JICA Assisted

AGRA WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

(ID-P185)

Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam

NJS Consultants Co. Ltd., Japan

In Association with

Mott MacDonald, UKTCE Consulting Engineers, IndiaShah Technical Consultants Pvt.

Ltd, India

144 MLD WATER TREATMENT PLANT

PROCESS DESIGN

Dr. Uday Kelkar

Dr. Ghulam Mustafa

Outline

Yamuna Water Characteristics

Major Issues with Yamuna Raw Water

Product Water Criteria

Treatment Processes for 144 MLD WTP

MBBR Process

Membrane Filtration

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF GANGA & YAMUNA RIVER WATER QUALITY

Data of Year 2005

Sl. No.

Particular Permissible Limit as per CPCB & BIS

Ganga Water at Mathura

(Mat Branch)

Yamuna River at Agra

1 pH 6.5 – 8.5 8.75 7.1-8.28

2 Chloride 600 16 264

3 Total Hardness 122 356

4 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)

2000 190 250-1420

5 Chlorine Demand - 1.00 23.50

6 DO >4.0 9.60 0-8.4

7 BOD <3.0 0.60 7-26

8 COD <10.0 5.10 27-83

9 TKN (Org N + NH3) - - 2.24-26.5

10 MPN, Index/100 ml <5000 280 23000

Note:- All parameters are in mg/l, except pH and MPN index.

Major Issues with Raw Yamuna Water

Deteriorated Quality of Yamuna waterNH3-N as high as 40 TIMES against limit < 1 mg/lit.

BOD as high as 12 TIMES against limit < 3 mg/lit.

PRE-CHLORINATON DEMAND as high as 134 mg/lit.which is too high

Excessive chlorination is used to oxidize Ammonia which is carcinogenic. (Cancer Causing)

Conventional treatment process not suitable toreduce BOD, NH3 and Nitrate from Yamuna rawwater.

Need for a Biological Treatment Process

Future Population of Agra (Census of India 2001)

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036

Year

Agra

Persons

2,033,000

2,909,000

1,260,000

Water Demand (Agra)

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036

Year

m3/day Raw water demand (No pipe rehabilitation)

Raw water demand (pipe rehabilitation)

Total Capacity (New plant +WWI+WWII) 510 MLD

Existing Plants (WWI+WWII)

366 MLD

Ganga Water

340 MLD

Availability of Raw Water at Agra

Town YearWater

Demand (Cusec)

Ganga Water

(Cusec)

Yamuna Water

(Cusec)

% additional

Yamuna Water

AGRA

2006 142 140 -- 0%

2011 160 140 20 12%

2016 179 140 39 22%

2021 199 140 59 30%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

BO

D5

mg

/L

Month

Minimum

Maximum

Typical Variation of BOD5 in Yamuna Raw Water

Raw Water Quality of Yamuna River at Sikandra

Adopted from Agra Jal Sansthan, Sikandra Plant

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

160.00

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Ch

lori

ne

De

ma

nd

(m

g/L

)

Ammonia (mg/L)

Ammonia to Chlorine Demand

Actual Cl2 Demand

Product Water Criteria

Product Water Characteristics :

Parameters Units Design Values

Flow rate MLD 141

pH - 7-8.5

TN mg/L < 10

NH3 mg/L <2 for 95% time

NO3 mg/L <40

BOD5 mg/L <2

Turbidity NTU ≤0.5

TSS mg/L <0.5

True Color Pt/Co Scale ≤ 5

Total Coliform Counts/100ml 0.0

Total Virus Counts/100ml 0.0

Alternative Technology

•Reliability and sustainability

•Technical feasibility

•Plant footprint

•Capital cost

•Operational cost

Process Options

Conventional Activated Sludge Process

Moving Bed Bio-Reactor (MBBR)

Membrane Bio-Reactor (MBR)

Reverse Osmosis Process (RO)

Other Criteria

Proven technology

Reliability and sustainability

Plant footprint

Capital cost

Operational cost

144 MLD AWTP Design

Treatment Processes:

Pre-Setting Tank - with Tube Setter

Fine Screen – 5 mm Auto Cleaning Screen

Moving Bed Bio-Reactor Process

Membrane Filtration

Chlorination

Water Distribution System

WW2B CONSTRUCTION SITE

Major Processes and its Use

Advance Process

Pre-settlers to reduce TSS level in downstream processes

Auto Cleaning Fine Screens

to safeguard the downstream processes

MBBR Biological Process

to reduce ammonia, Nitrate and BOD

Ultra Filtration process

to eliminate TSS, bacteria and virus

Pollution Control

Sludge Treatment Facility

to recover water and to avoid waste sludge discharge to river

Waste discharge routing to the river

to discharge waste stream to downstream side of the raw water intake

Operational Control

Plant Automation using SCADA

It requires additional instrumentation, sensors and actuators

144 MLD WATER TREATMENT PLANT AT SIKANDRA

MBBR Salient Features

Significantly lower footprint required

Suitable for high-load applications

Simple operation

Low O&M costs

No sludge re-circulation

Low sludge yield

Simultaneous BOD and Nitrogen Removal

High quality effluent

MBBR for BOD & NH3 Reduction

Typical Configurations of MBBR for Nitrogen Removal

144 MLD MBBR DesignConfiguration

Feed EthanolEffluent

Material: HDPE (virgin or recycled)

Size: 10- 14 mm

Surface area: 500-1000 m²/m³ of carriers

Geometry: Highly open external surface

Biomass Carriers

AquaWise BioMass Carrier

Case Study for Ammonia Removal MBBR Plant - Israel

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

07-0

1-2

010

12-0

1-2

010

17-0

1-2

010

22-0

1-2

010

27-0

1-2

010

01-0

2-2

010

06-0

2-2

010

11-0

2-2

010

16-0

2-2

010

NH

4-N

co

nc.

[mg

/l]

Date

NH4-N inlet (mg/l) NH4-N outlet (mg/l)

Influent

Effluent

Design Effluent Concentration

Results - MBBR Pilot Plant - Florida

MBBR-UF Pilot Plant

MBBR-UF Pilot Plant – Agra WTP

SecondaryWastewater

MBBR Membrane Filters

Membrane filters

Filtration size 0.1 to 0.01 microns

TSS in filtrate <0.5 mg/L

Status in India Being considered

Protozoa 0 mg/L

Faecal Coliforms < 2 / 100 ML

Membrane Filtration

Removal of Bacterial Contaminants

Membrane Contaminant Removal

Reverse Osmosis

Nano Ultra Micro

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100

.

Pore Diameter - microns

1 micron

Hemoglobin0.007 microns

Na Ion0.00037 microns

Giardia Lamblia &

Cryptosporidium

3 to 5 microns

Water0.0002 microns

Virus

Hollow Fiber Configurations

More difficult to remove solids from confined pressure vessels, tightly packed fibers

Use higher pressures as membranes become fouled

Expensive pressure vessel required for each unit

Open tank configuration, loosely packed fibers for easier solids removal

Low pressure, vacuum-driven operation

Simpler scale-up for larger systems

PressurizedImmersed

Tertiary Membrane Competition

Koch

Memcor CP

(USFilter)

Pall MicrozaNORIT Memcor CS (USFilter)

Hydranautics HydraCAP Trisep Spirasep

Dow / Omexell

Thank You!