THE TESTING OF GRIT SYSTEMS: UNDERSTANDING FACT

AND FICTION
Gary Hunter, Chris deBarbadillo*, Dean Pond
Black & Veatch

*8400 Ward Parkway, Kansas City, MO 64114

deBarbadilloC@bv.com

ABSTRACT
Traditionally, grit system design criteria have been based on the assumption that grit settles at the same rate
as sand. Literature, such as MOP 8, indicates a grit generation rate of 0.5 to 5.0 cubic feet per million
gallons for separate collection systems and 0.4 to 10.5 cf/MG for combined collection systems. This
information has enabled treatment plant designers to size grit facilities for many years. Recently, testing
approaches have been developed that allow accurate measurement of grit by using a mass balance. Testing
results from several wastewater facilities indicate that grit has a settling velocity about half that of sand,
which has resulted in radical changes to traditional approaches.

This new approach to testing was used at the Rifle Range Road WWTP in Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina, to
establish the design influent grit load. In addition to developing the influent grit load, testing was
conducted to determine grit removal across the screen and the existing vortex grit system. Testing
locations were selected based on access rather than velocity.

Results of the testing indicated good removal of larger grit particles but limited removal of smaller grit
particles. The results of the Mt. Pleasant testing were compared with those of performance testing
conducted at the Western Carolina Regional Sewer Authoritys Pelham Wastewater treatment plant.
Results from the Pelham plant indicate that the vortex system is capable of removing up to 50 percent of 75
micron particles.

This paper will discuss the various grit testing methods that are available, the advantages and disadvantages
of each test method, and implications of using results from the various test methods in the design of grit
facilities.

KEY WORDS
Grit testing, vortex grit removal

BACKGROUND
Grit volumes vary from region to region and depend on the type of collection system (i.e., sanitary sewer or
combined sewer), the characteristics of the drainage area, and the condition of the collection system. It is
not uncommon to see large variations and increases in grit quantities, especially in combined sewer systems
and during rain events. Rain events increase the flow and velocity in the collection system, which tends to
result in greater quantities of larger grit particles in the treatment plant influent stream.

Grit can be classified by a variety of means as shown in Table 1. Most commonly used of these is the grit
particle size expressed either as US sieve size or in microns. Many vortex grit removal equipment
manufacturers have developed performance guarantees based on sieve size.
 Table 1. Sieve Size Equivalents
Opening
U.S. Sieve Size Tyler Equivalent Microns inch
1/4 3.25 mesh 6300 0.2500
1/8 6.5 mesh 3180 0.1250
#12 10 mesh 1680 0.0661
#20 20 mesh 841 0.0331
#50 48 mesh 297 0.0117
#70 65 mesh 210 0.0083
#100 100 mesh 149 0.0059
#140 150 mesh 105 0.0041
#200 200 mesh 74 0.0029
#270 270 mesh 53 0.0021

Grit sampling at the treatment plant was conducted during a dry weather period, and the results are not
typical of those for wet weather periods. It is difficult to predict grit quantities in wet weather flow,
because of the large fluctuations in both flow rates and grit quantities between dry and wet weather periods.
WEF Manual of Practice 8, Design of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants, summarizes the grit
quantities encountered in various parts of the United States.

Grit removal equipment manufacturers generally develop their performance standards based on the
percentage of particles removed by a specific sieve size. Typical grit removal systems are usually designed
to remove.

95 percent of grit particles, 50 mesh and larger.

85 percent of grit particles, 70 mesh and larger.
65 percent of grit particles, 100 mesh and larger.

These removal efficiencies generally apply to most types of grit removal equipment even if it is not a
vortex system. Free vortex manufacturers may guarantee 95 percent of 50 micron grit, microns is
extremely fine, and usually has fine as this usually has organic particles attached to it. Therefore, washing
and dewatering of the grit is essential to minimize development of odors and to increase the dryness of the
dewatered grit.

GRIT SAMPLING AND TESTING PROCEDURES USED AT

MOUNT PLEASANT
During the testing conducted at the Rifle Range Road WWP in Mount Pleasant, SC, Grit Solutions
personnel collected grit samples from each designated location. A portion of each sample was processed
through a wet sieve; and the solids collected on the 50, 70, 100, 140, 200, and 270 mesh sieves were settled
in an Imhoff cone. The setting velocity for each fraction was recorded and used to determine its sand
equivalent size (SES). SES refers to the sand particle size, measured in microns that would have the same
settling velocity as the selected grit particle.

Next, the ash fraction of sample retained on each sieves, was dried and ashed to determine the fixed solids
(i.e., non-organic grit) weight of the sample, since all the organics were burned off in the ashing process.
The fixed solids weight of grit is used to determine the total amount of grit entering the plant per million
gallons of flow.
Results of Grit Sampling and Testing
Four locations were chosen for sampling and testing at the treatment plant: influent to the plant, effluent
from the screen, and effluent from the grit basins. In addition, samples of grit that had accumulated in the
oxidation ditches were collected. Data were collected for two days (March 16 and 17, 2007) at the
influent, screen effluent, and grit basin effluent locations. A light rain fell on March 16, 2007; however, it
does not appear to have caused of a peak wet weather condition with large quantities grit.

Influent Results
The first monitoring location was established upstream from the influent screens. This location represents
the grit load being discharged to the treatment plant influent before any removal. Table 2 presents the
results of that sampling.

Table 2. Grit Quantities at Pre-screen Sampling Site

Total Grit
Entering
Settler Channel During
Feed Rate Sampling Grit Concentration Grit Concentration
Date (gpm) (pounds) (pounds/MG) (cf/MG)
March 16, 2007 7.55 139.5 136.7 1.367
March 17, 2007 7.87 97.8 87.3 0.873

The average grit concentration during the two days of sampling was 1.12 cf/MG. Therefore, the grit loads
measured during the study were less than half the typical median value listed in Table 2, but were within
the range of values reported in the literature. Because only a limited amount of sampling was conducted, it
is recommended that Table 2 values be used in the evaluation and in the design of the grit system for the
treatment plant to ensure that the system is not under designed.

Influent samples were classified by the particle sizes indicated in Figure 1.

 Figure 1. Distribution of Influent Grit Size

The size distribution of grit appeared to be quite similar for both days of sampling: 70 percent of the
influent particles are larger than 150 microns (100 mesh). These results indicate that the grit particles
received at the treatment plant are larger than those seen at other treatment facilities, which should allow
removal efficiencies comparable to the performance levels specified by vortex grit removal system
manufacturers. The size of the grit particles can be affected by a number of factors (wet weather, seasons,
age of the collection system, and types of industrial users). In addition, utilities that are interested in grit
testing often are located in areas where the grit particle size is smaller (often referred to as sugar sand) and
more difficult to remove. Therefore a complete comparison between data collected at the treatment plant
and those from other facilities can not be made.

To examine the relative removal of the grit at the treatment plant, the data are compared with data for clean
sand (Figure 2). Sampling results indicate that grit in sizes up to 250 microns (55 mesh) should settle at
least as efficiently as sand. The comparison shown on Figure 2 suggests that organic material
(foam/oil/grease) in the collection system reduces the settling rate of particles larger than 250 microns to
less than the rate percent expected for a sand particle of equivalent size. Since approximately 70 percent of
the grit is smaller than 250 microns and settles more than sand, it is anticipated that a designed and well
functioning grit removal system should effectively remove grit at the treatment plant.
 Figure 2. Comparison of Grit and Clean Sand

Influent Screening Results

The literature has suggested that some grit may be removed through the screening process, primarily
through entrapment of grit particles onto gross material removed by screening. Since it is possible that
Mount Pleasant Waterworks will change both its grit removal and screening facilities in the future, grit
samples were collected both upstream and downstream from the influent screens to properly characterize
the grit load in both locations. Results of the samples taken downstream from the influent screens are
presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Grit Quantities Present Downstream from Influent Screens

Total Grit Entering
Settler Channel During Grit
Feed Rate Sampling Grit Concentration Concentration
Date (gpm) (pounds) (pounds/MG) (cf/MG)
March 16, 2007 7.24 135.4 132.7 1.327
March 17, 2007 6.98 79.1 70.6 0.706

Like the concentrations in samples collected upstream from the screens, the grit concentration downstream
from the screens averaged 1.0 cf/MG, which is significantly lower than the values discussed in the
literature. The data in Tables 2 and 3 indicate that the grit concentrations recorded before and after
screening are virtually identical. Thus, the screening system did not remove any grit; and it is
recommended that the full influent grit load be used in the grit removal system without an allowance
accounting for any removal with the screenings.

Grit Basin Results

One of the goals of the project was to determine the efficiency of the existing grit removal system. The grit
concentrations upstream and downstream from the grit removal system, as well as that of the grit
accumulated in the hopper are listed in Table 4, and the cumulative size distributions are shown on Figures
3 and 4.
 Table 4. Grit Quantities Ahead of and After Grit Removal System
Grit System Grit
Pre-Screening Grit Post-Screening Grit Effluent Grit Accumulated in
Concentration Concentration Concentration Hopper
Date (pounds/MG) (pounds/MG) (pounds/MG) (pounds/MG)
March 16, 2007 136.7 132.7 259.8 2.0
March 17, 2007 87.3 70.6 254.2 1.19

Figures 3 and 4. Fractional Distribution of Grit Exiting Vortex Grit Chamber

The study showed that the quantity of grit collected downstream from the grit removal system was
significantly greater than the volume upstream. In addition, very little grit accumulated in the hopper
during this period. There are several possible reasons for this. First, Grit Solutions indicated that the
effluent channel was wider than needed, which would result in low flow velocities that could allow larger
grit particles to be deposited during periods of low influent wastewater flows, such as at night or during dry
weather. As noted earlier, the samples were collected during the day when flows tend to be higher. The
higher flows may cause resuspension of the grit deposited in the grit removal system effluent channel
during the low flow period if the grit pumping system was unable to remove this material. A second
possibility is that the excess grit accumulated channel when the equipment was out of service, rather than
only during periods of low flow, meaning that the grit was already in the channel, and not a result of
operating conditions during the test. Finally, there could be operational issues associated with the grit
pumping. If grit is not adequately removed from the vortex grit unit, it will be carried into over to the
effluent channel and accumulate in the grit effluent channel or pass into downstream processes. The
channel should be checked for grit accumulation and whether these conditions have continued after testing
was completed.

In addition to the volumes of grit collected downstream from the grit removal unit, very little grit
accumulated in the hopper which suggests that the grit pumping system may have malfunctioned;
otherwise, more grit should have accumulated in the hopper. One possible cause for the poor performance
of the system is that the grit removal pump was not adequately removing grit from the system during
testing. This problem may be corrected by increasing the grit pumping frequency. Other causes of the
poor removal may be inadequate capacity of the grit pump or loss of solids during washing. The test
results alone cannot identify the problem, but it is recommended that grit pumping frequency be increased
and the results monitored. If this approach is not successful, the capacity/hydraulics of the grit pumping
system may have to be evaluated.

Aeration Basin Results

A composite sample of grit obtained from several locations in the oxidation ditches, was evaluated, and the
results are shown on Figures 5 and 6.

Grit Distribution - % Retained by Fraction

65
60
55
50
Percent Retained

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
50 75 100 150 200 300 820 1680 3180 6300

Physical Size (micron)

Figure 3. Grit Distribution in Sample Collected from Oxidation Ditches

Grit Distribution - Cumulative % Greater by Fraction

100

90

80

70

60
Percent

50

40

30

20

10

0
50 75 100 150 200 300 820 1680 3180 6300

Physical Size (micron)

Figure 4. Cumulative Grit Distribution in Sample from Oxidation Ditches

The existing grit removal system was not operational for a significant period as a result of plugging of the
grit pumps. The grit system maybe functioning well when it is operational, although this did not appear to
be the case during the testing. The grit accumulation in the oxidation ditches may be the result of the
frequent outages of the grit removal system, rather than its malfunctioning.

Data on Figures 5 and 6 suggest that the size distribution of the grit accumulated in the oxidation ditches is
similar o that of the grit collected at the grit system effluent (Figures 3 and 4). It also resembles somewhat
the particle size distribution of the grit in the influent wastewater (Figure 1), but the grit in the oxidation
ditches contained fewer fine particles than the influent grit. The deposition of grit in the oxidation ditches
is likely the result of both outages of the grit removal system and carryover from the effluent channel.
Some of the smaller particles may have been removed in the grit unit itself or, if they were carried into the
oxidation ditches, they may have remained suspended and then removed in the clarifiers with the waste
activated sludge.

The grit in the oxidation ditches had likely been accumulating over a long period. The similarity of the size
distribution in the oxidation ditch and of the influent grit suggests that the size of grit particles entering the
treatment plant is relatively consistent over time.

SUMMARY
The following conclusions and recommendations were developed:

Results of testing at the treatment plant indicate that the grit load to the plant was lower than typically
reported in the literature. Because of the limited extent of the sampling, it is recommended that literature
values be used to represent the grit load generated at the plant.

The testing results suggest that the size of grit particles entering the plant is relatively consistent over time.
Based on this information, as well as the sand equivalent size data and the specified design criteria for the
existing 12 mgd vortex removal system, the existing unit should be able to remove the grit load.

The grit quantities measured downstream from the grit removal system were nearly double those observed
in the pre- and post-screen influent wastewater, suggesting that excess grit accumulates in the channel and
becomes resuspended during higher flows. Very little grit actually accumulates in the hopper, which
appears to be the result of inefficiencies of the grit pumping and washing system that must be corrected.

So is Grit Testing fact or fiction..it is a matter opinion.