CFD for Wastewater Case

Studies: Sedimentation, Mixing

and Disinfection
Randal Samstag
Civil and Sanitary Engineer

Ed Wicklein
Carollo Engineers

Joel Ducoste
North Carolina State University

Stephen Saunders
Ibis Group CFD
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier

Radial flow clarifier

Questions:
Optimum Depth?
Optimum Inlet ?
Optimum Feedwell?
Optimum Effluent Zone?
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier
Existing Condition CFD
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier
Alternative Inlet Configurations
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier
Alternative Velocity Vector Plans
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier
Alternative Velocity Plans
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier
Alternative Velocity Profiles
Case Study: Activated Sludge Clarifier
Comparison Solids Profiles
 Case Study: Mixing
Jet mixing and aeration in a sequencing batch reactor (SBR)*

415,350 mixed tetrahedral

cells
2,108,308 nodes
Inlet flow into jet nozzles
Outlet flow to pump suction
Air added as second phase
Solids transport, settling, and
density impact modeled by
UDF Mesh projected onto model
surfaces.

*Samstag, Wicklein, et al. (2012)

 Case Study: Mixing
Velocity profiles for pumped mixing and aeration

Simulated Pumped Mixing Profile Simulated Aeration Profile

 Case Study: Mixing
Comparison of pumped mix velocity profiles for increasing jet velocities

Existing
(2.5 3.0
m/sec m/sec
Jet) Jet

3.5 4.0
m/sec m/sec
Jet Jet
 Case Study: Mixing
Comparison of solids profiles for increasing jet velocities

Existing
(2.5 3.0
m/sec m/sec
Jet) Jet

3.5 4.0
m/sec m/sec
Jet Jet
 Case Study: Mixing
Comparison of power levels for different mixing devices.
Equivalent 10%
CoV CoV Power Level
Type of Mixer Reference Basis of Test (W/m3)
Samstag et al.
Jet Aeration 2.5 m/sec jet CFD 23.00% 17.71
(2012)
Samstag et al.
Jet Aeration 3.25 m/sec jet CFD 19.00% 24.7
(2012)
Samstag et al.
Jet Aeration 3.5 m/sec jet CFD 7.00% 14.49
(2012)
Samstag et al.
Jet Aeration 4.0 m/sec jet CFD 5.00% 15.4
(2012)
Samstag and
Vertical Hydrofoil II Field test 3.31% 0.5
Wicklein (2014)
Vertical Samstag and
Field test 3.39% 1.8
Hyperboloid I Wicklein (2014)
Horizontal Wicklein et al.
CFD Simulation 5.40% 4.5
propeller (2013)
Randall and Randall
Submersible Mixer Field test 8.32% 5.3
(2010)
Horizontal Wicklein et al.
CFD Simulation 13.80% 7.6
propeller (2014)
 Case Study: Mixing
Comparison of density-coupled and neutral density simulations
Density-coupled

Solids transport model

calculates the local solids
concentration based on
flow regime.
The influence of the local
solids concentration on the
local density is then
iteratively calculated.
This approach was verified by
the field solids profile test
data.
 Case Study: Mixing
Comparison of density-coupled and neutral density simulations
Neutral Density

Solids transport model

calculates the local solids
concentration based on
flow regime.
Influence of the local solids
concentration on the local
density was turned off.
This approach over-predicted
measured solids mixing.
 Case Studies: Disinfection
Dye, disinfectant, and
microorganism
transport in a chemical
disinfection system
Validation of
disinfection in a
ultraviolet disinfection
system
System Hydraulic Efficiency

The hydraulic efficiency of a contact tank system

is measured in CFD simulations with a tracer.
Using a time dependent CFD model, tracer is
introduced at the point of disinfectant injection and
its concentration is monitored at the model outlet.

Data gathered at the model outlet are used to plot

a residence time distribution (RTD) curve. The
slope and inflection points of the RTD curve are Streaklines colored by elapsed time
indicative of the hydraulic performance of the normalized against TTDT
contact system. Data points T10, TTDT and T90 are
inputs used for accepted evaluation protocol.

T10: time at which tracer concentration has

reached 10% of the target value
Residence Time Dstribution
TTDT: Theoretical Detention time ( Voltank/Qeffluent ) 1
0.9
T90

normalized concentration
T90: time at which tracer concentration has 0.8
reached 90 % of the target value 0.7
0.6
BF: Baffle Factor T10/TTDT Values near 1.0
0.5 TTDT
indicate good plug flow. Values lower than 0.3
indicate some short circuiting is taking place. 0.4
0.3
MI: Morrill Index - T90/T10 Values greater than 0.2
5.0 indicate some flow is getting hung up in
0.1
recirculation zones. T10
0
0 0.5 t/TTDT 1 1.5
Disinfectant Decay

The efficacy of the contact system is dependent

on the time the active microorganisms in the
effluent are exposed to disinfectant at sufficient
concentration to neutralize them.

Disinfectants currently in use like sodium

hypochlorite or peracetic acid begin to decay
immediately upon introduction to the effluent
stream. Their levels of concentration are
modeled by UDF based on published data.

Contours of disinfectant concentration normalized against target

concentration level. Contour level 1.0 denotes the target
concentration.
Neutralization of
Microorganisms

The rates at which microorganisms are

neutralized are specific to the disinfectant in use
and the target microorganism. For example,
different coliforms will have differing sensitivities
to the disinfectant in use. Their neutralization is
simulated using UDFs based on published data.

Log(N/N0) (bio. organisms)

Contours of microorganism population. N is the local

population and N0 is the population in the effluent prior to
exposure to the disinfectant.
UV Reactor Validation and the use of CFD
In an effort to quantify the UV reactor
performance, UV reactors must be validated at
different flow rates, water quality conditions, and
lamp power settings
Reason:
to determine if the target reduction equivalent dose (RED) is
being met
To ensure that the performance can be monitored with a UV
sensor.
Validation tests are the only means of confirming
UV reactor performance since UV does not leave
a measurable disinfectant residual
 Validation
Validation tests can be performed:
Onsite at the WTP
May not be practical or can be cost prohibitive for large
WTPs.
Offsite at designated validation facilities
Tests are performed under conditions that mimic the range
of possible conditions seen at the intended WTP
Tests are performed assuming a worst case hydraulic
condition, which is assumed by placing an elbow upstream
from the reactor inlet
 Validation Objectives
Investigate the impact of an upstream elbow in a pilot-
scale UV reactor using biodosimetry measurements.

Perform numerical simulations of the pilot-scale

reactor to evaluate model performance.

Perform simulations of a full-scale reactor with

alternative upstream elbow configurations using a
validated model.
 Validation Objectives
Investigate the impact of an upstream elbow in a pilot-
scale UV reactor using biodosimetry measurements.

Perform numerical simulations of the pilot-scale

reactor to evaluate model performance.

Perform simulations of a full-scale reactor with

alternative upstream elbow configurations using a
validated model.
 Methods: Microbial UV Response Kinetics
The first order UV response kinetics was used to represent
MS2 and B. subtilis.
-1
Y=-0.065x-0.583
0

1 R^2 = 0.99

log(N0/Nd)
B. subtilis 2

5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 Fluence, mJ/cm2
-0.5
MS2 sample
Log Inactivation (N/No)

-1
-1.5 Linear (MS2 sample)
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5 y = -0.0549x - 0.1192
MS2
-4 R2 = 0.9934
-4.5
-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Fluence (mJ/cm2)
 Methods: Reactors Investigated
Reactor A
Without Upstream Elbow With Upstream Elbow
Results: Impact of Influent Elbow on Microbial Log Inactivation
Reactor A, 1 lamp LP without elbow
UVT (%) Flow CFD Model Experimental
B subtilis MS2 (gpm) B subtilis MS2 B subtilis MS2
92 84 7.6 2.61 1.88 2.95 0.26 2.060.28
Reactor A, 1 lamp LP with elbow
UVT (%) Flow CFD Model Experimental
B subtilis MS2 (gpm) B subtilis MS2 B subtilis MS2
92 84 7.6 2.06 1.43 2.130.10 1.160.38
The experimental and numerical results showed that the
presence of an upstream elbow led to the reduction in the log
inactivation of MS2 and B. subtilis
The reduction in log inactivation was caused by a shift in the
low fluence peak of the fluence distribution due to the
presence of the elbow

CFD numerical modeling results displayed reasonable

agreement with the experimental biodosimetry data.
Results: Impact of Influent Elbow on Fluence Distribution for
pilot-scale reactor
0.14 No Elbow
Elbow
0.12
Particle number fraction

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Fluence (mJ/sq cm)
 Methods: Reactors Investigated
Reactor B

Straight pipe Alt Elbow A Alt Elbow B

 Results: Impact of Alternative Influent Piping
Configuration on Full-Scale reactor performance
Reactor B: 4 lamps, MP
UVT Flow rate Original Straight Alternative A Alternative B
(%) (MGD) Design pipe elbow elbow
86.5 3 1.03 1.20 1.16 1.40

l The straight pipe configuration provides a 17 % improvement to the

original elbow and 3.5 % improvement over alternative A elbow
configuration.

l Alternative B elbow configuration was found to improve the log

inactivation by almost 40 % compared to the original configuration.

l Alternative B elbow configuration further displayed a 17 %

improvement over the straight pipe configuration
Results: Eulerian representation of microbial transport in Reactor B

Original
configuration

Straight pipe
configuration
Results: Eulerian representation of microbial transport in Reactor B
Alternative A elbow

configuration

Alternative B elbow

configuration
 Results: Velocity vector profile in Reactor B

Straight pipe
configuration

Alternative A elbow

configuration
 Results: Velocity vector profile in Reactor B
Alternative B elbow

configuration: Side View

Alternative B elbow

configuration: End View

 Results: Impact of Alternative Influent Piping
Configuration on Full-Scale reactor performance

The Microbial transport and velocity vector analyses for

Reactor B revealed:
There may be more reactor short circuiting with the initial elbow, the
straight pipe, and alternative A elbow configurations than with
alternative B elbow configuration
The improved performance with alternative B elbow was due to the
change in direction of the core fluid in the elbow away from the
outlet.
The combined impact of a recirculation zone with the centrifugal and
pressure forces acting on the fluid in the initial and alternative A
elbow configurations causes a greater fraction of the microorganisms
to move towards the outlet
 Results: Impact of Alternative Influent Piping
Configuration on Full-Scale reactor performance

The Microbial transport and velocity vector analyses for

Reactor B revealed:
There may be more reactor short circuiting with the initial elbow, the
straight pipe, and alternative A elbow configurations than with
alternative B elbow configuration
The improved performance with alternative B elbow was due to the
change in direction of the core fluid in the elbow away from the
outlet.
The combined impact of a recirculation zone with the centrifugal and
pressure forces acting on the fluid in the initial and alternative A
elbow configurations causes a greater fraction of the microorganisms
to move towards the outlet
 Thank you!
Questions?
Randal Samstag
randal.samstag@rsamstag.com
Joel Ducoste
jducoste@ncsu.edu
Stephen Saunders
ibisgroup@bellsouth.net