Source: AUTOMATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES

Chapter 2

The Business Case for

Automation
The Benefits of Automation

Meet Regulatory Requirements 8

Improve Process Performance
and Reliability

Record Data and Create

Reports

Save Chemicals and Energy

Save Labor

CostBenefit Ratio

11

Rate of Return

13

Ten Keys to a Successful Project

Reduce Risks

10

Ensure a Good Nights Sleep

10

The Cost of Automation

10

Return on Investment
Why We Do Projects

10

Payback Period

11

13

System Advocate

13

Management Support

14

Owner Involvement

15

Operator Involvement

15

Stakeholder Involvement

16

Maintenance Plan

16

Full System Testing

16

Contingency Plans

17

Training

17

Goals

18

References

18

7
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

Automation of Wastewater Treatment Facilities

THE BENEFITS OF AUTOMATION

There are several good reasons to automate a wastewater treatment facility:
Meet regulatory requirements;
Improve process performance and reliability;
Record data and create reports;
Save chemicals, energy, and labor;
Reduce risks, and
Ensure a good nights sleep.

MEET REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. Many instruments are required under

water-quality regulations. State and federal discharge permits, for example, require
wastewater treatment facilities to record their daily flowrates and report average
monthly and maximum daily flows. Most treatment plants also must collect flowweighted composite samples for analysis. The samples may be collected by an operator and composited manually based on the flowrate during sampling or collected by
an automatic sampler paced by a flow meters signal. In Texas, treatment plants must
measure the underflow rate of each activated sludge clarifier and keep it between 0.34
and 0.68 m3/m2d (200 and 400 gpd/sq ft) (Texas Administrative Code, 1990).
Design engineers and wastewater treatment plant staff should carefully study
design criteria and permit requirements and make sure that all required instruments
are properly installed and maintained.
IMPROVE PROCESS PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY. Proper instrumentation and control are essential for good process performance. Biological nutrient
removal systems, for example, depend on effective dissolved oxygen control in every
basin. Nitrification requires sufficient dissolved oxygen concentrations, while denitrification requires the dissolved oxygen level to be near zero.
Virtually every wastewater management conference now includes presentations
documenting how instrumentation and automation improved process performance
in every area of the treatment plant. Several publications, including Sensing and Control Systems: A Review of Municipal and Industrial Experiences (Water Environment
Research Foundation, 2002) and Efficient Redundancy Design Practices (Water Environment Research Foundation, 2003), also note instrumentations key role in reliable
treatment plant operations.
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

The Business Case for Automation

RECORD DATA AND CREATE REPORTS. All wastewater utilities must collect various data and use them to produce reports for regulatory and management
purposes. For many utilities, however, these efforts are inefficient and time-consuming. Automation systems can streamline these processes by collecting some of
the data, making it readily available, and even generating related reports.
A utilitys automation goals should include collecting data automatically whenever feasible, entering manually collected data only once, making it available electronically to all who need it, and storing it in only one database.
SAVE CHEMICALS AND ENERGY. Many treatment plants could save chemicals and energy by implementing closed-loop control of chemical dosing and other
processes. Accurate estimates of these savings, however, are needed to make good
design decisions for automation. Typically, closed-loop control of chemical addition
saves 10 to 20%.
Saving 1.0 mg/L of chlorine at a 375 000-m3/d (100-mgd) treatment plant, for
example, could justify the cost of several chlorine analyzers and a part-time technician, with substantial funds left over. Saving 1.0 mg/L of chlorine at a 375-m3/d
(100 000-gpd) treatment plant, however, may not justify the installation of any
automation equipment.
In the chlorination process, changes in flow and effluent quality result in a
varying chlorine demand. If the automation system can match this demand, substantial savings in chlorine are possible. Control of chlorination therefore requires accurate flow and chlorine residual measurements. In the case of a large facility, Hill and
Martin (1994) reported a chlorine savings of $200,000 per year (33%) while only
incurring $12,500 of additional maintenance labor.
There are often many opportunities to save energy in wastewater treatment
(Chapter 14). Controlling dissolved oxygen, for example, saves 15 to 20% of electrical
costs.

SAVE LABOR. Automation saves operator labor by

Consolidating data so staff can observe it all at one location rather than having
to walk the plant for it,
Eliminating the need for rounds to check that equipment is operating correctly,
Eliminating such repetitive tasks as filling day tanks and draining sumps,
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

10

Automation of Wastewater Treatment Facilities

Eliminating the need to check and adjust chemical flows, and

Eliminating unnecessary visits to lift stations and other offsite facilities.
However, automation can increase maintenance staffs requirements. A welldesigned project should show a net labor savings for comparative performance.

REDUCE RISKS. Today, the penalties for improper risk management include fines;
incarceration; wasted resources; and public outrage at plant odors, unsightly
receiving waters, and discharged toxics. Instrumentation and controls can reduce the
risk of permit violations and keep utility finances under control.

ENSURE A GOOD NIGHTS SLEEP. As one anonymous manager said, the best
benefit of automation may be getting a good nights sleep knowing that the automation system will oversee operations; make prompt, economical control decisions; and
contact staff if conditions arise that it cannot handle well.

THE COST OF AUTOMATION

Automation equipment, including sensing instrumentation, control elements, controllers, software, and programming, typically adds 4 to 12% or more to the total cost
of building a treatment facility. Project costs are site-specific and depend on the treatment processes involved and managers decisions about the tradeoffs between
automation and labor.
Once installed, an automation system then has ongoing maintenance costs. Such
costs should be considered early in the design phase, because an automation system
that is not maintained properly will eventually fail and fall into disuse.

RETURN ON INVESTMENTWHY WE DO PROJECTS

The wastewater treatment plants built or expanded 15 to 20 years ago often included
instruments and control systems just because utilities needed something to operate
the plant. The related cost justifications typically were based on estimates with little
supporting data. It did not matter then, however, because automation systems typically were a small percentage of the total construction budget.
Cost justification is more important today. Accurate estimates of automation
costs and benefits are required to justify replacing or upgrading current systems.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

The Business Case for Automation

Common methods for measuring return on investment include the payback

period, costbenefit ratio, or rate of return. All three will be demonstrated on the following dissolved oxygen control example, in which the following cost estimates were
made:
Initial investment
$500,000;
Power savings
$200,000 per year;
Additional maintenance requirements
$50,000 per year;
Equipment life
10 years; and
Interest rate
5% per year.

PAYBACK PERIOD. The payback period is a relatively simple calculation in

which the initial investment is divided by the net annual savings. The underlying
assumption is that the interest rate is 0%.
Payback period

3.33 years

(2.1)

Payback periods of less than 5 years typically are considered good investments.
If the payback period is more than 6 or 7 years, however, the project task force should
thoroughly evaluate the accuracy of all estimates before making a strictly economic
decision.

COSTBENEFIT RATIO. The costbenefit ratio is a calculation in which the initial investment (cost) is compared to the overall net savings (benefit). First, however,
the designer must calculate the present worth of such savingsthe amount that
would have to be deposited in an interest-bearing account today to yield the savings
total at a future date.
Most books on engineering economics will have various formulae for calculating
present worth and related parameters. The formula relating future values to present
worth is

(2.2)

Where
P
present worth of money,

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

11

The Business Case for Automation

12

Automation of Wastewater Treatment Facilities

F
future payment or savings,

i
interest rate per interest period, and
n
number of interest periods.
In this case, the present worth is $1,158,260.24 (Table 2.1), so the costbenefit ratio
is 2.32 to 1.
costbenefit ratio
$1,158,260.24/$500,000
2.32 to 1
The ratio must be at least 1.2 or 1.3 or more for a project to be considered a good
investment.

TABLE 2.1

Calculation of present worth.

Year

Investment ($)

500,000

Net savings ($)

P/F factor

Present worth ($)

150,000

0.952381

142,857.14

150,000

0.907029

136,054.42

150,000

0.863838

129,575.64

150,000

0.822702

123,405.37

150,000

0.783526

117,528.92

150,000

0.746215

111,932.31

150,000

0.710681

106,602.20

150,000

0.676839

101,525.90

150,000

0.644609

96,691.34

10

150,000

0.6139113

92,086.99
Sum
1,158,260.24

P/F factor = the ratio of present value of money divided by future value as defined in eq (2.2).

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

The Business Case for Automation

RATE OF RETURN. The rate of return is the interest rate (i) needed so the equivalent present worth of the future annual net savings equals the initial investment. The
following equation describes the relationship between annual savings (A) and initial
investment (P):
(2.3)
Where
A
end-of-period payment or receipt in a uniform series continuing for n
periods, the entire series equivalent to P at interest rate i.
In our example, where A
$150,000 and P
$500,000, eq 2.3 can be solved iteratively to find that i
0.273, or 27.3%. If i is substantially greater than the lending rate,
the project is considered a good investment.

TEN KEYS TO A SUCCESSFUL PROJECT

During the 2000 Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference
(WEFTEC), a Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) project team asked
leading utility managers, consultants, industrial specialists, instrumentation suppliers, and academics to identify factors that they thought contributed to controlsystem success (WERF, 2002). The team then prioritized the success factors, made a
list of the top 10, and asked attendees of the WEFTEC 2001 workshop, State-of-theArt WWTP Sensing and Control Systems, to validate it. Thirty-nine attendees (93%)
agreed with the list, and three (7%) disagreed.
Interestingly, most of the success factors on this list are organizational and managerial issues rather than technical ones. (Successful projects, however, still require
complete specifications, drawings, and other documents.) The following sections
describe these keys to success, which should be implemented throughout the
systems lifetime (Table 2.2).

SYSTEM ADVOCATE. The success or failure of any automation project depends

on the people leading it. Successful projects typically had an advocate, someone who
was technically competent, really excited about the project, and respected throughout
the organization.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

13

The Business Case for Automation

14

Automation of Wastewater Treatment Facilities

TABLE 2.2

The keys to success and their importance during each phase of a project.

Key

Planning

Design

System advocate

Management support

Owner/operator involvement

Trust in operators

What's in it for me

Plan for maintenance

Full system testing

Preparation for failure

Training
Setting goals

Implementation Operations

If the staff turnover rate is high, the role of system advocate should be assumed
by a project task force of several people. This task force should be responsible for the
project from planning through operations and should develop a common, consensual
understanding of system requirements, capabilities, and features. This will maintain
continuity if one member leaves the organization.
The task force should be led by a key manager and include representatives from
the operations, maintenance, engineering, and information technology (IT) groups.
The task force should not be led by IT staff unless that person also has a thorough
understanding of wastewater treatment processes and real-time control. One task
force member should be a project manager responsible for task force logistics.

MANAGEMENT SUPPORT. Successful projects must have the utility managers

full backing. A high-level statement committing the organization to the project and
its task force is essential.
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

The Business Case for Automation

Managers also need to provide sufficient resources for the project (both procurement and maintenance) and support its integration into the organization. If the
system will result in staff reassignments or reduction, then managers need to develop
and communicate the specific plan for reorganization (e.g., staff reductions only
through attrition).

OWNER INVOLVEMENT. Large control-system projects typically are planned,

designed, and implemented by consulting engineers because the related risks and
level of effort are suitable for contract work. However, the results may not meet the
owners needs and intentions unless these are well-defined before the contract is
signed.
During initial project definition, owners and designers need to define their needs
and expectations, which should be the basis of project objectives. It is then the
owners responsibility to stay involved in the project and confirm that the system
will meet these objectives.
During the design phase, consulting engineers are responsible for the designs
details and accuracy. The owners, however, should be involved in establishing the
overall project goals and should review design documents for operations- and maintenance-related issues.
During the implementation phase, owners should be involved in system testing,
both in the factory and in the field.
OPERATOR INVOLVEMENT. Ultimately, a systems success depends on
whether it is used for its intended purpose. The best way to get operators to use a
new control system is by involving them in all phases of the project and creating a
system that meets their needs. Also, operators can provide valuable information that
will help consulting engineers design and build a better control system.
During the planning phase, operators should be represented on the project task
force and should evaluate the proposed control systems overall operability (e.g.,
ease of use and functionality). They can provide a practical, hands on perspective
that is frequently overlooked or understated by engineers and managers.
During the design phase, operators can provide valuable information needed to
define control strategies, which is especially important during a plant retrofit. (The
task force should verify and validate this information.) Plant retrofits may require
revising instrumentation and controls to change the way operators run a process
either because it previously was run incorrectly or because the process itself changed.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

15

The Business Case for Automation

16

Automation of Wastewater Treatment Facilities

During the implementation phase, operators must be integrally involved in

system testing. This is a critical opportunity to introduce operators to the system and
give them a chance to use it without worrying about degrading the treatment
process.

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT. Stakeholders reasons for wanting the control system will vary, and the project objectives need to reflect each stakeholders specific needs. Stakeholders also should be represented on the project task force. Ideally,
these representatives visions should be broad enough to reflect the entire organizations goals.
Ongoing stakeholder involvement throughout the project will help ensure that
the resulting system will meet everyones needs. It also increases the likelihood that
the system will be accepted and considered a success.

MAINTENANCE PLAN. should determine how reliable the control system must
be and what steps must be taken to maintain that level of reliability. One of these steps
is maintaining equipment in accordance with their manufacturers requirements.
During the design phase, the designers should address system-reliability issues,
including redundancy, power source and backup, surge and lightning protection,
response to control-system equipment failure, and equipment location and accessibility, in the design documents.
During the construction phase, construction inspectors should review the equipment for ease of access, maintenance, and replacement. Provisions also should be
made for maintaining equipment until it is turned over to the plant staff so no warranty is voided. Afterward, ongoing equipment maintenance should be the responsibility of plant staff or an appropriate vendor.
FULL SYSTEM TESTING. Complete control-system testing and approval is critical; any part of a new control system that does not work contributes to a negative perception of the entire system. Also, the owner should witness all system testing because
unwitnessed testing often is compromised when budgets or schedules get tight.
During the planning phase, the owner and project task force should allocate sufficient money, resources, and time so the necessary tools and documents are available
for timely testing. Plant staff also must be authorized to participate in all testing
activities.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

The Business Case for Automation

The Business Case for Automation

During the design phase, the contract and design documents should establish
system requirements, including control strategies, and specify the contractors testing
requirements.
During the implementation phase, testing should include a complete factory test
of all hardware and software, field-testing of all process input and output (I/O) points
to each end element (e.g., instrument or control element), and complete system testing
for operation with the treatment process, including all control strategies.
Testing plans must be flexible, so testing will not unduly delay the project
schedule. For example, one project called for a full-system factory test of both hardware and software, but delays in the control-strategy submittal process resulted in
the hardware being ready well before the control-strategy configuration was complete. So, the project task force modified the factory-testing requirement to allow for
two tests. The first only tested the hardware; once approved, the hardware was
shipped and installed. The second only tested the software. This allowed more time
to finalize and test the control configuration without delaying onsite hardware installation and wiring.
Also, all changes need to be fully tested before the control system is turned over
to plant operators.

CONTINGENCY PLANS. Despite the best intentions, not every aspect of a project goes exactly as planned. Task force flexibility, contingency plans, and creative
solutions are essential to getting derailed projects back on track. Flexible budgets and
schedules, in particular, can best absorb the results of unexpected changes.

TRAINING. The best control-system projects will be pointless if utility staff do not
know how to use the system as intended. Training should be scheduled before the
system is turned over, and the training program should include multiple
approachestrain-the-trainer, formal classroom training, hands-on, self-directed, onthe-job, etc.to maximize results by allowing for different learning styles.
The training budget should include both the cost of training itself and the
arrangements for staff to attend. Training for small systems or system changes can be
done in the control room during normal shifts. Large systems or system changes
especially those involving a major process upgrademay require dedicating a shift
to staff training. If so, plans should be made for temporary personnel to handle the
workload while staff is in the classroom.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.

17

The Business Case for Automation

18

Automation of Wastewater Treatment Facilities

In addition to basic training, the program should include refresher training after
the system has been operating for several weeks. Follow-up training also should be
periodically available thereafter to refresh staff skills and train new employees.

GOALS. Before starting any project, the task force should put together a written
plan. This plan should state the tangible and intangible goals for the entire project.
These goals need to define the specific benefits to be derived from implementing the
control system. The plan should be authorized by managers and key personnel and
referenced whenever questions of intent, goals, schedule, and priorities arise. It will
be the projects justification and a measure of its success.
Consulting engineers use various methods to create these plans. The method
used is not important, so long as the plan defines the objectives.

REFERENCES
Hill, R. D.; Martin, J. (1994) Measurement and Automatic Control of Chlorination. In Critical Issues in Water and Wastewater Treatment, Proceedings of the 1994
National Conference on Environmental Engineering, American Society of Civil
Engineers: Reston, Virginia, 718725.
Stire, T. G. (1983) Process Control Computer Systems Guide for Managers; Butterworth Publishers: Boston, Massachusetts, 170.
Texas Administrative Code (1990) Title 30 Environmental Quality, Part 1 Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality, Chapter 317 Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems, 317.4 Wastewater Treatment Plants.
Water Environment Research Foundation (2002) Sensing and Control Systems: A
Review of Municipal and Industrial Experiences, WERF Project 99-WWF-4; Water
Environment Research Foundation: Alexandria, Virginia.
Water Environment Research Foundation (2003) Efficient Redundancy Design Practices, WERF Project 00-CTS-5; Water Environment Research Foundation:
Alexandria, Virginia.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)

Copyright 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.