www.ijcrt.

org © 2022 IJCRT | Volume 10, Issue 6 June 2022 | ISSN: 2320-2882

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL

APPROACH OF SEWAGE TREATMENT
PLANT: A CASE STUDY
Ritesh Rangari1 Jayant Ramteke2 Hiradas Lilhare3
1
M. Tech. student, Department of Civil Engineering, Swami Narayan Siddhant Institute of Technology, Kalmeshwar, Nagpur,
Maharashtra, India

2
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Swami Narayan Siddhant Institute of Technology,
Kalmeshwar, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

3
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Swami Narayan Siddhant Institute of
Technology, Kalmeshwar, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Abstract: Almost 80%-85% of the water supplied for domestic use gets converted into the wastewater. Wastewater containing high
organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus leads to numerous problems like eutrophication, consumption of oxygen, toxicity to the
environment. To remove these contaminants; physical, chemical and biological wastewater treatments are adopted. A Sewage
treatment Plant (STP) can be express as the factory, which prevents the environment from waste produced by human beings. When
the waste produced is beyond the limit of environment to decompose, STP is only the solution. The present STP reduces the waste,
produces manure & energy and helps us to keep our rivers, ponds clean. Various types of STPs are introducing each day, according
to the requirement and economic view. The SBR is one of the potential options for treatment of wastewater. SBR is a fill and draw
system for aerobic wastewater treatment. In this system, wastewater is added to a single “batch” reactor, treated to remove
undesirable components, and then discharged. Equalization, reaction/aeration, and clarification can all be achieved using a single
batch reactor. SBR systems have been successfully used to treat both municipal and industrial wastewater (Mahvi, 2008). For further
improvement in the performance, the attempt was made to study the 245 MLD existing sewage treatment plant at Kabitkhedi, Indore
and identify the bottlenecks in the system to make it more suitable for Indian conditions.

Index Terms - Sewage, Wastewater, Treatment Plants, Treatments Technologies

I. INTRODUCTION
The treatment of domestic wastewater is a major and complicated issue regarding the environmental pollution; hence one can
have the better solution in the form of SBR. The wide variety of wastewaters can be treated using SBR as can be concluded from the
literature review. The process modification is very easy due to flexible nature of the SBR. The cycles, HRTs, SRTs can be changed
and hence it provides wide scope for treatment that too in a single reactor which is most advantageous factor.
Although, SBR gives good performance in average conditions, it fails to deliver the same output in peak hours. The quality of
treated water is affected in peak hours due to reduction in the reaction time of SBR basin. Whereas the consideration of higher peak
factor makes it uneconomical due to increase in sizes of basin and other processing units. These drawbacks can be detected by
studying and analyzing the design approach, operation and maintenance of existing STP and wastewater collection system. Further
rectification in the existing system and process modification can be proposed for better functioning of the overall system.
India accounts for 2.45% of land area and 4% of water resources of the world but represents 16% of the world population. Total
utilizable water resource in the country has been estimated to be about 1123 BCM (690 BCM from surface and 433 BCM from
ground), which is just 28% of the water derived from precipitation (Kaur et al). Insufficient capacity of waste water treatment and
increasing sewage generation pose big question of disposal of waste water. As a result, at present, significant portion of waste water
being bypassed in STPs and sold to the nearby farmers on charge basis by the Water and Sewerage Board or most of the untreated
waste water end up into river basins and indirectly used for irrigation. It has been reported that irrigation with sewage or sewage
mixed with industrial effluents results in saving of 25 to 50 per cent of N and P fertilizer and leads to 15-27 % higher crop productivity,
over the normal waters (Anonymous, 2004). In India, there are 234 Sewage Water Treatment plants (STPs). Most of these were
developed under various river action plans (from 1978-79 onwards) and are located in (just 5% of) cities/ towns along the banks of
major rivers (CPCB, 2005a). Batch Operation of the activated sludge process is nothing new. During the early development of the

IJCRT22A6045 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a319

www.ijcrt.org © 2022 IJCRT | Volume 10, Issue 6 June 2022 | ISSN: 2320-2882

activated sludge process in the United Kingdom by Arden and Lockett around 1914, plants were operated using fill-and-draw or
batch feed methods. These researchers firmly established the concept of operating a single reactor basin using repetitive cycles of
aeration, settlement and discharged of treated effluent. Around 1956, during the development of oxidation ditch technology, Pasveer
incorporated interrupted and continuously fed batch treatment principles. Further advancements to the oxidation ditch fed-batch
treatment then took place by incorporating a rectangular basin configuration.

II. SEQUENTIAL BATCH REACTOR (SBR)

Sequential batch reactor is a type of biological treatment system in which stabilization of organic matter, flocculation of
generated cells and settling of cells occur in a safe tank. In its operations, the cycle processes FILL-REACT, REACT, SETTLE
DRAW are controlled by time to achieve the objectives of the operation. Each process is associated with particular reactor conditions
(turbulent/Quiescent, Aerobic/Anaerobic) that promote selected changes in the chemical and physical nature of the waste water.
These changes lead ultimately to a fully treated effluent.
III. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
A treatment plant utilizing the SBR concepts has only one type of process unit, the batch reactor tank. It is possible and even
preferable in many cases, to link several identical reactors in a multiple tank configuration, to limit the size of Individual units and
increased flexibility. There are no units dedicated to a single process, such as equalizing basin, aeration chambers, and clarifiers, as
continuous flow systems. In its simplest form, a batch reactor consists of single tank equipped with an inlet for raw waste water; air
diffusers, with associated compressors and piping for aeration; a sludge draws off mechanism at the bottom of waste sludge; a decant
mechanism to remove the supernatant after settling; and a control mechanism to time and sequence the processes. Various suppliers
of SBR systems include different modifications to the basic system, such as the installation of a baffle near the inlet to provide a pre
react chamber separated from the aerated portion of the basin. Many decant structures are marketed with features designed to limit
the discharge of floating solids and settled sludge. Air diffuser design and construction also varies among suppliers, but many SRBs
use jet aerators or mechanical aeration to accomplish aeration and/or mixing with a single device. The heart of the SBR system is the
control unit and automatic switches and valves that sequence and time the different operations. The advent of reliable microprocessors
at reasonable cost, used in conjunction with modern limit/level switches and automatic valves, has been a major factor in the recent
development of SBR technology. The ability to control the processes in time rather than space is crucial in SBR Concept.
IV. BOD, NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL MECHANISM
More than 95% removal of BOD is noted in SBR. An important advantage of the SBR system is the control the operator can
maintain over microorganism selection. Within a complete treatment cycle, the microorganism selection pressures are highly variable
and severe. These pressures include oxygen availability, which ranges from anaerobic through anoxic to high DO conditions, and
substrate availability, which ranges from famine to feast conditions. While certain of these selection pressures can occur in some
conventional continuous flow systems, the SBR system provides the ability to easily select and extend or limit preferred conditions
through time, allowing the preferential growth of desirable microorganisms. Two observations have been documented that illustrate
the beneficial effects of this control ability. Firstly, in an SBR system more microorganisms are capable of processing a greater
quantity of substrate at a greater rate than in a conventional system. Secondly, it has been reported that a properly selected aeration
strategy can result in the minimizing of the growth of filamentous microorganisms. These microorganisms, whose presence in
quantity leads to problems with sludge bulking and foaming, are undesirable in the activated sludge floc in excessive numbers, and
their control is an asset to system performance. Nitrogen removal can be achieved in the SBR system without additional equipment
or chemicals. Nitrogen enters the system in the raw waste water in the form of organic nitrogen and ammonia (NH4). It is removed
from the system in the form of organic nitrogen gas. Phosphorus removal by microbiological methods in SBR systems is well
documented. The additional of chemical coagulant to the reactor that precipitates phosphorus into the sludge is a common phosphorus
removal process applicable to both conventional continuous flow and SBR systems. The microbiological removal of phosphorus first
requires an anaerobic period (absence of dissolved Oxygen and Oxidation nitrogen) during which substrate (raw waste) is present.
This period should be followed by an aerobic period (high DO) that promotes the uptake of excess phosphorus by the sludge mass.
Excess sludge should be removed from the reactor in suitable quantities before the onset of next anaerobic period. In term of SBR
operation anaerobic conditions and aeration must be available during FILLREACT period for phosphorus release and uptake by
biomass. These conditions can also available in selector by recirculation of sludge. Fig.1 shows a Typical SBR Cycle for BOD, SS
and COD, SS, T-N and T-P Removal.
V. PERFORMANCE COMPARISON
The performance of SBRs is typically better to conventional activated sludge system and depends on system design and site-
specific criteria. Depending on their mode of operation, SBRs can achieve good BOD and nutrient removal. For SBRs the BOD
removal efficiency is generally 85 to 95 percent. SBR manufactures will typically provide a process guarantee to produce an effluent
of less than: (i) 10 mg/L Biochemical Oxygen Demand (ii) 10 mg/L Total Suspended Solids (iii) 5-8 mg/L Total Nitrogen (iv) 1-2
mg/L Total Phosphorus (EPA, 1995). The advantages of Sequential Batch Reactor over conventional system are:
1. Control system provides high flexibility. The control system automatically coordinates equipment operation through
various phase of SBR cycle. This feature offers a high degree of flexibility allowing adaptation of the process cycle to
meet the changing influent conditions through simple changes in control set points.
2. No primary and secondary settling tanks, no return sludge pumping, hence lesser area requirement and ease in operation
& maintenance.
3. It is a proven process, which enhances the standard system through strategic cost, operating and biological advantage.
4. Improved effluent quality: extended aeration mode, a special ability to handle extremely high organic and hydraulic
shock loads, no washout of biomass, reliable performance. More than 95% BOD removal, advantage aeration
processes.
5. The process is also recommended for small-scale sewage treatment in CPHEEO manual, but due to the advancement
in technology in last decade, these plants are very favourable for medium and largescale sewage treatment applications.
IJCRT22A6045 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a320
www.ijcrt.org © 2022 IJCRT | Volume 10, Issue 6 June 2022 | ISSN: 2320-2882

It is a proven process all over the world for sewage treatment. Many large-scale plants working efficiently around the
globe.
6. Nitrified effluent (no ammonia is present), doesn’t consume further oxygen for nitrification and much beneficial for
irrigation and fisheries.
7. Expansion potential: Simplified expansion- Each unit forms a modular treatment unit. All basins have been built with
common wall construction. This can be achieved by maintaining the same length for all tanks and increasing the width
appropriately. The blower equipment is also sized proportionally to the capacity of each basin such that the same
blowers are used before and after expansion.

VI. SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT DETAILS

From main pumping station Raw water supply to inlet of STP (for treatment purpose). Where water passes through 6mm bar screen.
Here 6mm and above particles retain and removed. After removal of 6mm particles water passes through GRIT mechanism. In GRIT
mechanism 0.5 mm and above particles are retained and removed. Then water passes through partial flumes for measurement of flow.
After pre-treatment water enter into the SBR.

Figure 1: Photographic view of Sewage Treatment Plant, Kabitkhedi, Indore

VII. OBSERVATIONS AND ANALYSIS
The sequential batch reactor is operated in cycles of 3 hrs. Scheduling of all six basins is done considering the inflow in the system.
8.1 Basin Operation Sequence
SBR batch operations are operated as follows,
Table 1 : Operation Sequence

Time (Hrs) 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00

Basin-1 F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A S S D D D D

Basin-2 S S D D D D F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A

Basin-3 D D F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A S S D D

Basin-4 F/A F/A S S D D D D F/A F/A F/A F/A

Basin-5 D D D D F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A F/A S S

Basin-6 F/A F/A F/A F/A S S D D D D F/A F/A

F/A: Filling and aeration phase, S: Settling phase, D: Decanting phase

IJCRT22A6045 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a321

www.ijcrt.org © 2022 IJCRT | Volume 10, Issue 6 June 2022 | ISSN: 2320-2882

8.2 Average Inflow and Treated Water Flow

Average inflows and outflows from STP are shown in figure 2;

225.00
220.00

Flow (MLD)
215.00
210.00
205.00
200.00
195.00
Jan Feb March April
Inflow (MLD) Treated Water (MLD)

Figure 2: Average Inflow and Treated water flow

8.3 Wastewater Generation Patterns
The wastewater generation during a day is not constant throughout the day. It changes every hourly. The typical domestic
wastewater generation pattern used to design STP is as shown in figure below;

2.5

2
Multiplier

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours
Figure 3: Wastewater Generation Pattern Used for Design

But the wastewater generation in Indian scenarios is not found as per the pattern used for the design. The actual wastewater generation
pattern observed on field is as shown in figure below;

3.5

3
Multiplier

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours
Figure 4: Wastewater Generation Pattern Observed on Field

IJCRT22A6045 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a322

www.ijcrt.org © 2022 IJCRT | Volume 10, Issue 6 June 2022 | ISSN: 2320-2882

8.4 Comparison between wastewater generation pattern used for design, wastewater generation pattern observed on field
and operational peak factor in STP
The peak factor used while designing the STP was 2.5, the same factor is used while designing the SBR in general conditions.
The peak factor of 2.5 was used considering the ideal wastewater generation pattern. But the data observed on the field was not
matching to the data considered during design. The comparison between wastewater generation pattern used for design, wastewater
generation pattern observed on field and operational peak factor in STP is shown in figure below;

3.5 Pattern Used

for Design
3
Pattern
2.5
Multiplier

Observed on
Field
2
Operational
1.5 Pattern of
STP
1

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours
Figure 5: Comparison between wastewater generation pattern used for design, wastewater generation pattern observed on field
and operational peak factor in STP

VIII. CONCLUSIONS
The study was conducted to understand the design and operation approach of sewage treatment plant at Kabitkhedi, Indore of capacity
235 MLD. After detailed analysis of design and operational considerations following conclusions are made;
1. The wastewater generation pattern adopted for STP designing in India is not suitable for Indian conditions.
2. During peak hours the incoming flow in STP exceeds the operational capacity of STP which raises the issue of storage of excess
inflow at STP.
3. As STP cannot take flow more than its operational capacity, the remaining wastewater remains in the primary sewerage lines
which causes problems like surcharging the primary lines and overflowing the manholes.
4. These problems can be tackled either by providing larger wet wells or designing the STP basins for higher peak factor.

IX. REFERENCES
[1] A.H. Mahavi (2008) Sequencing batch reactor: A promising technology in wastewater treatment. Iran. J. Environ. Health Sci.
Eng., Vol.5, No.2, 79-90.
[2] Akshey Bhargava (2016) Activated Sludge Treatment Process-Concept and System Design. International Journal of
Engineering Development and Research, Volume 4, Issue 2, ISSN: 2321-9939.
[3] Ashok S.S., Kumar T. and Bhalla K. (2018) Integrated Greywater Management Systems: A Design Proposal for Efficient and
Decentralised Greywater Sewage Treatment. 25th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Procedia CIRP 69, 609-614.
[4] Bhagwatkar A., Kamble S., More K. and Amup A.K. (2017) Decentralized wastewater treatment facility. International journal
of engineering sciences & management, 3(4), 144-155.
[5] Dahamsheh A. and Wedyan M. (2017) Evaluation and assessment of performance of Al-Hussein bin Talal University (AHU)
wastewater treatment plants. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(1), 84-89.
[6] Daniel Vieira Minegatti de Oliveira, Marcio Dias Rabelo and Yuri Nascimento Nariyoshi (2014) Evaluation of a MBBR
(moving bed biofilm reactor) pilot plant for treatment of pulp and paper mill wastewater. International Journal of
Environmental Monitoring and Analysis, 2(4), 220-225.
[7] Davis, M.L. and Cornwell, D.A. (2008) Introduction to Environmental Engineering. McGraw-Hill Companies, New York.
[8] Durga Madhab Mahapatra, H. N. Chanakya and T. V. Ramachandra (2013) Treatment efficacy of algae-based sewage
treatment plants. Environ Monit Assess.
[9] Kulkarni B., Wanjule R.V., and Shinde H.H. (2016) Study on Sewage Quality from Sewage Treatment Plant at Vashi, Navi
Mumbai. ScienceDirect Materials Today, 5, 1859-1863. Mohammad Sadegh Nikmanesh, Hadi Eslami, Seyed Mojtaba
Momtaz, Rahmatollah Biabani, Amir Mohammadi, Babak Shiravand and Tahereh Zarei Mahmoudabadi (2018) Performance
Evaluation of the Extended Aeration Activated Sludge System in the Removal of Physicochemical and Microbial Parameters
of Municipal Wastewater: A Case Study of Nowshahr Wastewater Treatment Plant. Journal of Environmental Health and
Sustainable Development, 3(2), 509-17.
[10] Negi M.S. and Sahu V. (2015) Performance evaluation of 9 MLD sewage treatment plant at gurgaon and cost-effective
measures in treatment process. Civil Engineering and Urban Planning: An International Journal (CiVEJ), 2(3), 1-7.

IJCRT22A6045 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a323

www.ijcrt.org © 2022 IJCRT | Volume 10, Issue 6 June 2022 | ISSN: 2320-2882

[11] Patil Y., Raut Y., Patil Y. and Dhurve S. (2018) Design of sewage treatment plant units for st.john college campus.
International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), 7(3), 177-181.
[12] Rajkumar K. (2016) An Evaluation of Biological Approach for the Effluent Treatment of Paper Boards Industry - An
Economic Perspective. J Bioremediat Biodegrad, 7(5), 1-13.
[13] Shobhan Majumder, Poornesh, Reethupoorna M.B. and Razi Mustafa (2019) A Review on Working, Treatment and
Performance Evaluation of Sewage Treatment Plant. Journal of Engineering Research and Application, Vol. 9, 41-49.

IJCRT22A6045 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a324