Comparison of Methods of Sewage PurificationPhillips, Theodore Clifford
Science
Comparison of Methods of Sewage Purification
Phillips, Theodore Clifford
Sewage -- Purification
The reagents chiefly used at the present time are lime, sulphate of
alumina, and ferrous sulphate. In the case of lime, there is a
combination of some of the lime and with free and partially combined
carbon dioxide to form an insoluble carbonate of lime. There is probably
a further combination of an additional part of the lime with a portion
of the organic matter in solution. The insoluble substances so formed
sink to the bottom, carrying with them the major portion of the
suspended matter in the sewage in the form of sludge.
Sulphate of alumina exercises a precipitating effort by a combination of
the sulphuric acid with lime while alumina hydrate forms a flocculent
precipitate which entangles and carries down the suspended organic
matters.
On November 11, 1899 the writers visited the chemical precipitation
plant at Madison Wisconsin and through the kindness of Mr. McClellen
Dodge, City Engineer, were shown the plant at that time in operation.
The sewage was screened as it came from the city and emptied into a
well. Here it was dosed with lime and then pumped to one of the four
settling tanks. These are 15 feet deep and 25 feet in diameter. The
sewage enters near the bottom of the tanks. The sludge settles to the
bottom and the effluent rises to the top, where it is carried away to
three of the filter beds. These three beds are in continuous use. A
fourth bed is out of use while it is washed and allowed to rest for one
day.
The total area of the beds is 5550 square feet. The flow through the
beds is about 8,000,000 gallons per acre per day.
The company that constructed and operated the plant agreed that the
effluent on analysis should be found to be equal to the waters of Lake
Mendota and the analyses of Lake Mendota water which was adapted as a
standard of purity is reproduced in the Engineering News Vol. 42 No. 26
p. 414. Samples of the crude sewage tank effluent and filter effluent
were taken and analyzed as shown in Table II. A comparison of this table
with the standard shows that in no particulars does the effluent from
the plant come up to the standard.
The company has since abandoned the contract and the city is considering
other methods of disposal and purification “in order that there may be
no more fiascos in civil engineering at the seat of this well known
school.” (University of Wisconsin)
TABLE II.
Analyses of Sewage and Effluent from Chemical Precipitation Plant and Filter
Beds at Madison, Wis.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account