UNIVERSITI KUALA LUMPUR

MALAYSIAN INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL & BIOENGINEERING

TECHNOLOGY

LABORATORY REPORT
SUBMISSION FORM
Lecturer name: DR. SITI NOORAIN Group: L01 Code Subject: CEB30703
BINTI ROSLAN
Student name: No ID: Title of Experiment:

1. Muhammad Ikhmal Bin Mohd Ali 1. 55214117051 JAR TESTING

2. Muhammad Nur Khairi Bin Experiment Date: 2/3/2020
Dahalan 2. 55214117049
3. Syaida Khadijah Binti Rosli Submission Date: 9/3/2020
3. 55214117246

*To be filled by the marker*

VERY POOR GOOD VERY EXCELLENT
CRITERIA POOR 1 2 3 GOOD 4 5
INTRODUCTION (10%) 3 6 9 12 15
Write a very brief description of the background and
theory of the experiment.
OBJECTIVES (5%)
Precisely write what supposed to be done and it must
be measurable.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE (20%) 4 8 12 16 20
Describe the experiment so others would be able to
repeat the same process. (Photos can be a great help)
DATA & RESULTS (10%) 2 4 6 8 10
State all results obtained in clear and concise way with
units. (Present the data graphically)
DISCUSSIONS (30%) 6 12 18 24 30
Interpret results and relate finding to the theory.
Must shows the sample of calculation if necessary
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION (10%) 2 4 6 8 10
Give a general concluding statement if the experiment
has been a success or not.
Answer the objectives with quantitative summary of the
results
Recommendation for future studies
REFERENCES (5%) 1 2 3 4 5
FORMAT (5%) 1 2 3 4 5
APPENDIX (5%) 1 2 3 4 5

Date of
Submitted:
Student
Name/ID:
Subject/Code
:
Experiment title:
Student Slip
Date of
Stamp/Signature
Received

Submitted:
Student
Name:
Student ID:
Experiment title:
INTRODUCTION

Jar testing is a method of simulating a full-scale water treatment process, providing

system operators a reasonable idea of the way a treatment chemical will behave and operate
with a raw water. Because it mimics full-scale operation, system operators can use jar
testing to help determine which chemical will work best with their system’s raw water. Jar
testing is used to determine the proper coagulant dosage and continues to be one of the most
effective tools available to surface water plant operators. Finished water quality, cost
production, length of filter runs and overall filter life, all depends on the proper application
of chemical to the raw water entering the treatment plant.

The title of this experiment is jar testing as shown in Figure 1. The purpose of jar
testing is to determine the optimum pH and chemical dosages (aluminium sulphate &
polymer) for water treatment. This method allows adjustments in pH, variations in coagulant
and alternating mixing speeds on a small scale in order to predict the functioning of a large-
scale treatment process.

Figure 1.: Jar test usually use 6 beakers which one of the beakers labelled as reference

Pradeep Kumar et al. (2008) achieved the most effective coagulant between various
coagulants which includes aluminium potassium sulphate and poly-aluminium chloride
(PAC). PAC is the coagulant that was used to run this experiment. PAC is a highly efficient
coagulant with low generation of sludge in a wide pH range. It also works at low
temperatures. For the adjustments of pH values according to the samples in this experiment,
H2SO4 and NaOH were used as shown in Figure 1.2.
 Figure 1.2: The chemical used to adjust the pH values which are H2SO4 & NaOH

A jar test is a time-consuming method because several tests need to be done to

determine which coagulant is suitable for physical and chemical water treatment.

OBJECTIVES

1. To obtain the optimum pH and chemical dosages (aluminium sulphate & polymer) in
water treatment plant which will produce the highest removal of a given water turbidity.
2. To determine the removal efficiency of the water sample depending on the dosage of
coagulant, flocculants and pH.
3. To determine the time of flocs formation and the time taken of the flocs to form.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

1. Initial pH and turbidity of the sample water were measured to be compare with the
final pH and turbidity at the end of experiment.

2. The jar testing apparatus containers were filled with sample water. The sample was
premixed to obtain consistent condition in all jars. There will be 6 jar testing will be
used in this experiment.

3. For each container, the coagulant was added into each beaker in increasing doses
(1.5ml, 2.0ml, 2.5ml, 3.0ml, 3.5ml) and the stirrer was started at 200 rpm for 1
minute. While there will be no coagulant was added in beaker 6 because it acts as a
control sample.
4. The pH of water sample was adjusted using the NaOH(alkaline) and H2SO4(acidic)

5. The stirrer speed was reduced to 25 to 35 rpm for minutes.

6. The mixer was turned off to allow the containers to settle for 10 to 30 minutes.
7. The flocculation process was observed, and the floc formation was recorded in final
10 minutes by referring to the chart of particle sizes provided as in APPENDIX.

8. After the stirring period is over, the stirrer was stopped to allow the flocs to settle for
about 5 minutes.

9. The final pH and turbidity were checked.

DATA & RESULT
Initial Turbidity = 921
Initial pH =7.65
TABLE 1: Set 1

Set 1 (Coagulation process)

Jar
Dosage (ml) Turbidity
pH (FAU)
Coagulant Flocculants
1 1.5 0.5 7.65 745
2 2.0 0.5 7.65 919
3 2.5 0.5 7.65 772
4 3.0 0.5 7.65 754
5 3.5 0.5 7.65 594
6 0 0 7.65 921
(Control)

TABLE 1: Set 2

Set 2 (Flocculation process)

Jar
Dosage (ml) Turbidity
pH (FAU)
Coagulant (opt) Flocculants
1 3.5 1.0 7.65 683
2 3.5 2.0 7.65 550
3 3.5 3.0 7.65 476
4 3.5 4.0 7.65 319
5 3.5 5.0 7.65 142
6 0 0 7.65 914
(Control)

TABLE 1: Set 3

Set 3 (Optimum pH)

Jar
Dosage (ml) Turbidity
pH (FAU)
Coagulant (opt) Flocculants (opt)
1 3.5 5.0 5 196
2 3.5 5.0 6 222
3 3.5 5.0 7 339
4 3.5 5.0 8 305
5 3.5 5.0 9 273
6 0 0 890
(Control)
 SET 1: Turbidity vs Coagulant Dosage
12

10

8
Turbidity (NTU)

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Coagulant (ml)

Figure 1: Turbidity according to Coagulant dosage

SET 2: Turbidity vs Flocculants Dosage

1000
900
800
700
Turbidty (NTU)

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Flocculants (ml)

Figure 2: Turbidity according to Flocculants dosage

 SET 3: Turbidity vs pH
1000
900
800
700
Turbidity (NTU)

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
pH

Figure 3: Turbidity according to pH

Removal efficiency vs Coagulant Dosage

40
35
30
Removal efficiency

25
20
15
10
5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Coagulant Dosage

Figure 4: Removal efficiency according to the Coagulant dosage

 Removal efficiency vs Flocculants Dosage
90
80
Removal efficiency 70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Flocculants Dosage

Figure 5: Removal efficiency according to the flocculants dosage

Removal efficiency vs pH
90
80
70
Removal efficiency

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
pH

Figure 6: Removal efficiency according to pH

According to turbidity vs coagulant dosage graph, the higher the turbidity will lower the
turbidity reading until 594 FAU. So, the most optimum coagulant dosage obtained is 3.5 ml
which is Jar 5. From turbidity vs flocculants dosage graph, it shows that Jar 5, the turbidity is
decrease until 143 FAU when the amount of flocculants increase. The turbidity vs pH graph
shows that the most optimum pH obtained is 5 as the turbidity is reduced to 196 FAU which
is Jar 1. The removal efficiency of jar test 1 is increasing as the coagulant dosage increase
except for 2 ml. the graph for increasing of flocculants shows the increasing removal
efficiency of the wastewater.
Floc formation in final 15 minutes

Experiment 1

Beaker 1: Coarse (15 minutes)

Beaker 2: Moderate (13 minutes)

Beaker 3: Moderately fine (11 minutes)

Beaker 4: Fine (6 minutes)

Beaker 5: Fine (4 minutes)

Beaker 6: -

Figure 7: Flocs formation for Jar test 1 in 15 minutes

Experiment 2

Beaker 1: Coarse (15 minutes)

Beaker 2: Moderate (12 minutes)

Beaker 3: Moderately fine (9 minutes)

Beaker 4: Fine (7 minutes)

Beaker 5: Fine (5 minutes)

Beaker 6: -
 Figure 8: Flocs formation for Jar test 2 in 15 minutes

Experiment 3

Beaker 1: Moderately fine (5 minutes)

Beaker 2: Moderate (7 minutes)

Beaker 3: Very coarse (12 minutes)

Beaker 4: Coarse (9 minutes)

Beaker 5: Moderate (6 minutes)

Beaker 6: -

Figure 9: Flocs formation of Jar test 3 in 15 minutes

DISCUSSIONS

The objective of this experiment is to perform jar testing on the water sample and to
obtain the optimum pH and chemical dosages (alum & polymer) react with the water sample.
Jar testing is intended to simulate the coagulation and flocculation process in water treatment
plant. The result we obtain are used to help optimize the performance of the plant.

Jar test experiment was begun by preparing 6 beakers with water sample. Chemical
reagent such as alum solution, polymer solution, sodium hydroxide and hydrochloric acid
also been prepared. Before starting the experiment, the initial turbidity and pH of the water
sample were measured to ensure the adjustment of dosage was in range. The initial turbidity
and pH were recorded 921 FAU and 7.65pH respectively. The adjustment alum dosage was
added to the water sample and stirred in rapid mixing 200rpm for 1 minutes for coagulation
process. Coagulation process is a water treatment process where coagulant with charges
opposite were added to the water to neutralise the negative charge on disperse non- settable
solid such as clay and organic substance. This process causes small suspended solid to attract
to one another and form larger particle. All those large particles still too small to be visible
and rapid mixing was used properly disperse the coagulant and promote particle to collide to
achieve good coagulation. Next, adjusted dosage of polymer was added to the sample at 20
rpm, gentle for 20 minutes to promote flocculation process. Flocculation is a water treatment
process following coagulation, which uses gentle stirring to bring the suspended particles
together so they will form larger more settle able clumps called floc. The floc size continues
to build through additional collisions and interaction with inorganic polymers formed by the
coagulant or with organic polymers added. After the mixture was stopped, and the water was
let to settle down for 15 minutes. Final turbidity, pH and Aluminium residual were of the
water sample were tested.

The experiment was divided into 3 set of parameters, set 1 (adjusted alum dosage), set
2 (adjusted polymer dosage) and set 3 (adjusted Ph). For the first set, the dosage of alum was
adjusted from 1.0 ml, 1.5 ml, 2.0ml, 2.5 ml, 3.5 ml and 0 ml for control. The dosage of
polymer and pH were constant which are 1 ml and 7.65 respectively. Then the final turbidity
was measured once the experiment was done. Based on the result in set 1, it showed that the
best coagulant dosage was at 3.5 ml (jar 4) with lowest turbidity recorded which is 594 FAU.
For the second set, the dosage of polymer was adjusted from 1.0 ml, 1.5 ml, 2.0 ml, 2.5 ml,
3.0 ml and 0 ml for constant. The dosage of alum is fixed and based on the best record at set
1 which is 3.5 ml. The Ph was set at constant value, 7.65. Based on the result in set 2, the
lowest turbidity recorded was 142 FAU (jar 5) with 3.5 ml dosage of polymer. Lastly, for set
3, the Ph of the water sample was adjusted from 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 7.65 (initial) for control.
Acid (NaoH) and base (HCL) were used while adjusting the Ph of water sample. Based on
the results in set 3, the best pH value was at 5 with the lowest turbidity reading, 196 FAU (jar
1). The results from all the 3 sets showed that the optimum combination was 3.5 ml alum, 5.0
ml polymer and pH 5.
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

There were two process involved in jar test experiment, process of coagulation and
flocculation. Coagulation occur in rapid mixing and flocculation in gentle mixing. Next, for
determination of heavy metal removal we found that 3.5 ml alum, 5.0 ml polymer and pH 5 is
the best and optimum condition. The result may not valid because there was problem occur
like broken Ph meter while do the Ph adjustment. Then there were several safety precautions
that need to take care of while conducting this experiment. Firstly, students must wear proper
and complete PPE to avoid any harms such as electrical hazard and chemical hazard. Lastly,
study the lab manual completely so that the experiment will run smoothly.
REFERENCES

1. Satterfield, Z. (Spring 2005). Jar Testing. Tech Brief, Vol. 5, Issue 1

2. Pradeep Kumar, B. P. (2008). Decolorization and COD reduction of dyeing
wastewater from a cotton textile mill using thermolysis and coagulation. Hazardous
Materials, Vol 153, 635- 645.
3. Valley, E., Water, M., Elsinore, L., Noblet, J. A., Campbell, E., & Cervantes, G. (2012). a Jar
Test Study on the Use of Alum for Turbidity and Nutrient Removal in Canyon Lake , Ca.
(May).
4. Zane Satterfield, P.E., Nescen. S. (2005). Tech Brief - Jar Testing. On Tap, 5(1), 1–4.
LABORATORY EXERCISES

1. Why Jar Test must be done according to the condition of the real plant?

It is because the system operator can use jar testing to help determining which
treatment chemical will work best with their system’s raw water.

2. Name a few of the coagulants.

Ferric sulfate, ferric chloride, aluminiun chloride

3. What other reagent can be used to replace lime in pH adjustment?

Calcium carbonate, magnesium hydroxide.

4. What is the DOE (Department of Environment) Standard (Standard A and Standard

B) of aluminium according to the Environmental Act of Malaysia (1974)?

For Standard A, 10 mg/L is acceptable and for Standard B, 15 mg/L is acceptable.

APPENDIX

i. Preparation 1% Alum (Aluminium sulphate) solution, 1% Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH)

solution and 1% Sulfuric acid (H2SO4)
1g
× 1000ml=10 g
100 ml

ii. Preparation of 0.1% Polymer solution

0.1 g
× 1000ml=1 g
100 ml

iii. Concentration of coagulant in ppm

C 1 V 1=C 2 V 2
10 g
( 3.5 )=C 2 ( 1000 ml )
L
g mg
C 2=0.035 =35
L L

iv. Concentration of flocculants in ppm

C 1 V 1=C 2 V 2
10 g
( 5 )=C 2 ( 1000 ml )
L
g mg
C 2=0.05 =50
L L