STUDY ON IRON AND MANGANESE REMOVAL IN RIVER WATER FOR
TEXTILES INDUSTRY USAGE
ZAITON BIN SAMAD
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
ii
PSZ 19:16 (Pind. 1/97)
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS
JUDUL :
STUDY ON IRON AND MANGANESE REMOVAL IN
RIVER WATER FOR TEXTILES INDUSTRY USAGE
SESI PENGAJIAN : 2004/2005
Saya
ZAITON BIN SAMAD
(HURUF BESAR)
mengaku membenarkan tesis (PSM/Sarjana/Doktor Falsafah)* ini disimpan di
Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti
berikut:
1.
Tesis adalah hakmilik Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
2.
Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk
tujuan pengajian sahaja.
3.
Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran
antara institusi pengajian tinggi.
4.
**Sila tandakan ( / )
(Mengandungi maklumat berdarjah keselamatan atau
SULIT
kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di
dalam AKTA RAHSIA RASMI 1972)
TERHAD
(Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD
ditentukan
oleh
organisasi/badan
penyelidikan dijalankan
yang telah
di
mana
TIDAK TERHAD
Disahkan oleh:
___________________________
(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)
Alamat Tetap:
29 Jln Sri Wangsa 4,
SAID
Tmn Sri Wangsa, Parit Besar
83000 Batu Pahat, Johor
Tarikh:
CATATAN:
*
**
____________________________
(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)
PM DR. MOHD ISMID BIN MOHD
Nama Penyelia
Tarikh:
Potong yang tidak berkenaan
Jika tesis ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak
berkuasa/organisasi berkenaan dengan menyatakan sekali sebab dan
tempoh tesis ini perlu dikelaskan sebagai SYULIT atau TERHAD.
Tesis dimaksudkan sebagai tesis bagi Ijazah Doktor Falsafah dan Sarjana
secara penyelidikan, atau disertasi bagi pengajian secara kerja kursus
dan penyelidikan, atau \Laporan Sarjana Muda (PSM)
iii
STUDY ON IRON AND MANGANESE REMOVAL IN RIVER WATER
FOR TEXTILES INDUSTRY USAGE
ZAITON BIN SAMAD
A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil – Environmental
Management)
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
MARCH 2005
iv
I declare that this project report entitled “ Study On Iron and Manganese in River
Water for Textiles Industry Usage” is the result of my own research except as cited
in the references. The report has not been accepted for any degree and is not
concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree.
Signature
: ...........................................................
Name
: ZAITON BIN SAMAD
Date
:
v
Especially dedicated to my beloved mother, brothers, sisters, my wife “YATI” and
my daughter “Aisyah Nabila”
For all the love, encouragement and faith....
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my highest gratitude to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof.
Dr. Mohd Ismid Bin Mohd Said, who have been very dedicated in showing his
guidance and sharing his invaluable knowledge.
Deepest gratitude to my beloved family for their unconditional care, love
and support throughout my study in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
I would like to thank to Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn. Bhd especially
Mr. Albert Lim Poh Boon, who gave me permission and support to complete my
study.
Last but not least, I would like to express my appreciation for people who
have directly involved in the commencement of this project.
vii
ABSTRAK
Industri tekstil merupakan salah satu industri yang penting di Malaysia.
Dalam industri tekstil terdapat berbagai aktiviti di mana aktiviti pencelupan
merupakan proses yang menggunakan air paling banyak di dalam sektor ini. Oleh
itu kualiti air yang digunakan memainkan peranan yang penting bagi menghasilkan
produk yang bermutu.
Kajian rawatan air yang digunakan di Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn Bhd.
dilakukan untuk melihat tahap keberkesanan penyingkiran Ferum dan Mangan.
Kehadiran Ferum dan Mangan pada kepekatan yang tinggi akan menyebabkan
kerosakkan pada fabrik yang dicelup seperti lekatan kotaran dan sebagainya. Bagi
Ramatex kepekatan yang dibenarkan bagi Ferum dan Mangan ialah 0.3 mg/L dan
0.05 mg/L.
Kajian ini menjurus kepada tiga kaedah penyingkiran Ferum dan Mangan
iaitu, pengoksidaan dengan potassium permanganate, teknik penyerapan udara dan
kombinasi kedua-duanya. Kualiti air sungai yang dirawat mempunyai kepekatan
Ferum di antara 0 mg/L sehingga 6.5 mg/L, manakala untuk Mangan antara 0
mg/L sehingga 2.6 mg/L.
Dari kajian didapati kecekapan penyingkiran Ferum dengan menggunakan
kaedah pengoksidaan potassium permanganat ialah 22% sehingga 100%. Kaedah
teknik penyerapan udara dari 94% sehingga 100% dan kombinasi keduanya ialah
antara
70%
sehingga
100%.
Kecekapan
penyingkiran
Mangan
menggunakan kaedah pengoksidaan potassium permanganat ialah
dengan
dari 8%
sehingga 64.5%. Kaedah teknik penyerapan udara dari 0% sehingga 13 % dan
kombinasi keduanya ialah antara 0% sehingga 100%.
Selain daripada itu dengan kombinasi dua kaedah ini, penggunaan bahan
kimia dapat diturunkan sebanyak 55% bagi potassium permanganate tanpa
menurunkan kualiti air yang dirawat.
viii
ABSTRACT
Textile Industry is one of main industry in Malaysia. There are a lot of
activities in textiles industry such as dyeing process where a lot of water is
required. Quality of water is main issue in this process to produce quality product
or fabric.
A study was done at Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn. Bhd. raw water
treatment plant to see efficiency of ferum and manganese removal. Water supply,
which contains high concentration of ferum and manganese, will affect the fabric
quality such as yellowish stain. For Ramatex permeable limit for Ferum and
Manganese concentration are 0.3 mg/L and 0.5 mg/L.
This study was concentrate at three methods to removed Ferum and
manganese by using potassium permanganate, aeration and combination of
potassium permanganate and aeration method. Quality of river has concentration of
Ferum between 0 mg/L to 6.5 mg/L, and for manganese between 0 mg/L to 2.6
mg/L which are excess with Ramatex quality limit.
From the study, it show that efficiency of Ferum removal by potassium
permanganate is between 22 % to 100%. Aeration method has efficiency from 94
% to 100% and combination of two methods between 70 % to 100%. Efficiency of
Manganese removal by potassium permanganate is between 8 % to 64.5%.
Aeration method has efficiency from 0 % to 13% and combination of two methods
between 0 % to 100%.
Chemical
consumptions
also
reduce
about
55%
for
potassium
permanganate by using combination of two method without reduce water quality
for production usage.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
CONTENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
ABSTRAK
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURE
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
LIST OF APPENDICES
CHAPTER 1
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
PAGE
iv
v
vi
vii
ix
x
xii
xiii
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of Study
1
1.2 Objective of Study
4
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Iron
5
2.2 Manganese
6
2.3 Source of Iron and Manganese
7
2.4 Impacts of Iron and Manganese
10
2.5 Type of Treatment
11
2.6 Efficiency of Aeration
19
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Site Description
20
3.2 Description of existing treatment plant
22
3.3 Method of Iron and Manganese Removal
23
x
3.4 Samples Collecting and Analysis
CHAPTER IV
25
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Evaluation of Aeration system
30
4.2 Distribution of Dissolved Oxygen
31
4.3 Water Quality of River Water
4.4.1 pH and Turbidity
32
4.4.2 Hardness, Chloride and Total
33
Dissolved Solid
4.4.3 Iron and Manganese
34
4.5 Water Quality of the Reservoir
4.5.1
pH and Conductivity
35
4.5.2
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen
37
4.5.3
Redox potential
40
4.5.4
Iron and Manganese
40
4.5.5
Turbidity
44
4.6 Iron and Manganese Removal
4.6.1 Chemical Treatment by Pottasium
45
Permanganate
4.6.2 Aeration method
47
4.6.3 Combination of Pottasium Permanganate
49
and Aeration method
CHAPTER V
4.7 Economy Effect
51
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
54
REFERENCES
56
APPENDIX A-F
58 - 72
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
TITLE
PAGE
1.1
Standard Water Quality For Textiles Industry
2
2.1
Typical concentration of irons containing substances
in environmental and biological systems
7
3.1
Parameter for Sungai Simpang Kanan
20
4.1
Flowrate for Aeration persurface area
30
4.2
Dissolved Oxygen from aeration point to treated
storage tank
31
4.3
Distribution of Dissolved Oxygen in the reservoir
37
4.4
Chemical consumption to treat the water at Ramatex
Raw water treatment plant for year 2004
51
4.5
Chemical dosage from January 2004 until December
2004
52
4.6
Cost of Chemicals usage and cost to treat the water per
cubic meter
53
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
TITLE
PAGE
1.1
Concentration of Iron in Sungai Simpang kanan From
May 2003 until June 2004
3
2.1
Schematic representation of iron cycle
8
2.2
Gas-liquid contact with gas transfer between the
phases
14
2.3
Different types of aerator (water into air)
17
2.4
Different types of aerator (air into water and
mechanical)
Location plan for water intake and Treatment Plant
18
3.2
Schematic diagram of raw water treatment plant at
Ramatex
22
3.3
Arrangement of Venturi Aerator Equipment
24
3.4
Schematic diagram of sampling points
26
3.5
Sampling stations for water quality sampling in
reservoir
27
3.6
Picture of the reservoir
28
3.7
Picture before and after installation of aeration
29
4.1
Profile of pH and Turbidity of river water during the
period of study
32
4.2
Profile of Hardness, Chloride and TDS in River water
during period of study
33
4.3
Profile of Iron and Manganese concentration in River
water during period of study
35
4.4
Profile of pH with water depth at reservoir
36
3.1
21
xiii
4.5
Profile of Temperature with water depth in reservoir
38
4.6
Profile of DO with water depth in reservoir
39
4.7
Profile of ORP with water depth in reservoir
41
4.8
Profile of Iron concentration in reservoir
42
4.9
Profile of Manganese concentration in reservoir
43
4.10
Profile of Turbidity and Iron concentration in River
Water
45
4.11
Profile of Iron concentration in River water, treated
water and percentage of Iron removal by pottasium
permanganate
46
4.12
Profile of Manganese concentration in River water,
Treated water and percentage of Manganese removal
by Pottasium permanganate
46
4.13
Profile of Iron concentration in River water, treated
water and percentage of Iron removal by Aeration
Method
47
4.14
Profile of Manganese concentration in River water,
Treated water and percentage of Manganese removal
by Aeration Method
48
4.15
Profile of Iron concentration in River water, treated
water and percentage of Iron removal by combination
of Pottasium permanganate and aeration method
49
4.16
Profile of Manganese concentration in River water,
Treated water and perventage of Manganese removal
by combination of Pottasium permanganate and
aeration method
50
5.1
Water current inside the reservoir at aeration point
55
5.2
Proposed location for aeration point
55
xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations
Full Name
DO
Dissolved Oxygen
ORP
Oxidation Redox Potential
PAC
Poly Aluminium Chloride
TDS
Total Dissolved Oxygen
xv
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX
TITLE
PAGE
A
Data of Analysis for river water and treated water
during treated by pottasium permanganate
56
B
Data of Analysis for river water and treated water
during treated by pottasium permanganate and
aeration
58
C
Water Quality Data for Reservoir
63
D
Iron and Manganese Concentration in Reservoir
67
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background of Study
Water is one of the most important elements in human life. Water is
essentials for human daily activities such as for drinking, washing, cooking and
others. In. Malaysia as climate country source of water supply is mainly from
surface water such as streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and reservoirs.
The quality and quantity of surface water depends on combination of
climatic and geological factors. Water is needed to treat for drinking purpose or
other usage such as for industrial or production usage. Textiles Industry is one of
the biggest consumers of water supply especially for dyeing activities.
Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn. Bhd. is an integrated textiles manufacturer
located at Sri Gading Indsutrial Estate, Batu Pahat Johor. The main activities in
this plant are spinning, knitting, dyeing, printing and finishing. All the activities
were need water in their activities such as spinning and knitting for cooling system
which is important to maintain the quality of product during manufacturing
process. Washing activities and preparation of the pigment at printing mill. The
largest consumer of water in this plant is dyeing mill were about 80% of water
supply are use in this mill. Water demand for dyeing mill at Ramatex was about
210 cubic meters per hour.
2
Currently Ramatex in the process of establish its own standard of water
quality for the purpose of dyeing process. Table 1.1 shows standard of water
quality for Ramatex and other for textiles industry. Excess contaminant in the
water such as hardness, iron, manganese and turbidity affect the quality of fabric
during dyeing process. Management are more concern with iron and manganese in
the water. Iron and manganese affect the quality of fabric if excess in the water
supply although in small amount.
Table 1.1: Standard water quality for textile industry (Cheong, 1996).
No
Parameter
A
B
C
D
6.5 – 7.4
5.5 – 9.0
-
5.5 – 6.0
1.
pH
2.
Alkalinity
-
-
-
< 15
3.
Turbidity
-
-
-
< 0.5 FTU
4.
Hardness
-
-
-
< 30
5.
Chloride
9 – 25
< 300
-
-
6.
Total Dissolved solid
130 – 170
< 1000
-
< 150
7.
Calcium
-
-
-
< 5.0
8.
Magnesium
-
-
-
< 5.0
9.
Iron
0 –0.1
< 0.3
0.01 – 0.1
<0 .3
10.
Manganese
-
-
0.02
<0.05
5 –30
< 50
15 - 20
< 10.0
11. Silica
Unit in mg/l except for pH
Note:
A: Standard of Japan Textiles Finishers Association (JTFA)
B: Standard for Cotton and PE/COT Fabric
C: Calise, Textile Chemicals and Auxiliaries
D: Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn. Bhd.
3
Since year 1990, Ramatex was using municipal water for dyeing process.
But after water crisis on year 1997, Ramatex with their own afford was build their
own water treatment system for their usage.
This plant is using chemical
treatment i.e. coagulant and flocculants process
for primary
treatment before
further treated by using membrane filtration in secondary treatment.
Water
resource are taken from Sungai Simpang Kanan , tributary of Sungai Batu Pahat.
Base on water analysis from Water Department of Ramatex, concentration
of iron and manganese in the river water fluctuated and the highest concentration
of iron is about 15 ppm. From data analyses it also shown that iron concentration
in the river water are high for several month i.e. in mid of the year. That may be
due to drought season or excavating activities by Drainage and Irrigating
Department (DID) for maintenance purpose. Figure 1.1 shows iron concentration
in Sungai Simpang Kanan water at catchments area.
16
14
10
8
6
4
2
20
0
21 3
/5
1 0 /0 3
/6
/2
00
30 3
/6
/0
20 3
/7
/
9/ 03
8/
20
0
29 3
/8
/0
18 3
/9
8 / /0 3
10
/2
0
28 03
/1
0/
17 03
/1
1
7/ /03
12
/2
0
27 03
/1
2/
0
16 3
/1
/
5/ 04
2/
20
0
25 4
/2
/0
17 4
/3
/
6/ 04
4/
20
0
26 4
/4
/0
16 4
/5
/
5/ 04
6/
20
0
25 4
/6
/0
4
0
1/
5/
Concentration / ppm
12
Date
Figure 1.1:
Concentration of Iron and Manganese in Sungai Simpang Kanan
from May 2003 until June 2004
4
Excess of iron and manganese content in water supply for production was
create a problem to the quality of dyed and yarn fabric. Red stain was occurring at
white or light colour of fabric after dyeing process. The worse problem are facing
by yarn dyeing part were yarn was act as filter during dyeing process by trap
suspended iron and manganese at their yarn fibre. This will cause about 20-30% of
yarn will be remove and thrown away as reject product.
To solve this problem, management was agree to put potassium
permanganate to remove iron and manganese from river water. This method will
increase operation cost. This study was conducted to see efficiency of aeration as
alternative method to remove iron and manganese and to reduce the operation cost
of water treatment.
1.2
Objective of Study
Iron and Manganese are two elements that always occur in river water.
High concentration of two elements in water will cause problem for further usage.
There are many methods to remove iron and manganese in water such as oxidation
by chemical or aeration method. The objective of this study is to compare the
effectiveness of iron and manganese removal by:
1. Chemical oxidation by using potassium permanganate.
2. Oxidation by aeration method, and
3. Combination of potassium permanganate and aeration method.
5
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
IRON
Quality of water depends on its physical, chemical, microbiological and
radiochemical characteristics. Drinking water or other usage always need desired
quality of water often need treatment.
There are certain elements or compounds in raw water which are not
removable by conventional processes of water treatment. The elements include
sodium, magnesium, nitrate, sulphate, chloride, iron, mangenese etc.
Iron is found in most raw waters in numerous forms: in true solution, as a
colloid, in suspension, or as a complex with other mineral or organic substance. It
can impart a bitter taste when present in large amounts, marking the water
unpalatable (Corbitt, 1999).
Iron is generally present in the soluble ferrous state and water containing a
lot of iron takes up oxygen on exposure to air. In ferric state, it will be precipitated
and causing brown stains on laundry and plumbing fixtures. Even small amounts of
iron can lead to the accumulation of large deposits in a distribution system. These
deposits also can give a good condition for iron bacteria growth, which in turn
6
cause further deterioration in the quality of the water by producing slimes, or
objectionable odours.
Levels of iron are in the range of 1 to 5 mg/l in large percentage of
Malaysian river waters (MWA, 1996). High levels also exits in some ground
waters. If iron level is high than 0.3 mg/l the water should be treated (Smathurst,
1988). Current treatment such as prechlorination and/or aeration followed by
adequate coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and pH control are
always applied. If iron concentration greater than 1.0 mg/l it will be need special
processes and the cost to treat the water will be increased.
2.2
MANGANESE
Manganese resemble with iron
in its chemical behavior and occur in
natural water. Normally the concentration of manganese are lower than iron in
natural water. Although small quantities of manganese present in natural water it
will cause troublesome element. Deposited of manganese will occur with presence
of oxygen or after chlorine added. It will coat the interior of the distribution
systems with black slime. Large quantity of manganese is toxic, but a water
requires treatment on grounds of taste and aesthetic quality long before such levels
are reached. A large percentage of the manganese in raw water in Malaysia can be
removed by conventional treatment. In certain areas KMnO4 has been utilized to
remove persistent high level of manganese.
7
2.3
SOURCE OF IRON AND MANGANESE
Iron is the second most abundant metal in the crust of the earth and the
fourth most abundant of all elements. The earth’s core is predominantly composed
of liquid iron and the mantle contains large quantities of iron-containing silicates
(William, 1999).
Dissolved iron still found in trace quantities in the hydrosphere and
insoluble iron compounds are present in streams and oceans as suspended solids.
Iron always found together with manganese nodules at the bottom of the oceans.
This nodule consists of iron oxide (Fe2O3), manganese oxide (MnO2), and small
amounts of clays, CaCO3, SiO2 and organic matter. In the atmosphere, iron is
found in suspended particles of dust. Typical concentration of iron-containing
substances in environmental (and biological) system is given in Table 1 below. But
we must be aware that environmental concentrations can vary widely from place to
place.
Table 2.1:
Typical concentration of irons-containing substances
environmental and biological systems (Williams I., 1999).
Location
Earth’s crust (by weight)
Concentration
5%
Sea water (by weight)
Surface
0.01 – 0.1 ug dm-3
Deep
0.1 – 0.4 ug dm-3
Stream water (by weight)
Drinking water (by weight)
0.01 – 0.1 ug dm-3
0.01 – 10.0 mg dm-3
Human body (by weight)
Average
60 mg dm-3
Blood
450 mg dm-3
Atmosphere
In airborne particulate matter
(by mass per unit volume)
0.5 ug m-3
in
8
Figure 2.1 shows a schematic diagram of the iron cycle (Williams, 1999).
Dust particles containing iron may be blown by the wind to and from the crust and
also may be deposited on the crust and in the oceans or river by rainout. Due to the
low solubility of most iron compounds, the cycling of iron between land and
oceans or river mainly through transfer of suspended solids.
Iron (III) compounds are not dissolving in water as long as there is oxygen
present. In anaerobic condition, insoluble iron (III) is converted to soluble iron (II),
which may be leached away. High amounts of iron (II) in groundwater due to a
limited amount of dissolved oxygen and a high level of carbon dioxide are present.
However, in river water that is well aerated, iron is always present as insoluble
(suspended) iron (III).
Iron and manganese enter soil solutions under the reducing conditions
existing in water, which have not been exposed, to atmospheric oxygen for long
periods or in zone having active anaerobic bacterial populations such as lake and
river sediments.
Iron and manganese dissolution are related to release of CO2 and H2S. Ion
Fe2+ are important catalysts for the production of free radical in the atmosphere.
Transition metal ions may enter raindrops in trace concentrations by scavageing
process during rain event.
9
ATMOSPHERE
Dust
LAND
Residual
Deposits
iron ores
iron(III)
Bog iron ores
Iron (III)
Solution
Iron (II)
Ferruginous
laterites Iron
(III)
RIVER
Suspended
solid
(99.8%)
Weathering
Crystalline rocks
ferromagnesian
minerals iron(II)
Sedimentary rocks
ironstones
iron ores iron(II) +
iron(III)
Diagenesis
Metasomatism
(high temperature)
Figure 2.1:
(low temperature)
Schematic representation of iron cycle
OCEAN
Solution Fe3+
(3ppb)
Sediments
Oxidizing
conditions
Iron(III)
oxide
Reducing
conditions
iron (II)
minerals
10
Iron and manganese can also be solubilized in the CO2-rich root zone by
dissolution of rock minerals containing the corresponding carbonates.
An
anaerobic hypolimnion (stagnant bottom water layer) in a reservior dissolves
precipitates iron and manganese from the bottom muds, and during periods of
overturn or drought season these minerals are dispersed througjht the entire depth.
Iron forms complexes of hydroxide and other in-organic complexes in
solution with substatial amounts of bocarbonate, sulphate, phosphate, cyanide or
halides. Presence of organic substances induce the formation of organic complexes
which increase the solubility of Iron. The water of high alkalinity have lower iron
than waters of low alkalinity.
2.4
IMPACTS OF IRON AND MANGANESE
a. The precipitation Fe2+ and Mn2+ ions rapidly oxidize on contact with
atmospheric oxygen to yield the higher oxidation states. These form
quite insoluble compounds. The most commonly observable change of
this sort is that Fe2+ into Fe3+ followed by precipitation as a hydroxide.
This hydroxide can be observed on calm water as a thin, red-colored
iridescent film floating on the eater surface (Williams, 1999).
b. Iron and manganese can cause difficulities in distribution system by
supporting growths of iron bacteria. These oxides and hydroxide can
lead to troublesome deposits in industrial waters such as bacterial
corrosion, staining, and reduction of cross section of piping system (Mc
Carty, 1994).
c. Iron also imparts a taste to water which is detecteable at very low
concentrations. Concentration of Iron in excess of 0.2 to 0.3 mg/L may
cause nuisance even though is presence does not affect the hygienic
quality of water (Graay, 1999).
11
d. Iron and manganese interfere with laundering operations (Corbitt,
1999).
e. To prevent esthetic and economic damage (Corbitt, 1999).
2.5
TYPE OF TREATMENT
Current water treatment pratices employes three general methods for
reducing iron contents to less than maximum contaminant level. The first one is
using oxidation and precipitation methods by aeration or use of chemicals like
chlorine, chlorine dioxide or potassium permanganate followed by filtration alone
or by settling and filtration can bring about precipitation of iron and manganese
and its removal. Second method are use Ion-exchange methods by using zeolites as
well as catalytic also serve the purpose. The third one are by using stabilization
with polyphosphates and silicates (Samuel, 1997). For this study oxidation by
potassium permanganate and aeration are focus to remove iron and manganese
from river water.
a.
Oxidation by Chemical Oxidants
There are several chemical can be use as oxidant to remove iron and
manganese from the water. The most used chemical oxidants are:
i. Chlorine gas or sodium hypochlorite.
The active compound in both cases is hypochlorous acid, HOCl, which
react according to (Roquest, 1995):
HOCl
HCl + 0.5O2
12
The oxidation treatment can be coupled with a strilization treatment if the
water is destined for municipal distribution. The residual chlorine level of 0.4 mg/l
required to insure proper sterilization is also adequate for insuring complete iron
oxidation.
ii. Other bactericidal agents such as ozone are also power oxidants.
iii. Hydrogen peroxide, H2O2,
H2O2 is especialy active in iron removal cases since Fe(OH)3 catalyzes
both the oxidation reactions it participates in and its breakdown (Fenton reagent).
iv. Potassium permanganate, KMnO4.
Theoretically, 1 mg/L of potassium permanganate oxidizers 1.06 mg/L of
iron or 0.52 mg/L of manganese (Hammer, 2001). But in actual practice, the
amount needed is often less than this theoretical requirement. Permanganate
oxidation may be advantageous for certain waters, since its rate of reaction is
relatively independent of pH.
Below is basic equation for iron and manganese removal by potassium
permanganate.
Equation for iron, Fe (II):
Fe(HCO3)2
+ KMnO4
Ferrous bicarbonate
Fe(OH)3
+
Ferric hydroxide
MnO2
manganese dioxide
13
Equation for manganese, Mn(II):
Mn(HCO3)2
+ KMnO4
Manganous bicarbonate
MnO2
manganese dioxide
One main advantages of potassium permanganate oxidation is the high rate of the
reaction, many times faster than for chlorine, also the rate of reaction is relatively
idenpendent of the hydrogen ion concentration within a pH of 5 – 9 (Boyce,
1997).
b.
Oxidation by Aeration
The main purpose of aeration in water treatment is to provide oxygen from
the atmosphere for the oxidation of dissolved iron and manganese to their insoluble
form and to liberate carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide thereby reducing
corrosiveness and removing odor (Nathanson, 2000). Other benefit of aeration is, it
will increase dissolved oxygen content in water thereby causing have a sparkling
appearance and “fresh” taste.
In the absence of oxidizing agents, iron and manganese are soluble in
water. Iron and manganese are soluble in significant quantities only in the
oxidation state (+2), i.e.’ Fe2+ and Mn2+. Upon contact with oxygen during aeration
process both ferrous and manganese will oxidize to higher valances, forming new
ionic complexes that are not soluble to any appreciable extent. Iron and manganese
will be removed as a precipitate during further treatment after aeration process
(Hammer, 2001). The reactions may be written as follows.
4Fe2+ + O2 + 10H2O
4Fe(OH)3
2Mn2+ + O2 + 2H2O
2MnO2
+ 8H+
+
4H+
(3)
(4)
14
For equation (3), Fe will be change from the +2 to the +3 oxidation state
and in equation (4), Mn will be change from the +2 to the +4 oxidation state. Free
oxygen will be reduced and the anion originally associated with the ferrous and
manganous ions recombines with other cations in the solution. pH value for the
solution will be lowered by the production of hydrogen ions.
Gas content in the atmosphere and water is in equilibrium. Gases will
liberated or desorption when their concentration in water is higher that at
equilibrium. In the other hand gases will be absorbed by water when their
concentration in water is below that at equilibrium. Processes of absorption or
liberation is called aeration in water treatment are very slow unless large water
surface are exposed or unless the water is agitated.
Gas
Absorption
Desorption/
liberation
Liquid
Figure 2.2 : Gas-liquid contact with gas transfer between the phases
15
Due to Design Guidelines For Water Supply System by The Malaysian
Water Assosiation there are two main aeration methods for water supply treatment.
1. Water into air.
This type of aerator is designed to produce small droplets or thin sheets of
water exposed to atmosphere. Examples of water into air aerators are:
a. Cascade aerators (single or multiple drop)
In cascade aerators, the water is allowed to flow downward over a
series of steps which causes the water to fall in thin layers from one
level to the other. This results in increasing the area-volume ratio
and the exposure time for mass transfer. Increasing the number of
steps increases the exposure time, and the addition of baffles to
produce turbulence will increase the area-volume ratio.
These areators are used mainly for gas transfer, such as removal of
carbon dioxide, where sufficient space and drop are avaiable at the
plant. The space requirements are on the order of 4050ft2/day/million gallons and head requirement varies from 3 to 10
ft. The efficiency of these aerators for removal of carbon dioxide
ranges from 25-45% (Samuel, 1997). This system are mainly used
in Malaysia for water treatment (MWA).
b. Multiple platform aerators, commonly known as circular cascade
aerators.
In multiple platform aerators, the water is allowed to flow
downward over a series of steps which causes the water to fall in
thin layers from one level to the other. This system same as cascade
aerators but in circular form. This system also widely use in water
treatment system in Malaysia (MWA).
16
c. Spray aerators.
In this system, the water is sprayed through fixed nozzles installed
on a pipe grid. Th sprayed water is broken into small drops, thus
providing high area to volume ratio for efficient gas transfer
(Samuel, 1997). The spray nozles direct the water upward,
vertically or at an inclined angle, and are generally designed as
fountain type, spraying into the open atmosphere.
2. Air into water.
The air into water aerator creates small bubbles of air that rises through
water being aerated. Examples of air into water aerators are:
a. Venturi aerators, and
b. Draft tube aerators.
3. Combination of both methods
Examples of combination aerators are:
a. Mechanical aerators and
b. Pressure aerators
17
Cascade Aerator
Raw
Water
Aerated
Water
Multiple-platform aerator
Platforms
Spray Aerator
Water Basin Wall
Nozzles
Nozzle
Feeding
pipe
Figure 2.3:
Different types of aerator (water into air)
18
Venturi Aerator
Air
Supply
Perforated pipe
Throat
Venturi
Aerated
Water
Raw Water
Rotating Brush
Raw Water
Figure 2.4:
Aerated water
Different types of Aerator (air into water and mechanical)
19
2.6
Efficiency of Aeration
The efficiency of aeration influence by:
1. The amount of surface contact between air and water.
2. Time of contact.
3. Type of aerator.
Efficiency of aeration generally measured by the increase in the oxygen
concentration or decrease of carbon dioxide concentration in the water. For
example, cascade aerators can remove as much as 50% to 60% of carbon dioxide
present in raw water, while spray aerators can remove about 90% of carbon
dioxide.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
3.1
Site Description
Sungai Simpang Kanan is located in the district of Batu Pahat, Johor. Sungai
Simpang Kanan is interval of Sungai Sembrong at the junction of Sungai Bekok and
Sungai Sembrong (Figure 3.1). There are two dams located at upstream of Sungai
Sembrong and Sungai Bekok for flood control, irrigation and water supply. One
study was done to know the class of this river. Information data was obtained from
Water Laboratory record at Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn. Bhd. Table 3.1 shows
the data to classify the river.
Table 3.1:
No
Parameter for Sungai Simpang Kanan.
Parameter
Unit
Data
1.
pH
2.9 – 5.6
2.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
mg/L
5 - 55
3.
Chemical Oxygen Demand
mg/L
45 – 200
4.
Suspended Solids
mg/L
5 - 150
5.
Ammonia Nitrogen, NH4+
mg/L
< 0.1
6.
Dissolved Oxygen
mg/L
1.4 - 3.1
Six parameter are use to classify the river by refer to water quality index. Base
on the WQI Simpang Kanan River can be classify to Class III.
21
Sembrong
Dam
Sg. Bekok
Sg. Simpang Kiri
Sg. Semberong
Intake area
Lot 2033
Sg. Simpang Kanan
Sg. Batu Pahat
Figure 3.1:
Primary Treatment Plant
Lot 2945
Location plan for water intake and Treatment Plant
22
3.2
Description of existing treatment plant.
Figure 3.2 shows flowchart for existing treatment plant at Ramatex. Water
from Sungai Simpang Kanan was channelled into small reservoir with area 80 feet
width x 200 ft long and 15 ft depth. Water from the pond was pump to primary
treatment by transfer pump about 1.8 km.
KMnO4
Sungai
Simpang
Kanan
NaOH
Reservoir
PAC
Polymer
Clarifier
Coagulant
and
Flocculant
Tank
Storage
Tank
Figure 3.2:
To
Production
Schematic diagram of raw water treatment plant at Ramatex
23
Potassium permanganate was pump into piping system during water transfers.
Caustic was dose to adjust water pH at mixing tank. After that Coagulant i.e.: Poly
Aluminium Chloride will be dose by dosing pump. Lastly flocculants i.e.,
polyelectrolyete are dose into mixing tank before go to clarifier. In clarifier floc will
be sediments at the bottom of clarifier and clear water are overflow to storage tank
before further treatment or use in the production.
3.3.
Method of Iron and Mangenese removal.
a. Potassium permanganat.
In this method potassium permanganat in powder form (industrial
grade ) was used. 200 g of potassium permanganat were dilute to 1000 liter
water in storage tank. By using dosing pump, potassium permanganate were
pump to piping system before go to treatment plant. Dosing rate about 0.03
ppm of potassium permanganate. Sample of river water and treated water was
taken and analysed to identify iron and manganese removal.
b. Aeration method.
For aeration method, venturi aeration was used to identify effenciency
of iron and manganese removal. One inch pipe was tap from main pipe. One
injector was intstall to one inch pipe to suck in air from the atmosphere. Two
inch PVC pipe was put at the end off the one inch pipe. Two inch pipe is
located at the suction area. Samples was taken for river water and treated
water. During this method potassium permanganat are not dose in.
24
Air inlet
Pressure gauge
Water outlet
Injector
1 inch pipe
Water inlet
To Raw
water
treatment
plant
Transfer
pump
Air bubble
Aeration
point
Reservoir
Figure 3.3:
Arrangement of venturi aerator equipment
25
c. Potassium permanganat and aeration method.
For this method, method (a) and (b) as above were use together to look the
efficency of the iron and manganese removal.
3.4. Sample Collecting and analysis.
Two types of method were used i.e., collecting sample and analysed in
laboratory and in-situ measurement.
a. In-Situ measurement
In-situ measurement was done by using water quality monitoring, model
Horibba U22. Several parameters are measured i.e. pH, ORP, conductivity,
Dissolved oxygen and temperature. Figures 3.4 and 3.5 shows four sampling
points for in-situ measurement in the reservoir. Measurement was done base on
the water depth.
b. Laboratory analysis.
Two (2) samples will be take everyday for Iron and manganese analysis.
The samples are from:
a. River water at pond at Lot 2033, Mukim Simpang Kanan and;
b. Treated water at water treatment plant after clarifier at Lot 2945 Mukim
Simpang Kanan, Batu Pahat.
All samples was taken to Water laboratory at Ramatex Textiles Industrial
Sdn. Bhd. for Iron and manganese analysis. Method of analyis was follow or
26
used Standard Method, APHA 3500-Fe B and APHA 3500-Mn B method for
Iron and Manganese analyis respectively. All anlysis was use Atomic
Absorption Spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer, AAS 300).
S1
S2
S3
S4
KMnO4
Sungai
Simpang
Kanan
Treated
water
Reservoir
Polymer
Clarifier
Storage
Tank
Figure 3.4:
NaOH
PAC
River
water
Schematic diagram of sampling points
Coagulant
and
Flocculant
Tank
To
Production
27
Simpang Kanan River
S1
S2
Aeration
point
S3
S4
To Treatment plant
Transfer pump
Figure 3.5:
Sampling stations for water quality sampling in reservoir
28
Water inlet
Aeration area at pump
suction
Figure 3.6:
Picture of the Reservoir
29
BEFORE
AFTER
Figure 3.7:
Air Bubble
Picture before and after installation of aeration
Sg. Bekok
CHAPTER IV
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1
Evaluation of Aeration system.
Aeration system is efficient when the efficency of the mixing is 100%
(Azraai, 2000). Azraai in his study was inform that several aeration system was
evaluated by Lorezen and Fast (1997), Davis (1980), Tay and Chui (1990).
Table 4.1, show eduquate flowrate for aeration at the lake persurface area.
Table 4.1:
Flowrate for aeration persurface area (Azraai, 2000)
Lorenzen & Fast (1997)
9.2 m3/min.km2
Davis (1980)
3.5 m3/min.km2
Cooke et. Al 91993)
6.1-12.3 m3/min.km2
For this study area of the lake as follow.
Surface area of the reservoir : 24 m x 100 m = 2, 400 m2 = 0.0024 km2
Maximum Depth
: 3.0 m
Air flow
: 37.5 L/min
Pressure
: 1.2 bar
31
4.2
Distribution of Dissolved Oxygen
Table 4.2 shows disolved oxygen from suction area at the reservoir
until storage tank. From the data it show that disolved oxygen increase at
mixing tank were coagulant and flocculant process happened. The highest
disolved oxygen reading is at the storage tank where reading of dissolved
oxygen is more than 8.3 mg/L. Increasing of dissolved oxygen in the step of
water treatment was caused by:
a. Cascade aeration happen at the mixing tank .
b. At the clarifier the current flow of the water from the bottom of the
clarifier and overflow to the weir was cause air and water contact
and increase the dissolved oxygen content in the water.
c. Water from the clarifier will overflow to the channel and go into
storage tank. Water will contact with air during going through the
channel and during water fall into storage tank like as cascade
aeration system.
Table 4.2:
Dissolved Oxygen from aeration point to treated storage tank.
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L
Date
Aeration
Before
area
mixing
Mixing tank
Stoarge
Tank 1
Tank 2
Clarifier
tank
tank
27/1/2005
3.8
3.4
4.4
5.8
6.8
8.3
28/7/2005
3.9
3.6
4.5
6.3
7.3
8.6
32
4.3
Water Quality of River Water
4.3.1
pH and Turbidity
Figure 4.1 shows profile of pH and turbidity of river water during the
period of study. The profile shows that river water are mainly acidic where the
pH range are from 3.5 to 6. This was happening due to soil condition within
this area where there are swap area along the riverside near the intake water.
This area is the place where to put all mud and rubbish such as grass during
river cleaning by Drainage and Irrigation department.
Turbidity of river water not more than 10 FTU except for month of July
2004. Source of turbidity of this river are mainly from suspended solid that
70
6
60
5
50
4
40
3
30
2
20
1
10
0
0
1/
6/
20
14 04
/6
25 /04
/
7/ 6/0
7/ 4
20
19 04
8/ /7/
23 04
/2
9/ 00
6 4
9/ /20
17 04
9/ /20
2 04
10 9/2
/1 0 0
4
10 2/2
0
/2 0
3 4
11 /20
/ 04
11 4/2
/1 0 0
9 4
12 /20
/ 04
12 1/2
/1 0 0
3/ 4
20
04
pH
7
FTU
erode by surface runoff during wet season.
Date
pH
Figure 4.1:
Turbidity FTU
Profile of pH and Turbidity of river water during period of study
33
4.3.2
Hardness, Chloride and Total Dissolved Solid
Figure 4.2 shows profile of hardness, chloride and TDS in river water
for a period of study. Concentration of TDS is fluctuate from 100 mg/l to 350
mg/L. in other hand, concentration of chloride and hardness is more constant
with concentration of chloride from 40 mg/L to 250 mg/L and concentration of
hardness from 40 mg/L to 90 mg/L. Concentration of TDS are mainly influence
with pH of river water. TDS concentration increase when pH of river water is
decrease or more acidic. That because a lot of impurities or suspended solids
are dissolved in acidic condition.
400
350
Concentration, mg/L
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Date
Hardness mg/L
Figure 4.2:
Chloride mg/L
TDS mg/L
Profile of Hardness, chloride and TDS in river water during
peroid of study.
34
Concentration of hardness and chloride are influence of the season and
water tidal. That because this area is influence to high tide and low tide from
the sea. During dry season, high tide was cause sea water reach intake area and
increase concentration of hardness and chloride content in river water.
4.3.3
Iron and Manganese
Profile of iron and manganese are shown in this figure. It show that
both of them are fluctuate with the same pattern but concentration of
manganese is lower than iron. Concentration of iron is from 0 mg/L to 6.5
mg/L and concentration of manganese from 0 mg/L to 2.6 mg/L. This figure
shows that concentration of manganese is mainly lower than 1 mg/L.
7
Concentration, mg/L
6
5
4
3
2
1
1/
6/
2
8/ 004
6/
20
0
14 4
/6
/0
19 4
/6
/
25 04
/6
1/ /04
7/
2
7/ 004
7/
20
0
13 4
/7
/0
19 4
8/ /7/0
17 4
/
8/ 200
23 4
/
8/ 200
28 4
/2
9/ 004
6/
9/ 200
11 4
/
9/ 200
17 4
/
9/ 200
23 4
/2
9/ 00
29 4
/
10 200
/6 4
10 /20
/1 0 4
2
10 /20
/1 04
8
10 /20
/2 04
3
10 /20
/2 04
9/
11 200
/4 4
11 /20
/1 0 4
0
11 /20
/1 04
9/
11 20
/2 04
5/
12 200
/1 4
/
12 200
/7 4
12 /20
/1 0 4
3
12 /20
/1 04
8/
20
04
0
Date
Iron mg/L
Figure 4.3:
Mangenese mg/L
Profile of Iron and Manganese concentration in river water
during period of study.
35
4.4
Water Quality of the Reservoir
4.4.1
pH and Conductivity
Average of pH value at the forth sampling stations are 4.0, where pH
value of station 4 was lower than other stations. The pH value in this reservoir
may be enffluence by geology factor i.e, type of the earth. Base on the water
depth, all stations shows that pH value will decrease when water is more
depper. Azraai (2000) in his study at Sungai Terip also show the same pattern,
where pH value at surface are always greater than pH value at the bottom of the
reservoir. Differential of pH value between surface and bottom of the reservoir
are 0.03 to 0.3.
Conductivity from the 4 stations shows the same value except for
measurement on 20 December 2004, where conductivity at station 3 is higher
than other stations. Conductivity for 4 stations is higher on 9 December 2004
i.e. 62 mS/m rather than other day of measurement. Conductivity is higer due
to increasing of ion concentration in the water (Azraai, 2000). Source of the ion
may be from the errosion of the earth by surface runoff during rain event.
Conductivity of most fresh water ranges from 10 to 1,000 uS/cm but may
exceed 1,000 uS/cm, especially in polluted waters, or those receiving large
quantities of land run-off (Chapman, 1996).
36
37
4.5.2
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen
Figures 4.5 and 4.6 shows profil of temperature and DO at 4 stations
with water depth. There are no differential or changes of temperature from the
surface and the bottom of the reservoir. It may be cause due to the depth of the
reservoir is only 2.4 meter to 3.0 meter.
There are some differential of DO concentration between surface water
and at the bottom of the reservior between 0.1 to 0.4. Concentration of DO is
higher at station S2, S3 and S4 than stations S1. That because station S4 is
aeration point where more oxygen are dissolved by aeration rather than station
1.
Table 4.3: Distribution of dissolved Oxygen in the Reservoir.
Date
River
S1
S2
S3
S4
20/12/2004
1.2 mg/L
2.7 mg/L
3.3 mg/L
3.4 mg/L
3.3 mg/L
21/12/2004
1.4 mg/L
1.1 mg/L
1.7 mg/L
1.9 mg/L
2.1 mg/L
29/12/2004
3.1 mg/L
3.4 mg/L
4.4 mg/L
4.7 mg/L
4.2 mg/L
Table 4.3, show average of dissolved oxygen distribution inside the
reservoir. Fourth sampling stations i.e., inlet to reservoir (S1), middle of the
resrvoir (S2), 4 m from the the aeration point (S3) and at aeration point (S4)
was establish to look dissolved oxygen distribution. From the data it show that
concentration of dissolved oxygen will increase nearby the aeration point. It
show that aeration system will help to increase concentration of dissolved
oxygen although in small amount.
38
39
40
4.4.3
Redox potential.
Redox potential is measurement of electron activity which are required
for reaction during reaction of reducton and oxidation process. In lake, redoks
potential are related with a lot of reaction which will be happen (Davison,
1993). Redoks potential which was obtain at 4 sampling stations shows in
Figures 4.7. Redoxs potential for all stations are increase with water depth.
It shows that electron activities are more active at the bottom of
reservoir. That because a lot of sediment are occur at the bottom part of
reservoir. A lot acitivities such as chemicals reaction and biological activities
was happened.
4.4.4
Iron and Manganese
Fluctation of Iron and manganese concentration at 4 stations are shown
at Figure 4.8 and 4.9. Concentration of Iron at station S1 is higher than other
stations. Concentration of manganese also show a same pattern as iron.
Decreasing of iron and manganese concentration due to sedimetation process
during water flow from the river go through reservoir inlet and to suction area.
Concentration of iron and manganese is high in river water when go
into the reservoir. Reservoir was react as a sedimentation basin and many
activities such as sedimentation and oxidation of impurities was happen in the
reservoir. Some suspended solids and impurities will sinks to bottom of the
reservoir by gravity force. Some iron and manganese was oxidize by oxygen in
the reservoir and fall down to the bottom of the reservoir. This condition will
help to reduce concentration of impurities such as iron, manganese and other
and increase water quality.
41
42
43
44
4.4.5
Turbidity
Figure 4.10 shows relation of turbidity of water with iron concentration
in river water. From the figure it shows that concentration of iron will affect
water quality especially turbidity of the water. High concentration of feric in
water will cause yellowish of water, purge odor and other effect of water
quality (Azraai, 2000). Iron in ferric state will cause yellowish color of the
water. Occurrence of this color was affected water quality such as turbidity
where turbidity will increase. This figure shows concentration of iron and
profile of turbidity of river water in the period of study. From this figure it
show that turbidity will increase when concentration of iron in river water is
high.
6
14
12
Turbidity, FTU
10
4
8
3
6
2
4
1
2
0
8/
13
/2
00
4
8/
25
/2
00
4
9/
8/
20
04
9/
20
/2
00
4
10
/1
/2
00
4
10
/1
4/
20
04
10
/2
6/
20
04
11
/6
/2
00
4
11
/2
2/
20
04
12
/3
/2
00
4
12
/1
5/
20
04
0
Date
Turbidity FTU
Figure 4.10:
Fe mg/L
Profile of Turbidity and Iron concentration in river water
Fe concentration, mg/L
5
45
4.5
Iron and Manganese Removal
In this study, three method are used to see the efficency of iron and
manganese removal in river water. The three method are chemical treatment by
using pottasium permanganate, aeration method and combination of chemical
treatment and aeration method.
4.5.1
Chemical Treatment by pottasium permanganate.
Pottasium permanganate is most strong oxidant which was used
globally to remove iron and manganese in water treatment. Figure 4.11 shows
percentage of iron removal by pottasium permanganate during this study. This
figure show that percentage of iron removal by pottassium permanganate is
fluctuate between 20% to 100%. Concentration of iron in treated water is lower
than water quality requrement for Ramatex i.e. 0.3 mg/L.
Figure 4.12 shows percentage of manganese removal by pottasium
permanganese. From the figure is shows that the highest removal of manganese
is 64.5%. It will due to reaction between pottassium permangante with iron and
manganese. Regarding to Roques (1995), that are difficulties to remove iron
and manganese in one time due to the significant difference in iron and
manganese oxidation rates. Addition of the chemical oxidant required for
manganese oxidation to the raw water results in rapid precipitation of iron. The
precipitate formed under these conditions will be collodial and therefore,
diffucult to remove by filtration. In addition, this collodial iron will hinder
manganese oxide filtration.
7
120.0
6
100.0
5
80.0
4
60.0
3
40.0
2
1
20.0
0
1/6/2004
0.0
8/6/2004
24/6/04
30/6/04
% Fe Removal
Fe Concentration, mg/L
46
6/7/2004 12/7/2004 17/7/04
Date
River mg/L
% Removal
Profile of Iron concentration in river water, treated water and
percentage of Iron removal by Potassium Permanganate
1.6
70.0
1.4
60.0
1.2
50.0
1
40.0
0.8
30.0
0.6
20.0
0.4
10.0
0.2
0
0.0
7/7/2004
8/7/2004
9/7/2004
17/7/04
19/7/04
20/7/04
Date
River
Figure 4.12:
Treated
% Removal
Profile of Manganese concentration in river water, treated water
and percentage of Iron removal by Potassium Permanganate
% Mn Removal
Mn Concentration. mg/L
Figure 4.11:
Treated mg/L
47
4.5.2
Aeration method.
Aeration method to remove iron and manganese was introduce into the
system about one week only because did not want to distrub exsiting system
and quality of treated water. Figure 4.13 and 4.14 shows percentage of iron and
manganese removal by using aeration method. From the figure it show that
percentage of iron removal is high between 94% to 100%, but not for
manganese where percentage of removal is just about 13% only.
It shows that oxygen are mainly oxidize iron rather that manganese.
When iron are totaly remove, only than manganese was oxidize. In the other
hand, dissolved oxygen by aeration was not enough to oxidize both elements in
one time. Regarding to Halvorson (1975) aeration is adequate for iron (II)
oxidation at pH values above 6, but the oxidation of manganese (II) is much
too slow, even at higher pH values for effective removal.
101.0
6
100.0
99.0
98.0
4
97.0
3
96.0
95.0
2
94.0
1
93.0
0
92.0
11/17/2004
11/18/2004
11/19/2004
11/20/2004
11/22/2004
Date
River
Figure 4.13:
Treated
% Removal
Profile of Iron concentration in river water, treated water and
percentage of Iron removal by aeration method.
% Removal
Fe Concentration, mg/L
5
0.7
15.0
0.6
10.0
5.0
0.5
0.0
0.4
-5.0
0.3
-10.0
0.2
-15.0
0.1
-20.0
-25.0
0
11/17/2004
11/18/2004
11/19/2004
11/20/2004
11/22/2004
Date
River
Figure 4.14:
Treated
% Removal
Profile of Manganese concentration in river water, treated water
and percentage of Manganese removal by aeration method
% Removal
Mn concentration, mg/L
48
49
4.5.3
Combination of pottasium permangante and aeration method.
Combination of both treatment to remove iron and manganese are
introduce on 13 August 2004. Figure 4.15 shows percentage of iron removal by
both method. From the figure it shows that percentage of iron removal are
fluctuate at intial state but more stable after one month. Percentage of iron
removal is fluctuate from 65% to 100%. Concentration of Iron in treated water
5
100
4
80
3
60
2
40
1
20
0
0
9/
8
8/
25
/2
% Iron Removal
120
/2
00
9/
20 4
/2
00
10
4
/1
/2
00
10
4
/1
4/
20
10
04
/2
6/
20
04
11
/6
/2
00
11
4
/2
2/
20
04
12
/3
/2
00
12
4
/1
5/
20
12
04
/2
9/
20
04
6
00
4
Fe Concentration, mg/L
also reduce below water quality standard for Ramatex use.
Date
River Water
Figure 4.15:
Treated Water
% removal
Profile of Iron concentration in river water, treated water and
percentage of Manganese removal by potassium permanganate
and aeration method
50
Figure 4.16 shows percentage of manganese removal by using
combination of both treatment. From the figure it show that the removal of
manganese are fluctuate from 0% to 100%. Mainly concentration of manganese
after treated is suitable for textiles industry usage.
1.4
120
100
1
80
0.8
60
0.6
40
0.4
20
0.2
0
0
8/25/2004
9/8/2004
9/20/2004 10/22/2004 11/19/2004 12/11/2004
Date
River
Figure 4.16:
Treated
%removal
Profile of Manganese concentration in river water, treated water
and
percentage
of
Manganese
permanganate and aeration method
removal
by
potassium
% Mn Removal
Mn Concentration, mg/L
1.2
51
4.6
Economy Effect
As reported by Azraai et. al (2000), aeration method was used at Sungai
Terip for 3 years and beneficial from economy aspects. Aeration method was
save the overall cost after 3 years aeration about RM 419, 762.93.
Table 4.4 shows monthly chemical consumption to treat the water at
Ramatex raw water treatment plant. The table shows the increasing quantity of
treaded water from January 2004 to December 2004. The consumption of
caustic soda for pH adjustment are depend on the incoming pH. Due to the
data, incoming pH of river water are between 3.3 to 5.7. Consumption of
caustic soda are high when pH is lower but decrease when pH of river water
increase.
Table 4.4:
Chemical consumption to treat the water at Ramatex Raw water
treatment plant for year 2004.
Treated Water
NaoH,
PAC,
Polymer,
KMnO4,
M3
kg
kg
kg
kg
Jan 2004
195, 591
16, 390
4, 700
160.8
5.4
Feb 2004
208, 848
27, 180
5, 280
162.4
5.8
March 2004
233, 581
23, 020
5, 400
181.6
7.4
Apr 2004
253, 580
43, 300
5, 720
202.8
6.8
May 2004
284, 393
51, 990
6, 160
196.0
7.8
June 2004
255, 721
30, 650
8, 960
251.4
9.0
July 2004
320, 649
69, 060
17, 100
264.4
9.4
Aug 2004
325, 383
43, 050
11, 300
312.0
8.8
Sept 2004
356, 668
99, 190
10, 000
350.0
8.6
Oct 2004
361, 592
65, 710
12, 200
351.0
7.8
Nov 2004
362, 024
51, 100
9, 600
344.0
4.8
Dec 2004
397, 538
39, 690
23, 200
377.0
5.0
Month
52
PAC as coagulant agent also decrease after aeration implemtation but
the usage is increase on December 2004 due to wet season where alot of
suspended solid will carry over to the river by surface runoff and effect the
quality of the reservior.
Table 4.5, shows chemical dosage for water treatment plant for year
2004. Basiccally dosage of caustic soda is inffluence by pH of incoming water.
Dosage of PAC are mainly about 24 g/m3 to 35 g/m3 . But the highest dosage
of PAC is 58 g/m3 and 53 g/m3 for December 2004 and July 2004 respectively.
Dosage of polyelctolyte is constant between 0.69 g/m3
to 9.8 g/m3. For
pottasium permanganate the dosage is decrease from 0.029 g/m3 to 0.013 g/m3
after applying aeration method, reduction about 55% of the dosage.
Table 4.5:
Chemical dosage from January 2004 until December 2004.
Month
Jan 2004
Feb 2004
March 2004
Apr 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
Aug 2004
Sept 2004
Oct 2004
Nov 2004
Dec 2004
NaOH
84
130
98
171
183
120
215
132
278
182
141
100
Chemical Dosage, g/m3
PAC
Polymer
24
0.82
25
0.78
23
0.78
23
0.80
22
0.69
35
0.98
53
0.82
34
0.96
28
0.98
34
0.97
27
0.95
58
0.95
KMnO4
0.028
0.028
0.032
0.027
0.027
0.035
0.029
0.027
0.024
0.022
0.013
0.013
Cost of chemical consumption for every chemical usage in water
treatment as shown in Table 4.6. Total cost of water treatment is influence by
caustic soda consumption. Cost to treat water per cubic meter are reduce from
RM 0.235/m3 on September 2004 to RM 0.126/m3 on December 2004. It is
reduction about 46% for cost to treat the water per cubic meter.
53
Table 4.6:
Cost of chemicals usage and cost to treat the water per cubic
meter
Month
NaOH
RM0.70/kg
Jan 2004
Feb 2004
Mac 2004
Apr 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
Aug 2004
Sept 2004
Oct 2004
Nov 2004
Dec 2004
11, 473
19, 026
16, 114
30, 310
36, 393
21, 455
48, 342
30, 135
69, 433
45, 997
35, 770
27, 783
Chemical Cost,RM
Polymer
PAC
RM25/kg
RM
0.55/kg
2, 632
4,020
2, 904
4,060
2, 970
4,540
3,146
5,070
3,388
4,900
4,928
6,285
13,680
6,610
6,215
7,800
5,500
8,750
6,710
8,775
5,280
8,600
12,760
9,425
KMnO4
RM6/kg
32.40
34.80
44.40
40.80
46.80
54.00
56.40
52.80
51.60
46.80
28.80
30.00
Total
Cost, RM
Cost
RM/m3
18,157.40
26,024.80
23,668.40
38,566.80
44,724.80
32,722.00
68,688.40
44,202.80
83,734.60
61,528.80
49,678.80
49,998.00
0.093
0.125
0.101
0.152
0.157
0.128
0.214
0.136
0.235
0.170
0.137
0.126
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
From this study, it was found that efficiency of Iron and Manganese removal
by potassium permanganate are 22% to 100% and 8% to 64.5% respectively.
Efficiency of Iron and Manganese removal by aeration are 94% to 100% and 0% to
13% respectively. Efficiency of Iron and Manganese removal by potassium
permanganate and aeration are 70% to 100% and 0% to 100% respectively.
Combination of two method i.e., potassium permanganate and aeration is show
the better result to remove iron and manganese rather than potassium permanganate
and aeration alone.
Combination of two method also show the reduction of chemical consumption
especially potassium permanganate about 55 % and reduction of treated cost per cubic
meter of water about 45% from RM 0.235/m3 to RM 0.125/m3.
During the study, aeration point was located at suction area. Aeration activities
by venture method was cause water current within this area and all suspended solid
was carry up to water surface and affected water quality (Figure 5.1). This water
current was occurring due to reservoir depth about 2.5 m to 3 m.
Aeration point should be located at inlet water to eliminate this effect. The new
location also will help to increase efficiency of aeration and giving the time for
suspended solid and other impurities settle down to bottom of reservoir before reach at
55
suction area. Figure 5.2 shows the schematic diagram of the recommended aeration
point for maximum aeration.
Reservoir surface
Bubble air
Water
current
Aeration
pipe
Bottom of reservoir
Figure 5.1:
Water current inside the reservoir at aeration point
To primary
Treatment plant
Simpang
Kanan River
Reservoir
New Aeration
point
Figure 5.2:
Proposed location for aeration point.
56
REFERENCES
Azraai, K., Ismid M.S., Carlo, N., (2000), Study on the Effect of Aeration on Water
Quality in Sungai Terip Reservoir, UTM.
Boyce, A., (1997), Introduction to Environmental Technology.
Chapman, D., (1996), Water Quality Assessments, A Guide to the use of Biota,
Sediments and Water in Environmental Monitoring, Second Edition, E&FN Spon,
Great Britain.
Cheong S.K., (1996), Water Treatment Report On Ramatex Textiles Industrial Sdn.
Bhd.
Corbitt, R. A., (1999), Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering 2nd
Edition, McGraw Hill Handbooks.
Design Guidelines For Water Supply Systems, (1994), The Malaysian Water
Association.
Gray, N.F., (1999), Water Technology, An Introduction For Environmental
Sciencetists and Engineers, BH.
Halvorson, H.O., (1975), Water Municipal Treatment, ECT 1st ed., Vol. 14, pp.
946-962, University of Illinios.
Hammer M.J., (2001), Water and Wastewater Technology 4th edition, New Jersy.
Hammer M.J., Viessman W.J., (1998), Water Supply and Pollution Control 6th
Edition, Addison Wesley Longman.
McCarty P.C., Sawyer C.N., and Parkin G.F., (1994), Chemistry For
Environmental Engineering, Mcgraw Hill Inc.
57
Nathanson, J. A., (2000), Basic Environmental Technology, Water Supply, Waste
Management and Pollution Control 3rd Edition.
Roques, H., (1995), Chemical Water Treatment Principles and Practice, VCH
Publishers Inc. New York.
Samuel D.F., (1997), Chemistry of Water Treatment 2nd Edition, USA.
Seong, C.Y., (1975), Water Treatment For Industry.
Smathurst, G., (1988), Basic Water Treatment For Application World wide 2nd
Edition, London.
Williams, I., (1998), Environmental Chemistry A Modular Approach, University of
Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
58
Appendix A
Data of Analysis for River Water and Treated Water during Treated by Potassium
Permanganate
River
water
Date
1/6/2004
2/6/2004
3/6/2004
4/6/2004
7/6/2004
8/6/2004
9/6/2004
10/6/2004
11/6/2004
12/6/2004
14/6/04
15/6/07
16/6/04
17/6/04
18/6/04
19/6/04
21/6/04
22/6/04
23/6/04
24/6/04
25/6/04
26/6/04
28/6/04
29/6/04
30/6/04
1/7/2004
2/7/2004
3/7/2004
5/7/2004
6/7/2004
7/7/2004
8/7/2004
9/7/2004
10/7/2004
12/7/2004
13/7/04
14/7/04
15/7/04
16/7/04
17/7/04
19/7/04
20/7/04
pH
Turbidity
Hardness
Chloride
TDS
Iron
Manganese
4.24
4.48
4.49
4.52
4.28
4.7
4.64
4.79
4.61
4.56
4.46
4.25
4.25
4.29
4.3
4.16
4.18
4.29
4.53
4.93
5.11
5.25
5.27
5.44
5.83
5.96
6.13
6.14
5.95
5.68
5.53
5.14
5.28
4.64
4.19
4.09
4.13
4.11
3.78
3.56
3.94
3.41
FTU
3.48
3.04
2.98
3.23
29.92
6.68
6
3.51
0.76
0.61
12.53
1
0.51
0.44
0.46
0.34
11.88
0.27
0.45
5.17
5.92
9.96
4.8
7.27
17.06
31.61
35.65
76
64
17.1
9.16
6.16
19.82
2.03
3.34
3.92
3.79
3.69
2.58
1.52
2.55
2.73
mg/L
29
29
28
28
25
27
28
31
32
34
30
35
36
39
38
38
36
34
29
32
30
30
30
31
31
35
42
74
60
44
42
40
40
6
54
59
63
76
79
76
83
88
mg/L
42
48
48
48
42
38
40
42
46
44
48
46
54
56
58
60
56
54
54
52
54
64
56
58
66
90
122
286
172
116
106
98
98
132
104
116
134
158
152
104
104
106
mg/L
110
130
120
120
110
100
100
110
120
110
140
130
140
140
150
150
150
130
130
120
130
140
120
130
140
170
220
370
270
190
180
170
160
220
200
210
230
260
270
260
270
280
mg/L
0.33
0.28
0.3
0.32
1.1
0.56
0.42
0.13
0.03
0
0.97
0
0
0
0
0
0.76
0.01
0.01
3.1
0.38
0.57
0.38
0.64
1.77
3.55
4.06
3.24
6.52
1.43
0.76
0.48
1.52
0.21
0.35
0.36
0.4
0.29
0.5
0.58
0.58
1.13
mg/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.18
0.21
0.68
0.39
0.39
0.51
0.75
0.78
1.08
0.5
0.6
0.87
59
Treated
Water
Date
1/6/2004
2/6/2004
3/6/2004
4/6/2004
7/6/2004
8/6/2004
9/6/2004
10/6/2004
11/6/2004
12/6/2004
14/6/04
15/6/07
16/6/04
17/6/04
18/6/04
19/6/04
21/6/04
22/6/04
23/6/04
24/6/04
25/6/04
26/6/04
28/6/04
29/6/04
30/6/04
1/7/2004
2/7/2004
3/7/2004
5/7/2004
6/7/2004
7/7/2004
8/7/2004
9/7/2004
10/7/2004
12/7/2004
13/7/04
14/7/04
15/7/04
16/7/04
17/7/04
19/7/04
20/7/04
pH
Turbidity
Hardness
Chloride
TDS
Iron
Manganese
6.39
6.38
6.36
6.35
6.6
6.63
6.58
6.63
6.6
6.48
6.64
6.6
6.66
6.63
6.6
6.3
6.61
6.49
6.52
6.52
6.52
6.3
6.67
6.59
6.6
6.7
6.43
6.3
6.3
6.27
6.21
6.18
6.15
6.03
6.02
6.17
6.14
6.23
6.14
6.18
6.01
5.84
FTU
0.93
1.11
1.55
1.43
2.18
2.07
1.52
1.55
1.62
1.1
1.17
1.25
1.32
1.32
1.37
1.24
1.99
0.98
1.3
1.29
1.46
1.82
1.97
2.27
2.15
1.91
2.73
4.39
8.4
3.04
1.6
0.88
1.27
0.37
0.62
0.53
0.62
0.4
0.37
0.35
0.65
0.67
mg/L
29
29
28
28
26
27
27
30
31
36
33
34
36
37
38
37
37
35
33
32
31
30
30
31
31
33
36
41
64
50
45
41
41
48
62
59
62
75
78
77
79
87
mg/L
53
54
56
55
54
46
48
48
49
54
52
55
58
63
65
66
64
60
57
56
56
60
63
64
76
90
110
140
254
162
136
114
109
122
146
124
145
176
148
128
116
116
mg/L
130
140
130
130
120
110
110
120
130
130
140
150
150
160
160
160
170
140
140
130
130
140
140
140
160
170
200
230
340
240
210
190
180
200
240
220
240
280
280
280
290
290
mg/L
0.12
0.09
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.18
0.07
0
0.13
0.05
0
0.06
0.03
0.04
0.12
0
0.1
0.04
0.09
0.07
0.11
0.13
0.18
0.21
0.15
0.19
0.16
0.35
0.76
0.26
0.17
0.17
0.14
0.16
0.27
0.17
0.12
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.18
0.01
mg/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.54
0.36
0.54
0.45
0.54
0.69
0.93
1.05
1.11
0.46
0.54
0.9
60
Appendix B
Data of Analysis for River Water and Treated Water during aeration and potassium
permanganate
Date
pH
8/13/2004
8/14/2004
8/16/2004
8/17/2004
8/18/2004
8/19/2004
8/20/2004
8/21/2004
8/23/2004
8/24/2004
8/25/2004
8/26/2004
8/27/2004
8/28/2004
8/30/2004
9/1/2008
9/2/2008
9/3/2004
9/6/2004
9/7/2004
9/8/2004
9/9/2004
9/10/2004
9/11/2004
9/13/2004
9/14/2004
9/15/2004
9/16/2004
9/17/2004
9/18/2004
9/20/2004
9/21/2004
9/22/2004
9/23/2004
9/24/2004
9/25/2004
9/27/2004
9/28/2004
9/29/2004
9/30/2004
10/1/2004
3.98
4.17
4.09
4.1
4.28
4.35
4.62
4.78
4.94
4.78
5.08
4.71
4.46
4.85
4.14
3.77
3.75
3.79
3.76
3.82
3.86
3.97
3.95
3.88
3.86
3.82
3.75
3.67
3.52
3.55
3.67
3.44
3.37
3.33
3.27
3.23
3.22
3.31
3.35
3.33
3.28
River
Water
Turbidity Hardness
FTU
mg/L
1.03
73
2.16
77
1.65
48
2.78
54
2.44
48
1.34
44
3.3
45
1.67
40
11.65
40
2.21
37
2.86
43
3.63
42
3.84
46
1.26
41
8.85
54
6.62
62
6.22
66
4.99
68
0.33
64
2.73
58
0.85
52
0.92
51
0.94
53
1.3
60
2.59
60
3.57
58
2.78
62
1.47
63
1.16
60
0.75
58
1.53
68
0.48
68
0.69
72
0.51
80
0.76
88
0.69
90
3.64
84
0.64
76
0.31
78
0.68
72
0.63
70
Clmg/L
162
192
78
112
90
76
80
78
70
68
68
64
68
80
80
76
71
80
81
68
56
52
60
84
56
76
64
54
60
58
40
42
48
44
48
52
56
50
50
50
44
TDS
mg/L
310
320
200
220
200
170
180
180
160
170
180
190
180
210
220
240
260
260
270
250
230
220
200
250
250
270
240
240
280
260
240
290
300
310
330
340
350
340
340
310
320
Fe
mg/L
0.54
0.58
0.45
0.38
0.29
0.1
0.63
0.3
1.75
0.25
0.25
0.57
0.48
5
5.4
1.05
1.14
0.9
0.23
0.51
0.5
0.33
0.33
0.36
0.38
0.54
0.55
0.55
0.52
0.69
0.73
1.25
2.08
2.6
2.93
3.51
3.43
2.06
1.65
1.55
1.65
Mn
mg/L
0
ND
ND
ND
0.18
ND
0.06
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.02
0
0
0
ND
0.24
ND
0
ND
0.2
0.06
0.36
ND
0.1
ND
0.57
0.27
0.36
0.42
0.44
0.66
0.48
0.33
0.21
0.64
Start
aeration
61
10/4/2004
10/5/2004
10/6/2004
10/7/2004
10/8/2004
10/9/2004
10/11/2004
10/12/2004
10/13/2004
10/14/2004
10/15/2004
10/16/2004
10/18/2004
10/19/2004
10/20/2004
10/21/2004
10/22/2004
10/23/2004
10/25/2004
10/26/2004
10/27/2004
10/28/2004
10/29/2004
10/30/2004
11/1/2004
11/2/2004
11/3/2004
11/4/2004
11/5/2004
11/6/2004
11/8/2004
11/9/2004
11/10/2004
11/11/2004
11/12/2004
11/17/2004
11/18/2004
11/19/2004
11/20/2004
11/22/2004
11/23/2004
11/24/2004
11/25/2004
11/26/2004
11/27/2004
11/29/2004
11/30/2004
12/1/2004
12/2/2004
12/3/2004
3.3
3.32
3.33
3.34
3.4
3.4
3.48
3.41
3.47
3.5
3.49
3.47
3.68
3.6
3.63
3.59
3.54
3.42
3.24
3.25
3.21
3.21
3.28
3.23
3.34
3.36
3.39
3.42
3.4
3.3
3.42
3.42
3.46
3.35
3.44
3.4
3.42
3.39
3.4
3.39
3.28
3.3
3.43
3.43
3.28
3.35
3.32
3.35
3.36
3.36
0.52
0.1
0
0.41
0.28
0.1
0.26
0.24
0.52
0.22
1.44
0.71
0.63
0.36
0.01
0.47
0.6
0.52
0
0.41
0.31
0.64
0.67
0
0.53
0.95
0.64
0.64
0.61
0
0.82
0.36
0.13
0.1
0.2
0.32
0.24
0.23
0.32
0.87
0.28
0.41
0.31
0.1
0.13
0.28
0.45
0.39
0.23
0.23
68
68
65
64
65
64
60
62
61
60
58
59
52
51
49
48
51
72
92
92
92
80
76
72
66
64
60
60
60
64
54
56
57
54
54
52
56
54
54
54
64
58
58
52
62
60
64
64
62
63
42
42
47
44
42
50
44
44
44
46
45
46
42
40
44
46
38
45
44
46
46
45
44
54
38
40
40
36
35
36
28
34
34
34
31
28
28
32
34
38
39
38
42
38
42
32
36
40
38
40
320
290
310
310
290
280
270
280
260
270
260
250
190
230
220
220
230
290
350
360
170
310
320
320
270
290
300
270
280
250
240
250
260
260
230
230
220
270
270
250
300
260
270
260
290
290
290
250
260
290
1.74
1.45
1.66
1.49
1.34
1.43
1.01
1.16
1.4
1.1
0.98
0.79
0.44
0.65
0.68
0.65
0.66
1.22
2.89
2.74
2.78
2.21
1.67
1.72
1.59
1.5
1.35
1.29
1.27
0.82
1.41
1.04
1.24
1.05
0.9
1.18
1.49
1.58
1.83
4.91
2.31
1.94
1.36
1.24
1.73
2.64
2.17
2.16
2.05
2.29
0.36
0.3
0.24
0.39
0.3
0.48
0.45
0.42
0.75
0.72
0.6
0.93
0.6
0.72
1.35
0.36
0.62
0.87
0.75
0.72
0.66
0.57
1.14
0.63
0.42
2.72
0.54
0.42
0.34
0.5
0.34
0.4
0.56
0.5
0.6
0.64
0.12
0.4
0
0.36
0.76
0.64
0
0.52
0.36
0.36
0.58
0.7
0.74
aeration
only
kmno4
62
12/4/2004
12/6/2004
12/7/2004
12/8/2004
12/9/2004
11/10/2004
12/11/2004
12/13/2004
12/14/2004
12/15/2004
12/16/2004
12/17/2004
12/18/2004
12/20/2004
12/21/2004
3.36
3.41
3.34
3.4
3.47
3.44
3.64
3.53
3.56
3.64
3.56
3.81
3.97
3.58
4.03
Date
pH
8/13/2004
8/14/2004
8/16/2004
8/17/2004
8/18/2004
8/19/2004
8/20/2004
8/21/2004
8/23/2004
8/24/2004
8/25/2004
8/26/2004
8/27/2004
8/28/2004
8/30/2004
9/1/2008
9/2/2008
9/3/2004
9/6/2004
9/7/2004
9/8/2004
9/9/2004
9/10/2004
9/11/2004
9/13/2004
9/14/2004
6.42
6.52
6.47
6.49
6.26
6.46
6.41
6.64
6.47
6.29
6.25
6.41
6.4
6.34
6.44
6.33
6.3
6.31
6.4
4.82
6.23
6.33
6.36
6.37
6.4
6.58
0.1
0.13
0.08
0.75
3.33
4.18
5.45
5.03
0.99
0.76
1.14
1.3
0.9
0.58
0.94
62
62
64
68
63
60
60
66
56
54
50
41
36
34
30
39
42
50
54
60
56
56
56
48
50
42
42
40
34
48
Treated
Water
Turbidity Hardness
ClFTU
mg/L
mg/L
0.2
73
171
0.36
81
216
1.42
67
170
0.76
57
126
0.5
48
104
0.47
44
88
0.57
44
70
0.49
41
92
0.76
40
82
0.45
37
78
0.47
38
82
0.55
40
80
0.6
45
86
2.09
47
94
1.48
52
84
0.74
623
76
0.4
66
78
0.44
70
81
0.17
66
81
1.96
60
69
0.36
56
66
0.32
52
62
0.13
51
64
0.35
70
134
0.93
62
90
1.45
59
76
270
260
280
280
270
280
270
230
24
230
220
170
170
140
140
2.24
2.04
1.91
3.29
4.44
2.99
4.81
2.05
1.15
1.24
1.1
0.36
0.3
0.2
0.19
0.78
0.54
0.76
0.76
0.6
0.94
0.56
0.52
0.48
1.2
0.6
0.38
0.36
0.84
0.36
TDS
mg/L
330
360
310
250
210
190
190
200
180
190
190
220
210
230
240
250
270
280
280
260
260
250
220
310
300
280
Fe
mg/L
0.12
0.21
0.5
0.12
0.08
ND
0.08
0.12
0.06
0.06
0.02
0.1
0.14
1.8
0.23
0.22
0.11
0.03
0.04
0.07
0.08
0.11
0.09
0.11
0.21
0.23
Mn
mg/L
0
ND
ND
ND
0.54
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0
ND
ND
0.12
ND
ND
ND
0.08
ND
Start
aeration
63
9/15/2004
9/16/2004
9/17/2004
9/18/2004
9/20/2004
9/21/2004
9/22/2004
9/23/2004
9/24/2004
9/25/2004
9/27/2004
9/28/2004
9/29/2004
9/30/2004
10/1/2004
10/4/2004
10/5/2004
10/6/2004
10/7/2004
10/8/2004
10/9/2004
10/11/2004
10/12/2004
10/13/2004
10/14/2004
10/15/2004
10/16/2004
10/18/2004
10/19/2004
10/20/2004
10/21/2004
10/22/2004
10/23/2004
10/25/2004
10/26/2004
10/27/2004
10/28/2004
10/29/2004
10/30/2004
11/1/2004
11/2/2004
11/3/2004
11/4/2004
11/5/2004
11/6/2004
11/8/2004
11/9/2004
11/10/2004
11/11/2004
11/12/2004
6.29
6.14
5.87
6.21
6.54
4.9
5.52
5.89
5.97
5.84
5.97
5.9
5.96
6
5.88
5.94
5.99
6.03
5.88
6.05
5.96
6.49
5.96
5.95
6.03
6
5.98
6.02
6.02
6.03
6.08
6.06
6.09
5.83
6.06
6.09
6.1
6.08
6.1
6.19
6.1
5.18
6.08
6.03
6.05
6.06
6.04
6.08
6.06
6.08
0.25
0.21
1.7
1.73
0.7
0.81
0.06
0.24
0.16
0.54
0.01
0.5
0
0
0
0.07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.05
0.09
0.06
0.21
0
0.3
0.06
0
0.15
0.07
0.3
0
0.29
0.33
0.37
0.14
0
0.55
0.4
0.39
0.51
0.22
0
0.18
0.15
0.03
0.01
0.36
66
67
63
62
62
70
78
81
90
96
98
84
82
76
74
74
70
69
70
71
70
63
64
64
63
61
62
52
51
49
50
49
62
94
99
100
90
82
74
70
66
62
59
59
66
64
58
56
54
52
70
60
58
56
48
46
50
54
57
60
60
56
56
54
48
44
44
47
54
55
54
46
48
52
54
55
54
58
49
52
52
54
58
48
46
49
48
46
52
45
44
42
42
42
44
38
39
42
44
36
260
260
300
270
280
280
300
300
330
370
320
360
360
320
310
330
300
300
320
320
290
290
280
270
280
270
250
230
230
230
230
230
250
340
370
380
330
310
330
280
280
270
260
260
250
250
240
250
250
220
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.06
0.07
0.23
0.31
0.13
0.04
0.03
0.07
0.01
0.11
0.13
0.08
0.04
0.03
ND
0.07
0.02
0.09
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.18
0.07
ND
0.08
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.08
0.15
ND
0.01
ND
0.04
ND
0.05
0
0.06
0.03
0.01
0.3
ND
0.08
ND
0.51
0.3
0.42
0.12
0.48
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.21
0.5
0.6
0.36
0.36
0.45
0.45
0.68
0.36
0.9
1.02
0.84
0.72
0.96
0.72
0.9
0.96
0.27
1.32
0.81
0.93
0.9
0.69
0.63
0.81
0.69
0.42
2.78
0.46
0.46
0.36
0.6
0.42
0.32
0.56
0.5
64
11/17/2004
11/18/2004
11/19/2004
11/20/2004
11/22/2004
11/23/2004
11/24/2004
11/25/2004
11/26/2004
11/27/2004
11/29/2004
11/30/2004
12/1/2004
12/2/2004
12/3/2004
12/4/2004
12/6/2004
12/7/2004
12/8/2004
12/9/2004
11/10/2004
12/11/2004
12/13/2004
12/14/2004
12/15/2004
12/16/2004
12/17/2004
12/18/2004
12/20/2004
12/21/2004
6.06
5.99
6.01
6.05
6.04
6.04
6.01
6.01
6.12
6.11
6.07
5.92
6.05
6.04
6.07
6.02
6.03
6.03
6.04
6.15
6.05
6.14
6.05
6.04
6.04
6.09
6.17
6.18
6.12
5.89
0.43
0.22
0.03
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.09
0.06
0
0.68
0.11
0
0.03
0.16
0.03
0.28
0
0.13
0.39
0.53
0.5
1.08
0.55
0.16
0.16
0.19
0.01
0.25
0.19
51
54
55
53
56
62
64
58
54
64
66
67
68
65
65
63
64
66
66
69
62
66
64
58
55
52
43
38
34
30
32
33
35
38
42
42
44
46
42
48
42
39
41
42
42
42
48
50
55
58
66
64
64
58
56
53
50
49
48
47
210
200
230
230
240
260
250
250
240
260
260
260
260
240
260
260
260
260
270
270
280
280
260
230
220
220
200
180
150
140
0.06
0.06
0.08
0
0
0.02
0
0.05
0.08
0
0
0
0.03
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.2
0.25
0.97
0.46
0.88
0.75
0.71
0.11
0.08
0.07
0.05
0.04
0.21
0.02
0.6
0.56
0.1
0.46
0
0.16
0.7
0.66
0
0.68
0.56
0.5
0.64
0.64
0.56
0.74
0.54
1.02
0.84
0.62
0.92
0.48
0.66
0.48
0.5
0.64
0.44
0.32
0.42
0.24
aeration
only
kmno4
65
Appendix C
Water Quality Data for Reservoir
Station: S4
Date:
9-Dec-04
conductivity: 62 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
3.6
60
3.6
80
3.6
100
3.5
120
3.4
140
3.4
160
3.4
180
3.3
200
3.3
220
3.2
240
3.2
260
3.2
280
3.2
Time:
9.15am
DO
mg/L
1.5
1.1
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
ORP
mV
466
470
471
473
475
478
480
481
483
486
488
489
495.0
Date:
20/12/2004
Conductivity: 28 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.13
60
4.14
80
4.14
100
4.11
120
3.81
140
3.77
160
3.77
180
3.77
200
3.76
Time:
10.30 am
DO
mg/L
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
ORP
mV
471
466
463
474
483
487
490
494
496
Date:
20/12/2004
Conductivity: 25 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.18
60
4.16
80
4.13
100
4.11
120
4.06
140
4.02
Time:
4.05pm
DO
mg/L
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.2
ORP
mV
434
440
443
448
451
454
Temperature
27.7
27.7
27.7
27.7
27.7
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.7
Temperature
28.8
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
Temperature
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
66
160
180
200
4.01
3.94
3.85
Date:
21/12/2004
Conductivity: 28 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.45
60
4.43
80
4.42
100
4.38
120
4.35
140
4.30
160
4.26
180
4.25
200
4.24
220
4.23
240
4.22
260
4.18
280
4.15
3.3
3.3
3.3
459
463
465
Time:
7.40am
DO
mg/L
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
ORP
mV
367
379
381
390
386
400
408
418
426
430
442
445
445
29.5
29.5
29.5
Temperature
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
67
Station: S3
Date:
9-Dec-04
Conductivity: 62 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
3.7
60
3.6
80
3.6
100
3.6
120
3.6
140
3.6
160
3.5
180
3.4
200
3.4
220
3.4
Time :
9.30am
DO
mg/L
1.4
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
ORP
mV
442
450
458
458
460
462
466
475
476
470
Date:
20/12/04
Conductivity: 28 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.06
60
4.05
80
4.04
100
4.03
120
3.76
140
3.76
160
Time :
10.40am
DO
mg/L
2.7
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.3
ORP
mV
481
480
480
482
488
491
Date:
20/12/04
Conductivity: 25 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.14
60
4.14
80
4.14
100
4.11
120
4.05
140
4.05
160
Time :
4.20 pm
DO
mg/L
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
ORP
mV
453
456
456
457
459
460
Date:
21/12/04
Conductivity: 28 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.4
60
4.39
Time :
7.55am
DO
mg/L
1.9
1.8
ORP
mV
441
446
Temperature
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
Temperature
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
Temperature
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
Temperature
28.8
28.8
68
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
4.38
4.36
4.35
4.35
4.35
4.35
4.32
4.31
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
448
449
452
455
455
457
458
461
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
Station: S2
Date:
Conductivity:
Water Depth
mm
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
9-Dec-04
62mS/m
pH
Date:
Conductivity:
Water Depth
mm
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
20/12/04
30 m S/m
pH
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.3
4.03
4.03
4.02
3.69
3.69
3.7
3.7
Time:
9.45am
DO
mg/L
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
ORP
mV
446
447
454
458
462
465
472
476
478
477
468
Time:
10.50 am
DO
mg/L
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.1
2
2
2
ORP
mV
480
482
488
499
508
512
513
Temperature
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.7
27.8
27.7
27.6
27.6
Temperature
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
69
Date:
Conductivity:
Water Depth
mm
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
20/12/04
25 m S/m
pH
Date:
Conductivity:
Water Depth
mm
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
21/12/04
28 m S/m
pH
4.11
4.11
4.11
4.11
4.11
4.06
4.01
4.35
4.35
4.36
4.34
4.28
4.21
4.14
4.12
4.1
4.05
Time:
4.30pm
DO
mg/L
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.4
3.4
3.4
ORP
mV
448
448
453
456
460
472
474
Time:
8.05am
DO
mg/L
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.7
ORP
mV
483
482
482
482
485
495
499
501
503
503
Temperature
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
Temperature
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.8
28.7
28.7
28.7
70
Station: S1
Date:
9-Dec-04
Conductivity: 62 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
3.6
60
3.6
80
3.6
100
3.6
120
3.5
140
3.5
160
3.4
180
3.4
200
3.4
220
3.3
Time
10.00 am
DO
mg/L
1.3
1.2
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
ORP
mV
430
430
431
431
433
437
439
441
442
442
Date:
20/12/04
Conductivity: 27 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
3.78
60
3.81
80
3.81
100
3.8
120
3.76
140
3.75
160
3.75
180
Time
11.00 am
DO
mg/L
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.6
ORP
mV
473
473
475
477
479
480
480
Date:
20/12/04
Conductivity: 25 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.11
60
4.11
80
4.11
100
4.11
120
4.11
140
4.06
160
4.01
Time
4.30pm
DO
mg/L
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.4
3.4
ORP
mV
448
448
453
456
460
472
474
Temperature
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
27.9
Temperature
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
Temperature
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
71
Date:
21/12/04
Conductivity: 28 m S/m
Water Depth
pH
mm
40
4.33
60
4.31
80
4.3
100
4.28
120
4.28
140
4.27
160
4.23
180
4.22
200
4.22
220
4.21
240
4.21
Time
8.20am
DO
mg/L
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
ORP
mV
470
470
470
471
472
473
476
471
473
474
474
Temperature
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
28.9
72
Appendix D
Iron and Manganese Concentration in Reservoir
Date
Time
22/12/04
23/12/04
23/12/04
24/12/04
24/12/04
25/12/04
27/12/04
6/1/05
7/1/05
6.00 pm
10.15 am
5.30 pm
8.00 am
5.30 pm
8.00 am
2.00 pm
10.00 am
9.30 am
Date
Time
22/12/04
23/12/04
23/12/04
24/12/04
24/12/04
25/12/04
27/12/04
6/1/05
7/1/05
6.00 pm
10.15 am
5.30 pm
8.00 am
5.30 pm
8.00 am
2.00 pm
10.00 am
9.30 am
Iron concentration, mg/L
S2
S3
S4
0.54
1.15
1.20
0.35
0.21
0.33
0.22
0.28
0.40
0.99
0.71
0.66
0.34
0.32
0.48
1.28
1.51
1.86
0.51
0.51
0.61
1.58
0.89
1.51
1.25
1.05
1.29
Remarks
S1
0.23
0.45
0.58
0.62
0.60
0.85
0.46
1.57
1.35
Remarks
S1
0.154
0.124
0.114
0.105
0.100
0.076
0.080
0.271
0.271
Manganese concentration, mg/L
S2
S3
S4
0.144
0.099
0.110
0.130
0.158
0.158
0.127
0.133
0.123
0.100
0.090
0.087
0.093
0.085
0.088
0.075
0.071
0.065
0.069
0.072
0.057
0.272
0.257
0.256
0.249
0.244
0.236
Low tide
High tide
Low tide
High tide
Low tide
Low tide
High tide
High tide
High tide
Low tide
High tide
Low tide
High tide
Low tide
Low tide
High tide
High tide
High tide