Removal of non-point pollutants from bridge runoff by a hydrocyclone using natural water head

doi:10.1007/s11783-012-0449-0

Front Envir Sci Eng

0, Vol.

Issue () : 886-895 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-012-0449-0

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Removal of non-point pollutants from bridge runoff by a hydrocyclone using natural water head

Jianghua YU¹, Yeonseok KIM², Youngchul KIM²(

)

1. School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China; 2. Department of Environmental Engineering, Hanseo University, Seosan 356706, R. O. Korea

Download: PDF(314 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

A hydrocyclone using natural water head provided by bridge was operated for the treatment of stormwater runoff. The hydrocyclone was automatically controlled using electronic valve which is connected to a pressure meter. Normally the hydrocyclone was open during dry days, but it was closed after the capture of the first flush. The results indicated that the average pressure and the flow rate were directly affected by the rainfall intensity. The pressure head was more than 2 m when the rainfall intensity was above 5 mm·h^-1. The percentage volume of underflow with high solids concentration decreased as the pressure and flow rate increased, but the percentage volume of overflow with almost no solids showed the opposite behavior. The total suspended solids (TSS) concentration ratio between the overflow and inflow (TSS_over/TSS_in) decreased as a function of the operational pressure, while the corresponding ratio of underflow to inflow (TSS_under/TSS_in) increased. The TSS separation efficiency was evaluated based on a mass balance. It ranged from 25% to 99% with the pressure head ranging from 1.4 to 9.7 m, and it was proportional to pressure and flow rate. Normally, the efficiency was more than 50% when the pressure was higher than 2 m. The analysis of the water budget indicated that around 13% of the total runoff was captured by the hydrocyclone as a first flush, and this runoff was separated as underflow and overflow with the respective percentage volumes of 29% and 71%. The pollutants budget was also examined based on a mass balance. The results showed that the percentage of TSS, chemical oxygen demand (COD), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP) in underflow were 73%, 59%, 7.6%, and 49%, respectively. Thus, it can be concluded that the hydrocyclone worked well. It separated the first flush as solids-concentrated underflow and solids-absent overflow, and effectively reduced the runoff volume needing further treatment. Finally, four types of optional post treatment design are presented and compared.

Keywords first flush hydrocyclone non-point pollution removal efficiency stormwater runoff

Corresponding Author(s): KIM Youngchul,Email:ykim@hanseo.ac.kr

Issue Date: 01 December 2013

Cite this article:

Jianghua YU,Yeonseok KIM,Youngchul KIM. Removal of non-point pollutants from bridge runoff by a hydrocyclone using natural water head[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 0, (): 886-895.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-012-0449-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y0/V/I/886

Fig.1 Hydrocyclone used in this study: (a) test-bed site, (b) schematic diagram, and (c) hydrocyclone in situ

Fig.2 Schematic diagram on hydrocyclone operation

Tab.1 Rainfall conditions of hydrocyclone monitoring work

Fig.3 Distribution of TSS mass runoff volume

Fig.4 Relationship between rainfall intensity and (a) flow rate and (b) pressure head

Fig.5 Schematic diagram of spilled flow at the hydrocyclone entrance

Tab.2 Data on hydrocyclone performance

Fig.6 Effects of flow rate (a) and pressure head (b) on the percentage of outflow volume as underflow and overflow

Fig.7 Relationship between TSS and pressure head: (a) underflow to inflow; (b) overflow to inflow

Fig.8 Effects of flow rate (a) and pressure head (b) on TSS removal efficiency

Fig.9 Water and pollutants budget of the hydrocyclone in this study

Fig.10 Optional designs for treatment of storm water runoff with or without hydrocyclone

1	Shutes R B E, Revitt D M, Lagerberg I M, Barraud V C. The design of vegetative constructed wetlands for the treatment of highway runoff. Science of the Total Environment , 1999, 235(1-3): 189–197 doi: 10.1016/S0048-9697(99)00212-0 pmid:10535119
2	Kayhanian M, Suverkropp C, Ruby A, Tsay K. Characterization and prediction of highway runoff constituent event mean concentration. Journal of Environmental Management , 2007, 85(2): 279–295 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.09.024 pmid:17161904
3	Terzakis S, Fountoulakis M S, Georgaki I, Albantakis D, Sabathianakis I, Karathanasis A D, Kalogerakis N, Manios T. Constructed wetlands treating highway runoff in the central Mediterranean region. Chemosphere , 2008, 72(2): 141–149 doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.02.044 pmid:18396317
4	Furumai H, Balmer H, Boller M. Dynamic behavior of suspended pollutants and particle size distribution in highway runoff. Water Science & Technology 2002, 46(11-12): 413–418 pmid:12523787
5	Ellis J B. The contribution of highway surfaces to urban stormwater sediments and metal loadings. Science of the Total Environment , 1987, 59: 339–349
6	Sriyaraj K, Shutes R B. An assessment of the impact of motorway runoff on a pond, wetland and stream. Environment International , 2001, 26(5-6): 433–439 doi: 10.1016/S0160-4120(01)00024-1 pmid:11392763
7	Crabtree B, Moy F, Whitehead M, Roe A. Monitoring pollutants in highway runoff. Water and Environmental Journal , 2006, 20(4): 287–294 doi: 10.1111/j.1747-6593.2006.00033.x
8	Sansalone J J, Cristina C M. First flush concepts for suspended and dissolved solids in small impervious watersheds. Journal of Environmental Engineering , 2004, 130(11): 1301–1314 doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2004)130:11(1301)
9	Kang J H, Kayhanian M, Stenstrom M K. Predicting the existence of stormwater first flush from the time of concentration. Water Research , 2008, 42(1-2): 220–228 doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.07.001 pmid:17643470
10	Kim L H, Kayhanian M, Zoh K D, Stenstrom M K. Modeling of highway stormwater runoff. Science of the Total Environment , 2005, 348(1-3): 1–18 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.12.063 pmid:16162310
11	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Storm Water Technology Fact Sheet: Hydrodynamic Hydrocyclones. EPA 835-F-99-017. Washington, USA: Office of Water, 1999
12	Yu J, Yi Q, Kim Y, Tateda M. Analysis of hydrocyclone behaviors in the separation of particulates from highway rainfall runoff. Water Science & Technology , 2010, 62(3): 532–540 doi: 10.2166/wst.2010.143 pmid:20706000
13	Villeneuve J P, Gaume E, Michaud F. Efficiency evaluation of an installed swirl separator. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering , 1994, 21(6): 924–930 doi: 10.1139/l94-098
14	Konieek Z, Pryl K, Suchanek M. Practical applications of vortex flow separators in the Czech Republic. Water Science & Technology , 1996, 33(9): 253–260 doi: 10.1016/0273-1223(96)00394-0
15	Andoh R Y G, Faram M G, Stephenson A G, Kane A. A novel integrated system for stormwater management. In: Novatech 2001: 4^th International Conference on Innovative Technologies in Urban Storm Drainage, Lyon, France . Lyon: Novatech, 2001, 433–440
16	Rietema K. Performance and design of hydrocyclones-IV: design of hydrocyclones. Chemical Engineering Science , 1961, 15(3-4): 320–325 doi: 10.1016/0009-2509(61)85036-7
17	American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association (AWWA), Water Environment Federation (WEF). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 19th ed. Washington: APHA, 1995
18	Davis A P, McCuen R H. Stormwater Management for Smart Growth. New York: Springer, 2005
19	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Quality of Our Nation’s Waters, EPA 841-S-00-001. Washington, USA: Office of Water, 2000
20	Castilho L R, Medronho R A. A simple procedure for design and performance prediction of Bradley and rietema hydrocyclones. Minerals Engineering , 2000, 13(2): 183–191 doi: 10.1016/S0892-6875(99)00164-8
21	Lawson T B. Fundamentals of Aquaculture Engineering. New York: Champman & Hall, 1995
22	Puprasert C, Hebrard G, Lopez L, Aurelle Y. Potential of using hydrocyclone and hydrocyclone equipped with grit pot as a pre-treatment in runoff water treatment. Chemical Engineering and Processing , 2004, 43(1): 67–83 doi: 10.1016/S0255-2701(02)00154-X

[1]	Pelin Koyuncuoğlu, Gülbin Erden. Microplastics in municipal wastewater treatment plants: a case study of Denizli/Turkey[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2023, 17(8): 99-.
[2]	Mengqing Ge, Tao Lin, Kemei Zhou, Hong Chen, Hang Xu, Hui Tao, Wei Chen. Characteristics and removal mechanism of the precursors of N-chloro-2,2-dichloroacetamide in a drinking water treatment process at Taihu Lake[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2021, 15(5): 93-.
[3]	Yaocheng Fan, Tiancui Li, Deshou Cun, Haibing Tang, Yanran Dai, Feihua Wang, Wei Liang. Removal of arsenic by pilot-scale vertical flow constructed wetland[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2021, 15(4): 79-.
[4]	Cheng Chen, Wenshan Guo, Huu Hao Ngo. Pesticides in stormwater runoff−A mini review[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(5): 72-.
[5]	Weihua Wang, Wanfeng Zhang, Hong Liang, Dawen Gao. Occurrence and fate of typical antibiotics in wastewater treatment plants in Harbin, North-east China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(3): 34-.
[6]	Qian Wang, Qionghua Zhang, Mawuli Dzakpasu, Nini Chang, Xiaochang Wang. Transferral of HMs pollution from road-deposited sediments to stormwater runoff during transport processes[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(1): 13-.
[7]	Jun Xia, Hongping Wang, Richard L. Stanford, Guoyan Pan, Shaw L. Yu. Hydrologic and water quality performance of a laboratory scale bioretention unit[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(1): 14-.
[8]	Ahmad Kalbasi Ashtari, Amir M. Samani Majd, Gerald L. Riskowski, Saqib Mukhtar, Lingying Zhao. Removing ammonia from air with a constant pH, slightly acidic water　spray wet scrubber using recycled scrubbing solution[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(6): 3-.
[9]	Jie GAO, Jun HUANG, Weiwei CHEN, Bin WANG, Yujue WANG, Shubo DENG, Gang YU. Fate and removal of typical pharmaceutical and personal care products in a wastewater treatment plant from Beijing: a mass balance study[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(3): 491-501.
[10]	Boxiong SHEN,Jianhong CHEN,Ji CAI. Removal of elemental mercury by KI-impregnated clay[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(2): 236-243.
[11]	Juan DU, Yu FAN, Xin QIAN. Occurrence and behavior of pharmaceuticals in sewage treatment plants in eastern China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(4): 725-730.
[12]	Sanath KONDAVEETI,Kwang Soon CHOI,Ramesh KAKARLA,Booki MIN. *Microalgae Scenedesmus obliquus* as renewable biomass feedstock for electricity generation in microbial fuel cells (MFCs)**[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2014, 8(5): 784-791.
[13]	Yongxiang REN, Kai WEI, Hua LIU, Guoqiang SUI, Junping WANG, Yanjun SUN, Xiaohui ZHENG. Occurrence and removal of selected polycyclic musks in two sewage treatment plants in Xi’an, China[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2013, 7(2): 166-172.
[14]	Xubin PAN, Jingyi ZHANG, Wei-Ta FANG, Kim D. JONES. Dynamic behavior of stormwater quality parameters in South Texas[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2012, 6(6): 825-830.
[15]	Wen LI, Zhenyao SHEN, Tian TIAN, Ruimin LIU, Jiali QIU. Temporal variation of heavy metal pollution in urban stormwater runoff[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2012, 6(5): 692-700.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed