cl}_2+\text{H}_2\text{O}\rightarrow\text{HOCl}+\text{H}^{+}
+\text{Cl}^{-}$$
and sodium hypochlorite arrives at the same place from the other side,
$\text{NaOCl}+\text{H}_2\text{O}\rightarrow\text{HOCl}+\text{Na}^{+}
+\text{OH}^{-}$. Note already that gas chlorine depresses pH while
hypochlorite raises it, so the choice of chemical is itself a pH
decision in a poorly buffered water.
The acid–base equilibrium is the whole answer.
Hypochlorous acid is weak and dissociates to the hypochlorite ion:
$$\text{HOCl}\rightleftharpoons\text{H}^{+}+\text{OCl}^{-},\qquad
K_a=\frac{[\text{H}^{+}][\text{OCl}^{-}]}{[\text{HOCl}]},\qquad
\mathrm{p}K_a=7.54\ \text{at}\ 20\,{}^{\circ}\text{C}$$
Both species together are the free available chlorine residual, but
they are not equally effective: the neutral HOCl molecule crosses the cell
membrane, whereas the negatively charged OCl$^{-}$ ion is repelled by the
negatively charged cell wall and is roughly 80 times weaker. Rearranging,
$$\alpha_{\text{HOCl}}=\frac{[\text{HOCl}]}{[\text{HOCl}]+[\text{OCl}^{-}]}
=\frac{1}{1+10^{\,\mathrm{pH}-\mathrm{p}K_a}}$$
Evaluate the speciation across the operating range.
Substituting pH values into the expression above gives the germicidal share of
the residual:
$$\alpha_{\text{HOCl}}(7.0)=\frac{1}{1+10^{-0.54}}=\frac{1}{1.2884}
=0.7762$$
and, repeating,
$$\boxed{\alpha_{\text{HOCl}}=97.2,\ 77.6,\ 52.3,\ 25.7,\ 3.4\ \text{per cent
at pH}\ 6.0,\ 7.0,\ 7.5,\ 8.0,\ 9.0}$$
A drift of one pH unit from 7 to 8 therefore destroys two-thirds of the active
species even though the measured total residual has not moved.
Free-chlorine speciation against pH at 20 °C (pKa = 7.54). The germicidal species HOCl collapses from 97 per cent at pH 6 to 3 per cent at pH 9.
Convert speciation into required contact time. Weighting
the two species at an 80:1 potency ratio gives a germicidal-equivalent factor
$\Phi=\alpha+(1-\alpha)/80$, and holding the kill constant means holding
$\Phi\,CT$ constant:
$$\frac{CT_{\mathrm{pH}\,8.0}}{CT_{\mathrm{pH}\,7.0}}
=\frac{\Phi(7.0)}{\Phi(8.0)}=\frac{0.7790}{0.2667}=\boxed{2.92}$$
So the same log-inactivation at pH 8.0 needs nearly three times the residual,
three times the contact tank, or some combination of the two. This is the
number that matters operationally, and it is slightly smaller than the raw
HOCl ratio of 3.01 precisely because OCl$^{-}$ is weak rather than inert.
Consequences worth stating. Temperature moves
p$K_a$ (7.54 at 20 °C, about 7.75 at 5 °C), so cold Canadian water
actually holds slightly more HOCl at a given pH, partly offsetting the
slower kinetics. A lime-softened water leaving at pH 10 has almost no germicidal
capacity in its free residual and must be recarbonated before the contact tank,
not after. Conversely, raising pH to about 8.3 for lead and copper corrosion
control — now common practice in Canada — buys distribution-system
benefits at a real disinfection cost that has to be paid back in $CT$.
A chloraminating plant runs the argument in reverse, deliberately trading
germicidal power for residual stability and lower THM formation.
Part (b) — Approach. Convert per-capita water demand
to an average daily wastewater flow through a stated return factor, apply the
Harmon peaking factor to get peak dry-weather flow, add a stated extraneous
allowance for infiltration and inflow, and check the low end with the Babbitt
minimum factor.
Check: the question says "make suitable assumptions". Three are made and each is stated where it is used — a wastewater return factor of 0.80 of water demand, an infiltration and inflow allowance of 90 L per capita per day at peak, and the Harmon relation for the peaking factor. A return factor of 0.75 to 0.85 and an I/I allowance of 45 to 135 L per capita per day are both defensible; the average flow moves in direct proportion to the first, and only the wet-weather design flow moves with the second.
Part (b) — average daily water demand.
$$Q_{\text{water}}=\frac{P\,q}{1000}=\frac{5000\times 450}{1000}
=2250\ \text{m}^3/\text{d}$$
Convert to average daily wastewater flow. Not all water
supplied reaches the sewer: lawn watering, car washing, leakage and process
losses are consumed. Taking a return factor $f_r=0.80$,
$$Q_{\text{avg}}=f_r\,Q_{\text{water}}=0.80\times 2250
=\boxed{1800\ \text{m}^3/\text{d}\ (20.8\ \text{L/s})}$$
Peaking factor and peak dry-weather flow. With
$P=5$ thousand, the Harmon factor evaluated in Question 1 is 3.245, so
$$Q_{\text{peak,DWF}}=\mathrm{PF}\times Q_{\text{avg}}=3.245\times 1800
=\boxed{5841\ \text{m}^3/\text{d}\ (67.6\ \text{L/s})}$$
Add the extraneous flow the pipe must also carry.
Sanitary sewers leak inward. Taking a peak infiltration and inflow allowance of
90 L per capita per day,
$$Q_{\text{I/I}}=\frac{5000\times 90}{1000}=450\ \text{m}^3/\text{d},
\qquad Q_{\text{design}}=5841+450
=\boxed{6291\ \text{m}^3/\text{d}\ (72.8\ \text{L/s})}$$
This, not the sanitary peak, is the flow the collection system is sized on.
Check the low end, because velocity governs there. The
Babbitt minimum-flow relation gives
$$\frac{Q_{\min}}{Q_{\text{avg}}}=0.2\,P^{0.2}=0.2\times 5^{0.2}=0.276,
\qquad Q_{\min}=0.276\times 1800=497\ \text{m}^3/\text{d}\ (5.8\ \text{L/s})$$
The design flow is therefore 12.7 times the minimum. A sewer sized on 72.8 L/s
runs at a small fraction of its depth at 5.8 L/s, which is precisely the
condition in which solids deposit — hence the rule that the grade must
still deliver about 0.6 m/s, or a boundary shear of roughly 1.5 Pa, at minimum
flow.
Design flow ladder for the 5 000-person town. The sewer is sized on the top bar and checked for self-cleansing on the bottom one; a 12.7-fold spread separates them.
Final results
Quantity
Value
(a) HOCl share of the free residual, pH 6 / 7 / 7.5 / 8 / 9
97.2 / 77.6 / 52.3 / 25.7 / 3.4 per cent
(a) $CT$ multiplier for a pH drift from 7.0 to 8.0