laboratory results of laundry wastewater treatment - …infohouse.p2ric.org/ref/12/11791.pdf ·...

I

(23

c c3 E

n L,

FESA-RT-2917

F-- b .# r7 LABORATORY RESilLTS OF I AUNDRi K i r S T E W k l E K TREATMENT <

Moun i r Bctros Walter C. @est US Army Facilities Fngineering Support A q e n c . ~ Research and Technology Division Fort Yelvoir, V A 22060

April 1977

c 1 > Final R c , \ o r t CL

Is ! I

APPROVED FOR P U B L I C R E L E A S E : DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED. , ! LJJ

z d c

I

REPORTDOCUMENTATION PAGE R E P O R T HUM- 2 GOVT ACCESSION NO

Y' /+p ' - ; { 5/\i-ESA-RT-Z,Ol!

_ - -

READ MSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COHPLETKNG FORM

3 R E C I P I E N T ' S C A T A L O G HUMBER

R W Q U T NUMBER i Laboratory Resul ts of Laundry Wastewater Trea tnient t -. 1

1 8 CO T R A C T O R G R h M T NUMBER(*) ' AUTI4OR(.)

Mounir/Botros Mal t e r /Bes t

A R E A d WORK U N I T N U M B E R S PERFORMING ORGANIZATION HLitE 4WD A D O R E S 5

I Research and Technology Division USA F a c i l i t i e s Engineerinq Support Agency

r

Water, water recyc le , water reuse , laundry water recovery.

____ 20 AMTRACT m k u m ~ ~ ~ . w r y si& If nrmq rrd t d m l l h bY block n m b u )

This r epor t r e l a t e s the r e s u l t s of the chemical t reatment of laundry wastewater i n the l ab , using d i f f e r e n t chaliical coagulat ion and f locc.ulat ion compounds i . e . , i r o n , aluminum and lime used sepa ra t e ly and toge ther . procedure using i ron was discussed i n d c t a i l . processes were t e s t e d . chemical t reatment i s by using jus t only one chemical coagulat ion compound ( A l u m i n u m S u l f a t e ) with po lye lec t ro ly t e s a s a f loccu la t ion a i d (WT-2700) t o lower the cos t and s impl i fy the design o f the t reatment p l a n t .

U N C L A S S I F I E D

The f loccu la t ion Also lime o r lime and aluminum

F ina l ly the r e p o r t suggests t h a t the bes t way f o r

The optimum - , :z"! 1413 mtnom or t wov c i t 15 O ~ ~ ~ L L T L

c S L C K C - I C A T I O W OF TU15 P A C E I- 1J.t. In1.r.d)

1. Continued. ! losage of aluminum sulfate was estimated, and t h ? bezt ccndTti3r: o f the b t ) f i c t i ? : - !specially for pt! and temperature of the soluticn were f i x e d A!:;.: ~ Z S ~ I I ( ! P S :r,e iltrdtion process, the ideal sand f i l t e r anu t h e desic;r!irlg o i t nc w d i a Led. :he using cf polymers as f i l t r a t ion a ids . :he i y p r c r f i : t .e . ~ ! . : . + , , t d ~ . ~ s w I liscussed. The g r a v i t y and pressure f i l t e r s were c ~ r i C ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 . ::n r .~;u t ; ~ j t :b,:: effort indicate t h a t the recycling of laundry wasteir2tcr .?t Lr-. , , j ? > ! , ? j ? t . 5 r i c i s nct cost effective a t the present t ine.

\ ?

\,

TABLE OF CONTENTS -- SECT1 ON

PART 1 Chemical Coagulation and Flocculat ion

I

PAGE NO. -__

1 .

2

3.

4 .

5 .

6 .

-, 1 .

8 .

9 .

10

l ron Coagulation

Tes ts in the Chemical Lab by Using FeC13

Calcula t ion o f Solile Tests and Conclusion

A i umi n u n Coagulation

Tests i n the Chemical Lab by Using A12(S04)3

1

3

9

4

a 23 Calcu la t ion of Some Tests a o J Conclusion

Lime Cuagulation 2 7

Tests in the Chemical Lab by Using Combination between Aluminwn S u l f a t e ar,d Lime CaO

Calculat ion o f Some Tests and Conclusions

Conc 1 us i on

1 1 . Another t e s t by Using A l ~ ( 1 0 4 ) ~

12. The Ef fec t of the Temperature on the Coagulation

13. Final Conclusion

PART 2 F i l t r a t i o n

1 . P a r t i c l e s D i s t r ibu t ion

2 . The Advantage of the Pressure F i l t e r

3 . The Grs;i ty F i l t e r I . - 4 . The Pressure F i l t e r

5 . The Head Loss

27

29

30

22

34

36

36

4 3

-- --y 45 46

d

i 1 1

'I I .I

15

7 l?

26

Betwccn the Concontt*ation 0; Al,(jG), addinii t o the WdstEhatcr and T u r b i d i t y ( d d s t c w a h r h igh F?:

Setween the Concentration Cf fil;(SG4j-. ad(t;ng t o the Wsstwater and Turbidity (Lzrttwatei :obi oh!

d

31 i3etwee;i the Concen%r6tioc GI L i i w (CeC) 2CLy-i9 ;:c the i idstewa tc and the t'drGncSs

Between the Concentraticn cf c\12(CC4), 2 ' i s : b - o q t:) the Wastewater and pH

Between t

32

35 d i ty and d i f f e r e n t degree. C m t i g r ade

, C r ' + ,

i3ed Depth And Part ic le D i s t r i b u t i o n 39

E f f e c t s o f Pplymers as F i l t r b t i u n Aids 42

45

46

Cvavi t y F i 1 ter

Pressure Filter

4

4

4 7 5 A Typical !!ertical Pressure F i l tm- I ! 5 Herd Loss bistribution i n mixed media tiltor

i i

TASLES

T i t l e Page

I ron Coagulat ion (Tes No. 1 - No. 7 ) 11 I r o n Coagulat ion ( T e s t No. 8 - No. 1 1 ) 1 2 Aluminum Coagulat ion (Test No. 1 - No. 3 ) 23

Aluminum Coagulat ion (Test No. 6 No. 8 ) 25

I l l u s t r a t i o n o f Varying Media Des Variotls Types o f Floc Removal

iii

gn f o r 40

I

PART 1

CHEMICAL COAGULATION AND FLOCCULATIOf i

I r o n Compounds as Phosphorus P r e c i p i t a n t b o t h fer i -ot ts (Fez') and

f e r r i c (Fe") i o n s can be used i n t h e p r e c i p i t a t i o n o f phosphorus w i t h

Fe3+ a r e a c t i o n can be w r i t t e n s i m i l a r t o t h a t shown e a r l i e r f o r p r e c i p -

i t a t i o n o f aluminum phosphate. A !:l mole r a t i o o f Fe:P04 r e s u l t s . S ince

t h e m o l e c u l a r w e i g h t o f i r o n i s 55.85; t h e we igh t r a t i G of Fe:F i s 1 . 8 : l .

J u s t as i n t h e cace o f aiuminum a l a r g e r amount o f i r o n i s r e q u i r e d i n

a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n s t h a n t h e c h e m i s t r y o f t h e r e a c t i o n p r e d i c t s . Wi th

Fez' t h e s i t u a t i o n i s more c o m p l i c a t e d and n o t f u l l y ucders tood .

phosphate can be forrred. The mole r a t i o o f Fe:P04 Hou ld be 3:2 .

Exper imen ta l r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e , however, t h a t when Fe2+ i s used; t h e

mole r a t i o o f Fe:P w i l l be e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same as when Fe3+ i s used.

Fe r rous

A number o f i r o n s a l t s a r e a v a i l a b l e f o r use i n phosphorus p r e c i p -

i t a t i o n . These i n c l u d e f e r r o u s s u l f a t e , f e r r i c s u l f a t e , f e r r i c c h l o r i d e ,

and p i c k l e l i q u o r . A l l w i l l l o w e r t h e pH o f wastewater becau5e of

n e u t r a l i z a t i o n o f a : k a l i n i t y . P i c k l e l i q u o r c o n t a i n s s u b s t a n t i a l amounts

of f r e e s u l f u r i c a c i d o r h y d r o c h l q r i c a c i d .

I r o n s a l t s a r e most e f f e c t i v e f o r phosphorus removal d t c e r t a i r ! pH

T h i s i s a r u n r e a l - va lues .

i s t i c a l l y l o w pH, n o t a t t a i n e d i n most wastewaters. S i g n i f i c a n t removal

o f phosphorus can be a t t a i n e d a t h i g h e r pH.

abcu t 8 and good phosphorus removal can be o b t a i n e d between 7 and 8 .

For Fe3+ t h e optimum pY range i s 4.5 t o 5.0.

f o r Fez+ t h e optimum pH i s

The a c i d i t y of f e r r o s s a l t s , and e s p e c i a l l y p i c k l e l i q u o r , n e c e s s i t a t e s

a d d i t i o n o f l i m e o r sodium h y d r o x i d e f o r good r e s u l t s .

i s a e r a t e d f o l l o w i n g Fez+ a d d i t i o n , t h e use o f a base may n o t be necessa ry .

Where t h e wa te r

1

I

forn. C. cryst

crystal l i n e fo rm b e i

s 35-9ri lb!ft*3. The t y ~ i

ic chloride and weighs 11

stcwater- cmgu;i!tirJn, a srriail

red t o necltral

.-

b r rls? i i i advdncec! w + s t

, a s i i l t p r .:i

.a:? inc

9h5

c.11

7 .L -

;lrm un t

i z c the

.ewa ter

d s , 3r

o r c!L.!igE con en t o f cei-%in wa;tcwater;, l i r e or

duce a f ine o r l i g h t f l o c w h i c h

roSably i s z [,olyrner which, w h e ?

:]sed ;i an a i d t locculztion, w i l l ;)roduse d rapidly

f polymer a + :lie r i q l r t p o i n t in

?.rea trllent. c3 Is o f bo tq CJrbidity and p h o ; p h o r u s .

fin!nary screening, b t i t pldnt :;cdle

.L(

l f i c instructions m y be ob td

the following steps are necessd

wder by means o f a funnel type

5 f u r

i fled

:ry.

asp i r a to r ,

ow

s t i r r i n g until a l l o f the polymer i s in solution.

Test i n the Chemical Lab by Using FeC13

NOTE: Every t e s t I n the lab was repeated several times and the fiaures

in the t e s t a r e the average figures.

Reagent

1 . Ferric Chloride

FeC13 6H20

20 gm in one l i t e r water

The concentration 20,000 ppm/l

every 1 m l o f the solution = 20 P M

2. Sodium hydrox,de

NaOH

20 gm i n one l i t e r water

the concentration 20,000 ppm/l

every 1 ml o f the solution = 20 ppm

polelectrolyte o r polymer ( W 2700)

0.1 gm i n one l i t e r water

the concentration 100 ppm/l

every 1 ml o f the solution

Apparatus

1. Turbidimeter

2. ph meter

3.

TEST NO. 1

sample o f the laundry wastewater 125 ml

pH o f the sample 10.75

3

I

1 L . 5 171 Fer! ~ ?onc 20,000 ppm

ptJ o f the water 3.75

c 2 .5 ml Nagti conc 20,000 pprn

oH o f the water 7.1

i n m l k't 2700 conc.10G ppm l i g h t f l c r .

TEST No. 2

Sanple o f %he laundry wastewater i i 5 nl

DH o f the sample 13.5 PH

18.5 ml FeCl m n c 22,000 3

p s f t h t . k23ter- 3.75

a d d i n g - -___ 3.25 ml NaOH conc 20,000 P P I I ,

pH o f the water 7 . 3 5

by adding ---. - -

10 WT 2700 conc 100 ppni very gGod f l o c .

J u l y 18, 1975

T E S T No. 3_

sample o f the laundry wastewater I25 ml pH o f the sample 15.25

by a d d i n g ---

14 ml FeC13 conc 20,000 ppm

pH o f the water 4.5

1.5 m l NaOH conc 20,000 ppm


4

by a d d i n g

10 m l WT-2700 colic 100 ppm l i g h t f l o c .

TEST No. 4

Sample o f the laundry Nastewater 125 ml --


by a d d i n g ~-

1 5 ml FeCl conc. 20,000 ppm


by adding

2 .5 ml NaOH conc 20,000 ppm

pH o f t h e water 7.50

by a d d i n g

10 ml WT 2700 conc 100 ppm l i g h t f l o c

TEST No. 5

Sample of the laundry wastewater 125 ml


by a d d i n g

13 ml FeCI3 conc 20,000 ppm

pH of the water 6

by adding - ~ -


pti o f the water 7.5

by adding

10 ml WT 2700 100 ppm

bad f l o c .

5

', ?

I ,

. .

D r l c f the s a m p l e 13.15

by a t j d i n g

19 ml FeCl? c t n c 20,COO ppm

ptl o f thc . water 3.59

.--

by ciddinq --d.

4.25 ml NaOli conc 20,300 ppr;

pt i of the water 7 . 5

10 rr.i WT 2'00 c o n c 13G pprn

excel l e n t f i s c .

TEST No. 7

Sainple o f the l a u n d r y w a s t e w a t e v ? 2 5 l~ll

DK 13.2

by rbdding

16 ml FeCI3 conc 20,000

~ t ' o f the vater 4 ' by adding -__

3.25 m l NaOH conc 20,000 ppn

PH of the water 7.8 !)) E d d i n g

10 ml WT 2700 c o n c 100 ppm

good f l o c

-----

6

I

TEST No. 8

I

Sample o f t h e laundry wastewater 125 ml

p! o f t h e sample 13.35

by adding

14.3 ml FeC13 conc 20,000 ppm

pH o f t h e water 6

by adding

1.15 ml NdOH conc 20,000 ppm


by a d d i n g

1 2 ml WT 2700 conc 100 ppm

TEST No. ,9


pH of t h e sample 13.35

by adding

14,,6 m l FeC13 conc 20,000 ppm

IJH o f the water 4.9

by adding


pH of t h e water 7.5

by a d d i n g

1 2 m l WT 2700 conc 100 ppm

TE5T No. 10

Sample o f t h e laundry wastewater 125 ml I


7

1 5 . 4 5 ml FcC13 conc 20,000 ppm

PI? o f the water 3.9;

t y a d d i n g

I

ptl o f t h t . water 7.5

!:y a d d i n g c-__

12 rlil WT 2700 cotic 100 ppm T. ( - 1t.j I tio. -. 1-l ---

S(iniple of the laundry wastewater 125 m l

pH of t h e sample 13.3

16 r;l FeC13 ccnc 20,000 ppm

pH Jf the water 3 . 8

by a d d i n g -. -

2 . 6 ml NaO3 conc 20,OOG ppm

p l i o f t h e water 7.8

!>/ addir7c; --_

1 2 m i NT 2700 100 ppm

8

I

Calculation

TEST No. 8 -- 14.3 x 20 = 286 ppm

286 x 8 = 2288 ppm/liter FcC13

1.15 x 20 = 23

23 x 8 = 184 ppm/liter NaOH

TEST No. 9

14.6 x 20 = 292 ppm

292 x 8 = 2336 ppm/liter FeC13

1.65 x 20 = 33 ppm


TEST No. 10

15.45 x 20 = 309 ppm


2.55 x 20 = 51 ppm


TEST No. 11

16 x 20 = 320 ppm


9

1 ' - --

t

0

N

0

0

cr In 0

u3 In

N

0

0

Q

N

0

2

-

cl-

0

b-

+.' c

W

W u x

W

- v' 0

Y-

V 0 0

cn

7

7

7

I--

2 a, >

co a

0

CD u3

0

N

LD

0

d 0

m

0

u3 Q

, N

0

7

0

I--

I

I

N

w

--I

Q

I- m

In

h

0

N

e

cn c

3

m

P

In

h

Q,

d

N

- d Io N Io m m N % m c m

In

h

m

h

N

h

d

N

m

c1

P

0

#--

a

h

h

cu

w e

P

0

u3 In

1-U

m

m

-

12

I

---+---

C

UI

m

I

v12;:,?:3 above 6 .3 , the ph3sphj.te fc r ,?~ . i l ? . : ( . . I ; . I I ~ ~ S I . i . ; e i iher by i nco rpora t ion

i n d complex wi th aluminum o r by at!sry-;:ior; c11 ? , I ~ J I : I ; ~ I , J I T I hydroxide f l o c .

I:' tlir: hydro l yz ing react lon d i d riot c c r ~ y ~ e t c w: t h the p h o s p h a t e p r e c i p i t a t i o n

r.i?E,:tjon, the removal o f phosphorous woul? h: s :oichiornetr ic , w i t h 0.87 ? b

CJ' al i t r+inum r e q u i r e d f o r each pound c! r:hosrt::>t I n p r i ~ c t i c e , the

~ i l u f i , i ~ i u m t o phosphorus r a t i o i s on t k ot.;lCr 2 - i . depending on the f i n a l

phosphorus c o r c e n t r n t i o n desir2d and * n o ~ . h j

tIli' a a r t i c u l a r was tewater invol vcd.

; ' I j+-ac te r i s t ics o f

?,

\o

In

o\

CO h

I

I

I I

1 I

I --------I

. Ci

SV 1

/31i SIlX

OH

dSOIId

15

8

I

A1 uminum Compounds a s Phosphorus Precipi tants

Alurjnum ions can combine w i t h phosphate ions t o form aluminum 3-

phosphate as follows: A13+ + PO4 * A1P04. - The above equation indicates t h a t the mole r a t i o for A1=P04 i s

1 = 1 . Inasmuch a s the mol'e r a t i o of P = PO4 i s a lso 1 = 1 , the

mole r a t i o fo r A1 = P I s 1 = 1 o r A1 = 7 when both aluminum and

phosphorus a re expressed i n terms of gram-moles o r lb-moles. On

a weight , rather than a mole basis, this means t h a t 27 l b s of A 1 will

react w i t h 95 l b of PO4 t o form 122 lb of A1 PO4.

( 1 1b-mole) of PO4 contains 31 lbs ( 1 15 mole) of P the weight re1at:onship

T

Since each 95 lbs

. between A1 and P i s 27 l b of A 1 t o 31 l b lbs of P cr 0.87 f o r t n i s reaction.

The principal source of aluninum fo r use i n phosphorus precipitation

i s "alum" a hydrated aluminum s u l f a t e , having the approximate formula

A I 2 (S04)3 14 H20 (molecular weight of 594).

The chemical which is a l s o known as a " f i l t e r alum" o r "paper maker's

alum" average about 17% soluble aluminum expressed as A1203 or about

9.1% expressed a s A l .

A I 2 (S04)3 14 H20 + 2P043- - 2ALP04 + 3 S04'- + 14 H20. Its reaction w i t h PO4 may be written as follows: The su l fa te remains i n solution as S04*'. T h e above reaction

indicates t h a t 1 lb-mole of alum (594 l b ) will react w i t h 2 lb-mole

(190 lb ) of PW3' containing 62 l b phosphorus to form 2 l b moles (244

l b ) of AlP04.

9.6:7,

der ived from the A l = P mole r a t i o a s follows:

The weight r a t i o of alum t o Ghosphorus i s , therefore

The alum requirement per pound o f phosphorus may a l s o be

Mole r a t i o AI :P=l : l

A l u m contains 9.1% A l .

9.6 lb .

therefore weight r a t i o A 1 : P = 27:31=0.87=1

Therefore, alum required per l b of P = 0.87 = K-0771

16

3

stumn and Morgan ( 3 ) s t a t e t h a t the so lub

dependent and v a r i e s as fo l l ows :

PH Approxi l~la t e

5

6

7

l i t y of A l P 0 4 i s pti

s o l u b i l i t y (mg/ l )

0.03

0.01 (minimum s o l u b i l i t y )

0.30

The optimum pH f o r removal o f phosphorus probably l i e s i n the range

. of 5.5 t c j 6.5, a l though some removal occurs above pH 6.5. , Add i t i on o f alum w i l l lwer t h e pH o f wastewater because of n e u t r a l i z a t i o n o f a l k a l i n i t y

and re lease o f carbon d iox ide .

p r i n c i p a l l y on the a l k a l i n i t y o f t h e wastewater.

the l e s s i s t h e reduc t i on i n pH f o r a g iven alum dosage.

The e x t e n t o f pH reduc t i on w i l l depend

The h igher the a l k a l i n i t y ,

Most wastewaters

con ta in s u f f i c i e n t a l k a l i n i t y so t h a t even l a r g e alum dosages w i l l n o t

lower t h e pH below about 6.0 t o 6.5. I n except iona l cases o f low

wastewater a l k a l i n i t y , pH reduc t i on may be so grea t t h a t a d d i t i o n o f

an a l k a l i n e substance, such as sodium hydroxide, soda ash, o r l ime w i l l

be requ i red .

a d d i t i o n o f s u l f u r i c a c i d b u t t h i s complicates the t rea tment process

and i t may be p r e f e r a b l e s imp ly t o use a h ighe r alum dosage.

Adjustment o f t h e pH downward can be accomplished by the

Bench, p i l o t , and f u l l sca le s tud ies have shown t h a t cons iderab ly

h igher than s t o k h i o m e t r i c quan t i t i e s of alum u s u a l l y a re necessary t o

meet optimum phosphorus removal ob jec t i ves . A competing reac t i on ,

respons ib le f o r the pH reduc t i on mentloned above, a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y

accounts f o r t h e excess alum requirement. It occurs as f o l l ows :

A 1 2 (s04)3 14H20 + 6HC03 - 2AL(OH)3 + 6C02 + I4H2O + 3S042. The f o l l o w i n g r a t i o s of alum (9.1% A l ) t o phosphorus a r e be l i eved

I

wdsonably representative fo r alum treatment or nlunic i p a l wastewater ( 4 )

P Reduction --- A 1 : ? A 1 um: P

Requi re3 rlole Ratio We i g h t Ra t i o Wei gh t Ratio

13:l

16: l

2 2 : 1

To achieve 85? P removal frorv a washwater c n n t a i n l n r : 11 mg/l 06 P the>

alutr dosage needed would be (16 ) ( 1 1 ) = 176 mg/l o r 1470 l b / 1 0 6 g a l .

A l u m i s avai lable in e i the r dry o r liquid fcrm. I t i s available i n

dry form as e i the r ground powder, o r lump form i n bags. barre l s , o r

carloads.

l b s / f t 2 a n d i s only s l i gh t ly by groscopic.

cer t a l u m s o l u t i o n a n d i s usually delivered i n minimum loads of 4000

g a l . !t must bc

s t o r e d a n d conveyed i n corrosion r e s i s t an t materials such as rubher

lined s t e e l , f iberglass or s ta in less s t e e l .

75': 1.38: 1 1.2: 1

as:. 1 . 7 2 : l 1 . 5 - 1 9 54 2 . 3 : 1 2 .G: l

. The ground form i s used for dry feeding. I t weighs GO - 75

The liquid form i s a 50 per

The l i q u i d form may be delivergd by r a i l or truck.

18

I

Test i n the Chertiical Lab

Reagents

1 . A l u m i n u m Sulfate Solution

A 1 2 (SO413 * 18 H20

20 gm i n one l i t e r water

the concentration 20,000 ppm/l

every 1 m l of the solution = 20 ppm

2 . Polyelectrolyte or polymer

We used WT-2700 as flocculation aids

0.1 gm in one l i t e r water

The concentration 100 ppm/l

Every 1 nl ~f the s o l u t i o n 0.1 ppm

Apparatus

1 . Turbidimeter

2 . pti meter

NOTE:

TEST No. 1


pH o f the sample 13 .3

Tui*bidity o f the sample 400 FTU

Adding

The figures i n the t e s t are the average figures for several t e s t s .

-

16.5 ml A12 (S04)3 conc 20,GOO ppm

I 2 ml WT-2700 conc 1OU ppm

pH a f t e r treatment 7.5

Turbidity a f t e r treatmerat 7 . 3 l i g h t f locculation.

4

TEST - No, 2

Sample of the laundry waste water 100 ml

,

pH of the sample 1 3 . 3

Turbidity of the sample 400 FTU

adding

1 7 . 2 ml A 1 (504) conc 20,000 ppm

1 2 m l 1JT 2700 conc 100 ppm 2 3

pH a f t e r treatment 7 .2

Turbidity a f t e r treatment 3.8 good flocculation.

TEST No. 3

Sample of the laundry

pH of the sample 1 3 . 3

Turbidity of the samp

hddi ng

wastewater 100 ml

e 400 FTU

18 ml A 1 2 (S04)3 conc 20,000 ppm

1 2 ml WT-2700 conc 100 ppm

pH a f t e r treatment 6.6

Turbidity a f t e r treatment 3.1 very Sood flocculation.

TEST No. 4 - Sample of the laundry wastewater 100 ml

pH of the sample 13

T u r b j di t y o f the sample 420 FTU

Adding

18 ml A 1 2 (S04)3 conc 20,000 ppm

10 ml WT 2700 conc 100 ppm

pH a f t e r t r e a t w n t 7.3 l i g h t f locculation,

20

I

I

,! I

TEST 140. 5

Sample o f the laundry wastewater 100 m l -__.


T u r b i d i ty o f the sample 420' FTU

Adding

20 m l A12 (S04)3 conc 20,000 ppm

10 m l WT 2700 conc 100 ppm

pH a f t e r t rea tment 6 e x c e l l e n t f l o c c u l a t i o n

TEST No. 6

Sample o f t h e laundry wastewater 100 m l

pH o f t he sample 9.5

T u r b i d i t y o f t h e sample 250 FTU

Adding: 1 m l A12 (S04)3 conc 20,000 ppm

5 m l WT 2700 100 ppm

pH a f t e r t rea tment 7

T u r b i d i t y a f t e r t rea tment 1.5 FTU

JEST No. 7

Sample of t h e laundry wastewater 100 m l

pH o f t h e sample 9.5

T u r b i d i t y o f the sample 250 FTU

Adding: 1.5 m l A12 (S04)3 conc 20,000 ppn


pH a f t e r t rea tment 6.5

Turb fd i ty 2.5 FTU

21

TEST No. 8 -

.. - . .

Sample o f the l aundry wastewater 100 m l


Turb id i ty o f t he sample 250 F N

Adding: 2.0 ml A12 (S04)3 conc 20,000 ppm


pH a f t e r t rea tment 6.0

T u r b i d i t y 3 . 5 FTU

22

'9' ' !

, , .

' , ' ',

m

N

fi

N

c

N

7

ln

m

m

c

V 0

u- U 0 0

LI)

c

co m

0

h

N

c

0

Q

.;f m

N

7

N

h

c

m

m

- N

7

m

u3

10

N

e

N

e

~

43 c

m

m

-. m

m

0

z

W

[Y

3

LI)

LL

W

W

m

- 23

a

0

N

sz

. --

r(

B U m 8

I

U4

cP

I W

E

rlrl

dlu

E Ll w 0 X a < . Y

al

i -3

0

xo

a-

h

c rl w

I I I I h

U

rl .E

l rl .n Ll 1 U

YJ E

PI

- -yc

P

0

24

I

U

0

* c, C aJ aJ U X w

e

7

e

c

0

Ill

v- a e

U

C

0

V

V

0

- TI 0 0 a e-- m m h -0

\O

E

%

nN

ni

s ln

U

0

z

W

CT 3

LL

W

LIJ

E

U

W

--I m

2

0

0

m

0

0

N

0

0

e

--

ln

ln

In

li

e--

In 7

lA7

m

ln

Q)

m

m

h

i

4

03

0

z U m PI

l-4

" A

- I

h

b

u 02

da

u

0

C

In

0

c

U

c

C

rl

0 c

N

0

0

d

i

'i

26

3

Lime as a Phosphorus P r e c i p i t a n t

Calcium i o n r e a c t s w i t h phosphate i o n i n the presence o f hydroxy l

i o n t o f o r m hydroxyapat i te . Th is m a t e r i a l has a v a r i a b l e composition,

b u t an approximate equat ion f o r i t s format ion can be w r i t t e n as fo l lows,

assuminq i n t h i s case t h a t the phosphate present i s HPO

3HP04'- +5Ca2+ +40H-q-wCa5(OH) (P04) + 3H20. .The r e a c t i o n i s pH

dependent. The s o l u b i l i t y o f hydroxyapat i te i s so low, however, t h a t

even a t a pH as low as 9.0, a l a r g e f r a c t i o n o f t h e phosphorus can be

* removed. I n l ime t reatment o f wastewater, t h e opera t ing pH may be

2- 4

removal p red ica ted on the a b i l i t y

r a t h e r than on phosphorus

Al though i t i s poss ib

t o o b t a i n good suspended s o l i d s

removal.

e t o c a l c u l a t e an approximate 1 me dose f o r

phosphorus removal, t h i s i s g e n e r a l l y n o t necessary. I n c o n t r a s t t o

i r o n and aluminum s a l t s , the l ime dose i s l a r g e l y determined by o t h e r

r e a c t i o n s t h a t take p lace when pH of wastewater i s ra ised . Only i n

w a t e r s o f very low b icarbonate a l k a l i n i t y would the phosphate pre-

c i p i t a t i o n r e a c t i o n consume a l a r g e f r a c t i o n o f the l i m e added.

Test i n t h e Chemical Lab Using A l p (S04)3 and CaO

Red gent

1 . Aluminum S u l f a t e S o l u t i o n

A12 (S04)3 18 H20

20 gm i n one 1 i t e r water

The concent ra t ion 20,000 ppm/l

Every 1 m l of the s o l u t i o n = 20 ppm

27

I

2 . Cal c i um Oxide Solution

CaO

20 gin I n one l i t e r water

The concentration 20,000 ppm/l

Every 1 m l o f the solution = 20 ppm

3 . Polyelectrolyte o r polymer

We used WT 2700 a s flocculation aids

0.1 gm in one l i t e r water

* T h p concentration 100 ppn/l

Every 1 nl o f the solution 0.1 ppm

NOTE:

TEST No. 1

The figures i n the t e s t are the average figures f o r several t e s t s

-~ Sample of the laundry wastewater 100 m l

Temp 5 2 O C

pH 1 1 . 5

Turbidity 430 FTU

Adding

18 ml CaO 20,000 ppm/liter

3 ml A 1 2 (S04)3 20,000 ppm/ l i t e r

2 ml WT 2700 500 p p m / l i t e r

Results: Turbidty 0.75 FTU

pH 11.4

Hardened 500 ppm

Friday, A u g u s t 1 , 1975

TEST No. 2_

Sample of the laundry wastewater 100 m l

Adding 1 - 1 2 ml CaO 20.000 ppm/l i ter --

28

2 - 2 m l A12(S04)

3- 2 m l WT 2700 500 p p m / l i t e r

20,000 ppm/l i t e r 3

Results: T u r b i d i t y o f t he water a f t e r t rea tment 2.25 FTU

pH 11.25

Hardness 400

lu'e t r i e d t o use l e s s amount of CaO f o r t reatment t o lower the f i g u r e of

t he hardness. The amount o f t he sample c o n s t x t 100 m l laundry waste-

w a t e r and the pH o f the sample 11.7 the temperature o f the sample 25OC

the t u r b i d i t y o f t he sample 300 FTU and we used 1 ppm of WT 2700 s o l u t i o n

I n the sample.

TEST No. 7

5 m l A12(S04)3 20,000 ppm

10 m l CaO 20,000 ppm 200 ppm

pH a f t e r A12(S04)3 11.2 pH a f t e r CaO 11.9

Resul ts: The water a f t e r t reatment: T u r b i d i t y : 12 Hardness: 460 ppm Ca03

TEST No. 2

6 m l Alz(S04)

- 20,000 ppm 3

8 m l CaO 20,000 ppm 160 ppm pH a f t e r A1 (S04)3 10.4 pH a f t e r CaO 12 RESULTS: T6e water a f t e r t rea tment

Turbi d i t y 9.2 Hardness 450

TEST No. 3 -- 8 m l A12 (S04)3

6 m l CaO 20,000 120 ppm

pH a f t e r A12 (S04)3 9.8 ph a f t e r CaO

Resul ts: The water a f t e r t r e a t m n t

T u r b i d i t y 8.00 Hardness 390

20,000 ppm

11.9

29

TEST No. 4

10 m l A12(S04)3 ZC,OOO ppm

2 ml CaO 20,000 ppm 40 ppm

pH a f t e r A12(S04)3 8.2 pH a f t e r CaO 10.5

Results: The water a f t e r treatment

Turbidity Hardness 300 TES- No. 5

1 3 m l A12(S04)3 20,000 ppm

1 m l C a O 4,000 = ppm

Results: The water a f t e r treatment

Turbidity 5.5 Hardness 150 ppm as CaC03 (See F i g . 5)

Concl usi on

1 . By using Ferric chloride i n the treatment process f o r the laundry waste-

water we must use a small amount of base, usually sodium hydroxide t h a t means

we shall use three chemical compounds ( 1 ) Ferric chloride, ( 2 ) Sodium hydroxide,

a n d ( 3 ) WT-2700 as a flocculation a i d . T h a t means the cos t soes up by u s i n g

more chemical compound and complicates the design o f the treatment

p l a n t .

2. By using a l u m i n u m su l f a t e and lime we watched the hardness go up by u s i n g

very small amount of lime (CaO) and also more chemical compound may be

complicates the design of treatment plant.

3 . The best method o f treatment laundry wastewater i s by using aluminum

su l f a t e only t o lower the cost by using one chemical compound and simplifying

the design of treatment plant.

We r u n another t e s t i n the chemical lab by using A l ~ ( S 0 4 ) ~ only:

The amount of the sample constant i n every t e s t = 100 m l wastewater and the

pH of the sample 11.7 and the amount of WT-2700 which added t o the samples

constant 10 m l 100 ppm/l fo r every sample.

30

I

\ :*

I

__ . .

.- .-- ,

31

... __

__

.. . ._. . .___..

---.-..-

-A

,.

. , . ,

3

3

4

n

3

n

N 4

C

VI b

0

VI hl

I TEST No. 1

6 ml A12(S04)3 20,000 ppm

6 x 20 = 120 ppm

1200 ppm/l

The f l o c t o o bad pH = 10.4

TEST No. 2

8 ml A12(S04)3 20,000 ppm

* 160 ppm = 1600 ppm/l

The f l o c bad pH = 8.5

-- TEST No. 3 10 10 ml A12(S04)3 20,000 ppm

= 200 ppm

= 2000 ppm/l

The f l o c medium pH = 7.2

TEST No. 4

13 ml A12(S04)3 20,000 ppm

= 260 ppm

= 2600 ppm/l

pH = 6.0

T u r b i d i t y 7.00 FTU

Hardness = 60 ppm/l

CaC03

Very good f loccula t ion See F i g No. 6

32

u 0 4.-

W

-_

-

a nt

Pa

. - .. i

I

P

The teriiperature e f f e c t o f t h e coagulatdon

The constant amounts are: ( 1 ) The sample o f raw water 100 m l ; ( 2 ) the

amount o f A1 (S04)

and (3 ) t h e amount o f WT-2700 constant 10 ml 20,000 ppm

TEST No. 1

The temperature 25OC

which added t o the wastewater 100 m l cons%ant 260 ppm; 2 3

--

The t u r b i d i t y 0.75 FTU

Very good f 1 occul a ti on

TEST No. 2



TEST No. 3

TP,o tanperature 45OC


TEYT No. 4



TEST No. 5



TEST No. 6


-

The t u r b i d i t y 22 FTU

Bad f l o c c u l a t i o n . (See Fig. No. 7)

.e*. . '..,.E

I

IJ

30

c

ud

I

nw

1 I I c

.- . .-- --

I

.. .

. __ - . -

- - . ..

. -

I I

I 35

I t 4 I

I I

FINAL COIKLUS ION

1 . 3y u s i q A 1 (S04) t o t r e a t laundry wastewater the r e su l t s a re very good in b o t h f l kcu la? inn and c l ea r tu rb id i ty .

2 . Tuesday, 21 October 1975, by u s i n g Aluminum Sulfate w1t.h polyelectrolyte WT-2700. The r e su l t s of this t e s t were excel lent .

The final t e s t was r u n . i n the quartermaster laundry p i lo t plant on

3 . The optimum dosage o f the amount of A 1 (S04) was fixed t o obtain good flocculation and was found the good f?occulition a t range 5.5 pH - 6.5 pH. 4 . the range 25-35C with flow turb id i ty .

The b e s t degree Centigrade t o r u n good treatment of the wastewater i s

36

The ideal sand f i l t e r .

PORI: S I Z E graded Cross section through ideal f i l t e r unif

from coarse to fine from top t o bottom. ' o m l y

I n designing a dual media bed, i t is desirable t o have the coal

( spec i f ic gravity about 1.6) as coarse as i s consistent w i t h solids removal

t o prevent surface blinding b u t have the sand ( spec i f ic gravity about 2 .6)

as f ine as possible t o provide maximum solids removal. However, i f the

sand i s too f ine i n re la t ion t o the coal, the former will actually r i se

above the t o p o f the coal d u r i n g the f i r s t backwash and remain there

when the f i l t e r I s returned to service.

Experience has shown t h a t i t is n o t feasible t o use s i l i c a sand

smaller t h a n about 0.4 mn because smaller sand would require coal small

enough t o resu l t i n unacceptably high head loss a t ra tes above g p m l f t 2 .

38

I .-

The problem of keeping a very f ine medium a t the bottom of the f i l t e r

i s overcome by us ing a t h i r d , very heavy 1 garnet, spec i f ic gravity of

about 4.2, o r ilmenite ( spec i f ic gravity of about 4.5) very f ine material

beneath the coal and sand.

refers more accurately t o the pore space rather than to the media par t ic les

themselves.

Actually, the term Itcoarsc-to-finet' f i l t e r

A typical mixed-media f i l t e r has a pa r t i c l e s i ze gradation which

decreases from about 2 mm a t the top to a b o u t 0.15 mn a t the bottom.

The uniform decrease i n pore space w i t h f i l t e r depth allows the en t i r e

f i l t e r depth t o be u t i l i zed fo r f loc removal and storage.

how par t ic les o f the d i f fe ren t media a re actual11 mixed throughout the

bed. A t a71 points i n the bed there i s some of each component, b u t the

percentage of each changes w l t h bed depth.

efficiency of f i l t r a t i o n i n the direction of the flow.

Figure 1 shows

There i s steadi1.y increasing

39

Removal o f t h e p o o r l y f l o c c u l a t e d s o l i d s normal ly found i n a

t r i c k l i n g f i l t e r e f f l u e n t can be improved by us ing sma l le r media than would

be used f o r removal o f a c t i v a t e d sludge e f f l u e n t suspended so l i ds . P i l o t

t e x t s o f va r ious media designs can be more than j u s t i f i e d by improved

p l a n t performance i n most cases.

Table 1. I l l u s t r a t l o n o f va ry ing media design f o r var ious types o f floc removal.

Size:

One of t h e key f a c t o r s i n c o n s t r u c t i n g a s a t i s f a c t o r y mixed media bed i s

the c a r e f u l c o n t r o l o f t h e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n of each component medium.

Rarely i s t he s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f commercial ly a v a i l a b l e m a t e r i a l s

adequate f o r cons t ruc t i on o f a good mixed media f i l t e r . The comnon

problem i s f a i l u r e t o remove excessive amounts o f f i n e m a t e r i a l s .

f i n e s can be removed by p l a c i n g a m e d i m i n the f i l t e r , backwashing it,

d r a i n i n g the f i l t e r and s k i n i n g the upper surface.

repeated u n t i l f i e l d s ieve analyses i n d i c a t e an adequate p a r t i c l e s i z e

d i s t r i b u t i o n has been obtained.

repeated.

-40 +80 = passing No. 40 and r e t a i n e d on No. 80 U.S. sieves.

These

The procedure i s

A second medium i s added and the procedure

The t h i r d medium i s then added and the e n t i r e procedure repeated.

40

I

Sometimes,

discarded t o achieve the proper par t ic le s i ze dis t r ibut ion.

20-30 percent of the materials may have,to be skimned and

Use of Polymers as F i l t ra t ion Aids

Polymers are h i g h molecular weight, water soluble compounds hhich

can be used as primary coagulants, s e t t l i n g aids , o r f i l t r a t i o n aids.

may be cat ionic , anionic, o r anionic in charge. Generally, the doses

required fo r coagulation or as a s e t t l i ng a i d in conjunction w i t h another

coagulant f a r exceed tha t needed as a f i l t r a t i o n aid. Typical doses when

used as a s e t t l i ng aid are 0.1 - 2.0 mg/l while doses of l e s s t h a n 0.1 mg/l are often adequate t o serve as a f i l t r a t i o n aid. W k n used as a f i l t r a t i o n

a id , the polymer i s added t o increase the s t rength of the chemical f loc and

t o control the depth of penetration of f loc into the f i l t e r .

They

The polymer i s not added t o improve coagulation b u t rather t o strengthen

the f l o c made up of prevlously coagulated material to minimize the

prospects of shearlng f r ag i l e f loc , causing f i l t e r breakthrough. For maxi-

mum effectiveness as a f i l t r a t i o n a id , the polymer should be added d i rec t ly

t o the f i l t e r inf luent and not i n an upstream se t t l i ng basin or flocculator.

However, i f polymers are used upstream as se t t l i ng a lds , i t may not be

necessary to add any additional polymer as f i l t r a t i o n a i d .

i l l u s t r a t e s the ef fec ts of polymers as f i l t e r a i d s . The condition

represented by F igure 2A I l l u s t r a t e s the resu l t s of a f rag i le floc

Figure 2

steering and then penetrating the f i l t e r causing a premature term-

i n a t i o n of i t s run due t o breakthrough Qf excessively high eff luent t u r b i d i t y .

41

I

I I

FIGURE NO. 2

E f f e c t of polymer8 a s filtration a i d 8

42

I ,I,. . I . . , --- ' ' - ... . - . - -.- L___

--.

If the polymer i s t oo h igh (F igure ZB), t h e f l o c i s t oo s t rong t o pe rm i t

pene t ra t i on i n t o the f i l t e r causing a r a p i d bu i l dup o f headloss i n the

upper p o r t i o n c f the f i l t e r and a premature te rm ina t ion due t o e x e s s i v e

headloss. The optimum polymer dose w i l l pe rm i t the te rmina l headloss

t o be reached s imul taneously w i t h the f i r s t s ign o f i nc reas ing f i l t e r

e f f l u e a t ttirSSCity (F igure 2C).

Types of F i l t e r S t ruc tu res

The g r a v i t y and pressure f i l t e r s t r u c t u r e s c o m n l y used i n water

t reatment p l a n t s a r e r e a d i l y adaptable t o advanced wastewater t rea tment

p l a n t f i l t r a t i o n .

t reatment a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r the f o l l o w i n g reasons:

Pressure f j l t e r s a r e o f ten advantageous i n waste

1. I n many wastwat .er app l i ca t i ons , t he app l i ed s o l i d s l oad ing i s

h igher and more v a r i a b l e than i n a water t reatment a p p l i c a t i o n . Thus i t

i s d e s i r a b l e t o have h igher heads (up t o 20 ft.) a v a i l a b l e than p r a c t i c a l

w i t h g r a v i t y f i l t e r designs t o p rov ide maximum opera t i ng f l e x i b i l i t y .

2. I n advanced waste t rea tment processes, the f i l t r a t i o n s tep i s

t r e q u e n t l y fo l l owed by another u n i t process (carbon absorpt ion, ion

exchange, e tc . ) . The e f f l u e n t f rom a pressure f i l t e r can be passed through

a downstream process w i t h o u t hav ing t o pump the f i l t e r e f f l uen t , o f t e n

e l i m i n a t i n g a pumping s tep which would be requ i red w i t h a g r a v i t y f i l t e r .

3. All f i l t e r wash water must be t rea ted sewage app l i ca t i ons . The

ab i 1 i ty t o operate t o h igher head losses w i t h a pressure fi 1 t e r reduces

the amount o f wash water t o be recyc led.

4 . Pressure f i l t e r systems a r e u s u a l l y less c o s t l y i n small and

medium s ized p lan ts .

43

b

I

A typical gravity f i l t e r section is shown i n Figure 3.

areas usually do n o t exceed 800-1000 sq f t per f i l t e r unit.

units may be combined i n onestructural ce l l .

Gravity f i l t e r

Two f i l t e r

Pressure fi1tei.c IEY be either horizontal or vertical. The horizontal

f i l t e r offers much larger f i l t e r area per u n i t and would normally be used

when plant capacities exceed 1-1.5 mgd.

A typical horizontal pressure f i l t e r vessel is shown

kithough an 8 f t diameter vessel is shown, 10 f t diameters

c o m n l y used w i t h lengths up to 60 ft.

n F

are

gure 4 .

also

A typical vertical f i l t e r is shown i n Figure 5. Diameter u p to

11 f t are comonly used w i t h working pressures up to 150 p s i g .

44

Surface Wash

. -Influent

Backwash Wastewater

-+, Filter E f f l u e n t

Wash water s u p p l y

FIGURE NO. 3 Cross section through a t y p i c a l gravity filter

50 PSIG Pressure 1" coupl ing a i r 10" f lange i n f l u e n t

backwesh waste Y )

r e l e a s e -' Vessel

d

10" Flange e f f l u e n t *.' and backwash

12" x 16" Ifanhole on v e r t i c a l p o f tank 2" Filter drain

ELEVATIOFI

!

I ' e 1 2 " x 16" Manhole

rt

e

Grnvel

SECTIOii

FIGURE N O . 4 TYPICAL PRESSUCE FILTER

46

7

A t y p i c a l vert ica l pressure f i l t e r with cement grout f i l l i n the bottom head, p ipe headers, and lateral underdrnins, grave l aupporting bed and f i l t e r sands

-

FIGURE NO. 5

47

Headloss (FT)

2

4

G

8

10

12

14

16

16

20

22

24

26

28

30

- I i I !

! I

I

I

I

I I

I

I

- ._ -- _ - .--- - ..- I

Headloss distribution i n nixed media f i l t c r applied to activated sludge e f f l u e n t

FIGURE 6

4c

i !

j l i l i 1 : I !

E i REFERENCES

1 . Advanced Wastewater Treatment, Russell L. Culp, Gordo? L . C u l p .

2 . 1974 Annual Book o f ASTt.1 Standards.

3 . Process design manual f o r Phosphorus Removal for US Environmental Pro tec t ion Agency Technology Transfer by Black, Vcatch Consulting Engineers, Oct. 1971.

49

FESA DISTRIBUTION

US M i 1 i t a r y Academy ATTN: Dept o f Mechanics ATTN: L i b r a r y West Po in t , NY 10996

Chief o f Engineers ATTN: DAEN-ASI-L ( 2 ) ATTN: DAEII-FEB ATTN: DAEfl-FEP ATTN: DAEN-FEU ATTN: DAEN-FEZ-A ATTN: DAEN-MCZ-S APTI4: DAEN-MCE-U ATTN: DAEt4-MCZ-E ATTN: DAEN-RDL Dept o f t h e Army WASH, DC 20314

D i r e c t o r , USA-WES ATTN: L i b r L r y P.O. Box 63'1 Vicksburg, MS 39181

Ccmmander, TRADOC Of f i ce o f t h e Engineer ATTt l : ATEN

Ft . Monroe, VA 23651 ATTN: ATEN-FE-U

US A r m y Engr D i s t , New York

26 Federal Plaza New York, NY 10007

ATTN: N A N E N - E

USA Engr C"st , Ba l t imore ATTk': Ch I f, Engr D i v P 0. Box 1715 Bal t imore, MD 21203

USA Engr D i s t , Char leston ATTN: Chief , Engr D i v P.0, Box 919 Charleston, S C 29402

USA Engr D i s t , Savannah ATTN : Chi c f , SltSAS-L P.O. Box 889 Savannah, CA 31402

USA Engr D i s t D e t r o i t P.O. Box 1027 D e t r o i t , M I 48231

USA Engr D i s t Kansas City ATTN: Chief, Engr D i v 700 Federal O f f i c e B ldg 601 E. 1 2 t h S t Kansas City, MO 64106

USA Engr D i s t , Omaha ATTN: Chief, Engr D i v 7413 USOP and Courthouse 215 N. 1 7 t h S t Omaha, NM 68102

USA Engr D i s t , F o r t N o r t h ATTN: Chief, SWFED-D ATTN: Ch ie f , SWFED-CIA/MR P.O. Box 17300 F o r t Worth, TX 76102

USA Engr D i s t , Sacramento ATTN: Chief, SPKED-D 650 C a p i t o l M a l l Sacramento, CA 95814

USA Engr D i s t , F a r East ATTN: Chief, Engr D i v APO San Franciscb, CA 96301

USA Engr D i s t , Japan APO San Francisco, CA 96343

USA Engr Div, Eurone European Div , Corps o f Engineers APO New York, NY 09757

USA Engr Div, N o r t h A t l a n t i c ATTN: Chief, NADEN-T 90 Church St New York, NY 10007

USA Engr D iv , South A t l a n t i c ATTN: Chief, SAEN-TE 510 T i t l e Bldg 30 P r y o r S t , SW A t l a n t a , GA 30303

USA Engr Dist , Mobile ATTN : Chief , SAMEN-C P , C L R?x 2288 Mobi l e , A L 36601

U S A En!lr. Sisi, i o u ; s v ; l l r A T I N : Chief , Engr Div F.0 BClX 59 Ltcuisv-:\le, KY 40201

U55 Eligr Dist, Norfolk A 5 ; i : Chi c f , NAOEN-D 103 F r o n t S t r e e t Uorfo lk , VA 23510

UC, i inqr D i v , Missouri River ATT1.I: Chief, Engr Div r.0. Box 103 Downtown Station C.riaha, NU 68101

USI: EncJr D i v , South Pacif ic A X i ; : Ct,ief, SPDED-TG G X Sarisome S t , Rm 1216 Sari Fr;;ncisco, CA $4111

A F Civil Eiigr Center/XRL T.;r.:ia11 AFB, FL 32401

N t i L r i 1 F a c i l i t i e s Engr Comand A 1714: Code 04 2% S t u v a l l S t A:cxdndria, V A 22332

l;..fense \)ocuinentation Center A T T N : TCA ( 1 2 ) Critnercn S t a t ion A 1 oxandria, \ A 22314

Coi:rrlan*.ler and Di rec tor USA Cold Regions Research Engineering

Hanovcr, NH 03755 Laboratory

USA Engr D i v , Huntsvil le ATTN: Chief, HNDED-ME P.O. Box 1600 Wcst Stat ion Huntsville, AL 35807

USA Engr Div , Ohio River ATTN: ChieF, E n g r D i v P.O. B s x 1159 Cincinnati, OH 45201

USA Engr Div, North Central ATTN: Chief, E n g r D i v 536 S. Clark S t Chicago, IL 60605

USA Enpr Div , Southwestern ATTN: Chi ef , SWDED-TM Main Tower Bldg, 1200 Kain S t Dallas, TX 75202

USA Engr D i v , Pacif ic Ocean ATTN: Chief, E n g r Div APO San Francisco, CA 96558

F ORS CO M AITN: AFEN

F t . McPherson, GA 30330 ATTN: A f tN-FE

Officer i n Charge C i vi1 Engineering Laboratory Naval Construction Battalion Center ATTN: Library (Code L O U ) Port Hueneme!, CA 93043

Commander and G i rector USA Construction Engineering Research Laboratory

P , O . Box 4005 Champaigfi, IL 61820

c

laboratory results of laundry wastewater treatment - …infohouse.p2ric.org/ref/12/11791.pdf ·...

Documents