cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng.

, NUST 23/10/2006 10-1

Chapter 10

WASTEWATER STABILISATION PONDS

Wastewater treatment attempts to reduce the biological oxygen demand (BOD) and
the numbers of pathogenic bacteria to levels that are acceptable. Untreated
wastewater discharged to a river would eventually be treated naturally by recycling
of material between producers, consumers and saprophytes, but if the balance is
not maintained, the purification system would break down. This will lead to
environmental damage and the spread of diseases.

Conventional wastewater treatment processes require highly experienced operators

and professional engineers to design the works. They require a reliable energy
supply and also the demand for energy is high. There is need to have well-
developed institutional structures to effectively administer the works. As a result the
capital, operation and maintenance costs are high. The majority of developing
countries lack the capacity to design, construct, operate and maintain conventional
wastewater treatment plants due to financial constraints faced by the local
authorities responsible for the provision of sanitation. Against this background,
focus should be put on appropriate technologies, which meet both the
environmental concerns and financial capabilities of the stakeholders. When land is
adequately available, wastewater stabilization ponds (WSP) are an attractive
alternative especially for small urban and rural centers. The technology is simple,
low cost and the efficiency is almost similar to other conventional treatment
processes.

Table 1 Comparison of wastewater treatment processes in Bulawayo

Item Magwegwe Aisleby I Aisleby III

North (Biological (Activated
(WSP) filters) sludge)
Capacity (ML/day) 4 13.5 10
COD loading(mg/l) 1050 1960 1200
Mechanical demand low high highest
Staff requirements lowest low low
Maintenance costs very low low high
Response to shock loadings excellent moderate good
Land requirements high low very low
Net present value high low very low
Treatment efficiency low low high

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-2

Wastewater stabilization ponds

Wastewater stabilization ponds are simple shallow excavations receiving continuos
wastewater flow. Wastewater is treated by settlements of solids, and by action of
aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. However besides their simplicity, they represent a
complex interaction of physical, chemical and biological processes. They have long
retention periods to enable the natural purification to take place on the incoming
wastewater. The BOD removal and pathogenic organisms is relatively high (Table
3) with low nutrient removal. However disposal of effluent through irrigation
alleviate this problem.

Table 2(a) Comparison of removal rates for different treatment processes

Treatment processes Removal rates as % of inflow

BOD Suspended Bacteria
solids
Sedimentation 30-40 40-75 25-75
Anaerobic digestion 25-65 40-75 40-75
Chemical precipitation 60-75 70-90 40-80
Combined sedimentation and 80-90 80-90 90-95
percolating filter process
Combined sedimentation and activated 85-95 85-95 90-98
sludge process
Waste stabilisation ponds (28 days 93 87 99.99
retention)

Adapted from Smith (1995), Wastewater Engineering

Table 2(b) Area required based on an equivalent population number of 10 000

Type of process Site area required (ha) Costs

Capital Operation &
maintenance
Activated sludge less than 2 very high very high
Percolating filters 4-6 high low
Wastewater stabilization ponds 10-28 low very low
Wetlands - low very low

The process finds widespread use because of the following advantages.

• can handle a reasonable volume of wastewater

• can easily treat strong wastewater from agro-industrial processes e.g.
abattoirs, food canneries and dairies
• can cope with high levels of heavy metals up to 60 mg/l (Mara, 1997)
• requires low or no energy at all
2

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-3

• is cheap to design and construct

• is easy to maintain and operate
• has a high BOD removal
• can withstand hydraulic and organic shock loads
• has a high efficiency in the removal of pathogens (99.9 %) in contrast to
other treatment processes which require a tertiary treatment process such as
chlorination.
• WSP are the only secondary treatment process that can readily and reliably
produce safe effluents for reuse in agriculture and aquaculture.

Despite enjoying these merits stabilization ponds have the following shortcomings:

• requires large space, hence not economic for large works.

• pose a health hazard to surrounding communities as ponds can become
breeding places for flies and mosquitoes if they are poorly maintained.
• releases offensive odour when improperly maintained.
• There is less removal of eutrophic nutrients. Final effluent contains lots of
enriching nitrates and phosphates.
• There is heavy concentration of algae in effluent which causes reverse
process in treatment.

However in situations in which capital is scarce, technical expertise is lacking

and land is readily available, the stabilization pond represents a simple and
relatively cheap answer to water pollution control problems. They are becoming
more widely appreciated and many local and public authorities are considering
installing them and especially for the financially constrained rural communities.
Because of the aforesaid reasons, emphasis will be put on wastewater
stabilization ponds in this module compared to the other treatment processes.
The design, construction, operation and maintenance of WSP is outlined in the
following sections.

Sitting
The following general factors should be considered when siting wastewater
stabilization ponds

• Flows of wastewater should be gravitational to avoid pumping costs

• Ponds should be located at least 200m (preferably 500m) downwind from
the community they serve and away from any likely area of future
development to avoid odours especially for anaerobic ponds
• There should be enough land available for future expansion
• The drainage system must be good enough to avoid flooding
• Pond foundations should be preferably impermeable to minimize possible
groundwater pollution

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-4

• Ponds should be orientated on the direction of the prevailing winds to

create turbulence thereby minimizing pond stratification.

Treatment
This stage aims at reducing the BOD of the influent wastewater to a given level of
purification such that on discharge to a receiving water the treated wastewater will
not have detrimental effects on the environment. In WSP the secondary treatment
takes place in a series of ponds, starting with the anaerobic, facultative and
maturation ponds. Depending on the strength of the wastewater, anaerobic ponds
may be omitted. A typical pond layout is shown in Fig. 1.

Pond geometry
The rectangular shape is the most common with much variation in the length to
breadth ratio. It is recommended to have anaerobic and facultative ponds to be
rectangular with L:W ratio of 2-3 to 1. Maturation ponds should have a higher L:W
ratio (10 to 1) so that they better approximate plug flow conditions.
To facilitate wind-induced mixing of the pond surface layers, the pond should be
located so that its longest dimension lies in the direction of the prevailing wind. To
minimize hydraulic short-circuiting, the inlet should be located such that the
wastewater flows in the pond against the wind.

Anaerobic Facultative
pond pond

Maturation pond Maturation

(Fully aerobic) pond
(Fully aerobic)

Anaerobi Facultative
c pond pond

Fig 1 Typical pond layout

ANAEROBIC PONDS

Anaerobic ponds
Principally, they are settling tanks with some organic stabilization and are suitable
for treating high strength industrial wastes with a high content of organic material in
a non-settleable condition. Bacteria anaerobically decompose organic matter to
gaseous end products of carbon dioxide and methane. In addition intermediate
4

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-5

odorous compounds, such as organic acids and hydrogen sulphide are formed.
The three main advantages of anaerobic treatment compared to aerobic are:

• the low production of waste biological sludge

• no need for aeration equipment.
• a higher BOD reduction is achieved in shorter retention time thereby
resulting in land savings for the facultative ponds (the use of anaerobic
ponds result in land savings of 49 % (Mara, 1997).

The disadvantages are that incomplete stabilisation requires a second stage

aerobic process and a relatively high temperature for anaerobic oxidation. The
primary function is BOD removal and a BOD reduction of 70 % at retention of 1 day
can be achieved in warm climates. BOD removal is achieved by sedimentation of
settleable solids and subsequent digestion in the resulting sludge layer. The
bacteria involved are anaerobic and are sensitive to low pH and therefore acid
waters require neutralization prior to treatment. Anaerobic ponds are also very
effective in removing heavy metals, which are precipitated as insoluble metal
sulphides and in degrading organic compounds such as phenols that would be toxic
to the algae in the receiving facultative pond (Mara, 1997). They are appreciably
deeper resulting in an intense surface loading to minimize aerobic oxidation.
Typical BOD removal rates at various retention times for anaerobic ponds are given
below:
Retention time (days) BOD Reduction

1.0 30 %
2.5 60 %
5.0 70 %

If the ponds are for treating municipal/domestic wastewater of moderate strength, it

is therefore concerned with the removal of suspended solids and functioning as a
sedimentation tank. In this case a 6 hr retention will be adequate and increasing it
to 12 and 24 hrs as the sludge bed increases. The maturation period varies from 3
months to 2 years but this period can be significantly reduced by seeding the pond
with actively digested sludge from another unit. There are effective in warm
environments or with warm wastes and during the cold periods they will become
purely settlement tanks. For effective stabilization, the pond temperature should be
above 19 oC. PVC, styrofoam or nylon covers may be used to contain odours and
heat. Carbon dioxide and methane gases are bubbled at the surface thereby
keeping the sludge stirred and uniformly mixed. The thick sludge at the surface
helps prevent heat-loss during the cold period. The nuisance associated with ponds
are mosquitoes and odours. Spraying the effluent onto the surface sludge
decreases the fly nuisance. The odours can be reduce also by recycling the final
effluent from the maturation ponds at rates of about 20 to 50 % of the average flow
thereby creating an aerobic zone which partially oxidise the gases. The summary of
the design parameters is given below:

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-6

Design parameters
Retention time 24 hrs
Depth 4-6m
Distance from settlements > 500m
Volumetric loading 0.033-0.3 kg BOD/m3.day

At present there is no clear design approach on anaerobic ponds but they can be
satisfactorily designed on the basis of volumetric loading.

Li Q
λv = Va (1)
Where Li = influent BOD, mg/l(g/m3)
Q = flow, m3/d
Va = anaerobic pond volume, m3

For Zimbabwean conditions (Ellis,1992), the recommend volumetric BOD loading is

190g/m3day. The design values for permissible volumetric loading and BOD
removal at various temperatures are shown in Table 3. The design temperature is
the mean air temperature in the coldest month or quarter and in Zimbabwe the
mean temperature of the coldest month months (June and July) is 14 oC. The
mean hydraulic retention time is calculated as

θ= Va
Q (2)
which becomes:

AD
θ= (3)
Q

Combining equations 1 and 3, the retention time can be computed as:

Li
θ= (4)
λv

Table 3 Design values of permissible volumetric loading

Temperature Volumetric loading, λ BOD removal

(oC) (g/m3d) (%)
<10 100 40
10-20 20T-100 2T+20
21-25 10T+100 2T+20
>25 350 70

Source: Mara (1992), Design Manual for WSP in India.

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-7

Example 1
Determine the size of anaerobic ponds for Zimbabwean conditions. Take the
influent BOD and the inflow to be 430 mg/l and 40 600 m3/day respectively.

Solution:
From Table 3, the volumetric loading design equation for Zimbabwe is given as:

λ v = 20T − 100
=20x14-100
=180 g/m3.d

From equation 4 the retention time:

Li 430
θ= = =2.38 days. Say 2.5 days
λv 180

Li Q
Pond volume, Va = = θQ
λV

=2.39x40600m3/d
=97034m3

It is recommended to have at least two ponds in parallel and in this case assuming
two ponds each with a depth of 4m. From equation 10, the area of each pond is
computed as:

⎡ 40600 ⎤
Qθ ⎢ 2 ⎥[2.39]
A= =⎣ ⎦
D 4

=12140m2

Taking L:W ratio of 2:1, therefore the length and with of each pond will be 156 m
and 78 m respectively. The calculated area is the mid depth area which is what the
surface and base areas would be if the pond had vertical sides). Therefore the top
and bottom dimensions should be computed based on the slope of the
embankments (Fig 2). If the slope for the wet wall is 1:2, the bottom dimensions will
be;
L=148
W=62

Top dimensions L=164

W=94

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-8

At 14 oC, the BOD removal (Table 3) will be 48%, so the BOD of anaerobic pond
effluent is 0.52x430=224mg/l.

TWL

D/2

D/2
1
n
L-nD

Fig.2 Top and bottom dimensions of pond from the mid-depth area

FACULTATIVE PONDS

Facultative Ponds
The bacterial reaction include both aerobic and anaerobic decomposition and hence
the term facultative pond. It is a dual layer system operating aerobically near the
surface and anaerobically at the bottom (Fig. 3). Aerobic digestion of the
putrescible organic biodegradable materials from the incoming wastewater will
occur in the upper layer is both quicker and efficient and preferably should include
most of water depth in the pond. Waste organics in suspension are broken down by
bacteria releasing nitrogen and phosphorous nutrients, and carbon dioxide. Algae
use these inorganic compounds for growth, along with energy from sunlight,
releasing oxygen to solution. Dissolved oxygen is in turn taken by the bacterial,
thus closing the symbiotic cycle. Some of the biodegradable material comes from
the bottom anaerobic layer due to partial anaerobic digestion.

The oxygen is received from the atmosphere through the water interface of the
shallow pond and the photosythetically produced oxygen from the activity of the
masses of algae. Heavy blooms of algae result in the rise of pH of water which is
not conducive to aerobic microorganisms. And all available oxygen can be stripped
from the pond during the night by the respiring algae. Aeration can be increased by
making use of the prevailing wind. Wind breaks up stratification by creating
turbulence. Stratification is the development of distinct thermal layers in the water
with the less dense warm liquid being on the top and the denser cold liquid at the
bottom. Any stratification will limit the aerobic treatment due short circuiting as the
incoming wastewater is warmer thereby short-circuiting across the surface and

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-9

discharged partially treated wastewater without the benefit of the normal retention
period. This situation is aggravated by algae and therefore the major axis of the
pond should be in the direction of the prevailing wind. No trees and solid fences
should be allowed within 150 m of pond edge.

Fig. 3 The basic biological reactions of bacteria and algae in a facultative

pond

The settleable solids are deposited at the bottom to form a layer of sludge and if
temperature is greater than 15o-19oC anaerobic digestion will commence. The
decomposition yields inorganic nutrients and odorous compounds like hydrogen
sulphide and organic acids. The latter are generally oxidised in the aerobic surface
thus preventing their emission to the atmosphere. The partial anaerobic digestion is
due to the limited sludge thickness of about 0.25 m.

Facultative ponds are either designed for incoming anoxic effluent from the
anaerobic ponds or from the raw wastewater. Facultative ponds are built in series
because the BOD of a well-mixed facultative pond should not exceed 60 mg/l. If the
BOD of the pond is appreciably in excess of 60 mg/l then it will no longer be
facultative but anaerobic, and if there is a pond in series following a similar pond
producing a 60 mg/l BOD effluent then it will nearly certainly be fully aerobic.

The optimum depth is approximately 1.5 m so as to prevent the growth of rooted

plants but not so deep to prevent solar radiation penetrating through most of the
ponds depth. The shallower the pond the more extensive is the water-air interface
and greater is the direct absorption of the atmospheric oxygen.

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-10

Design approaches for the facultative ponds

There are several design approaches for the facultative ponds and some of them
are as follows:

‰ Hermann & Gloyna Equation

‰ McGarry & Pescod
‰ First Order Complete mix Equation

Hermann & Gloyna Equation.

The equation is based on experimental results from a series of ponds and related to
the variation in temperature by the Arrhenius type equation. Hermann & Gloyna
equation considered the optimum temperature for the operation of ponds to be 35oC
and required retention period at this temperature to achieve 90% BOD reduction to
be 7 days. The pond area can be calculated from: -

Q L
A= t r (35) i 1.072 (35−T ) f ' f (5)
D 200
Where: t r(35) =Optimum retention time at 35oC
1.072 =Arrhenius coefficient
D =Depth of pond
Q =Inflow
T =Design temperature
Li =Influent BOD mg/l

f and f’ are factors to correct for any toxicity of the wastewater to algae present and
to correct for the oxygen demand by sulphur bacteria

McGarry & Pescod

MaGarry and Pescod (1970) suggested a simple relationship between pond loading
at the point of failure and the temperature:

λ f = 11.2(1.054)T f
(6)

Where: λf =Maximum pond loading at the point of failure, kg BOD5/ha.d

Tf =Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit

By using the maximum permissible loading before pond failure occurred is not a
good practice to design, and therefore the equation was later modified by Mara
(1997) to a liner relationship:

λ s = 20T − 120 (7)

in which T is in degrees Celsius. Recently Marks (1993) has suggested that for
Zimbabwean conditions the equation should be:
10

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-11

λ s = 20T − 90 (8)

The surface BOD loading is given as:

10 Li Q
λs = , kg/ha.day (9)
A

Where: Li = influent BOD, mg/l

Q =Inflow, m3/day
A =Area in m2

Therefore the area required becomes:

10 Li Q
A= , m2 (10)
20T − 90

Li Q
A= , m2 (11)
2T − 9

The retention time in the pond as:

Af D
θf = , days (13)
Qm

Where; D =Pond depth, m

Qm =Mean flow, m3/day

The mean flow is the mean of the influent and effluent flows. The latter being the
former less net evaporation and seepage thus the retention time becomes:

Af D
θf = (13)
1
2
[Qi + Qe ]
If the seepage is negligible, Qe is given by

Qe = Qi − 0.001 A fe (14)

Where e is the net evaporation in mm/day. Equation becomes:

11

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-12

2Af D
θf =
[2Q i − 0.001A f e ] (15)

A minimum value of 5 days should be adopted for temperatures below 20oC and 4
days for temperatures above 20oC. This is to minimise hydraulic short-circuiting
and to give algae sufficient time to multiply.

Example 2
Determine the sizes for the WSP system using the MacGary and Pescod approach.
Design data in example 1 is also applicable.

Without anaerobic ponds the area required is;

430 × 40600
A= =918842 m2
2 × 14 − 9

With anaerobic ponds, the influent BOD is reduced by 48% and therefore the area
will be;

224 × 40600
A= =478652m2
2 × 14 − 9

2Af D 2 × 478652 × 1.5

θf = = θf =
[2Q
i − 0.001A f e ] [2 × 40600 − 0.001× 47865 × 5]
=18.2 days

Say 19 days. (The net evaporation has been assumed to be 5 mm/day).

First Order Complete mix Equation

This is a rational approach based on the following assumptions:
‰ The pond is a completely mixed reactor
‰ There is a continuous inflow of raw wastewater and a continuos outflow of
treated effluent.
‰ There will be an instantaneous immediate perfect mixing of the influent with
the whole pond contents with no loss by evaporation or seepage.

The mean hydraulic retention time is given as:

V AD
θf = =
Q Q (16)

The design equation is given as follows:

12

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-13

Q( Li − 60)
A= , m2 (17)
18D(1.07 )
T − 20

Where: T = Mean temperature of the coldest month in oC.

MATURATION PONDS

Maturation ponds (Fully aerobic)

The ponds are used as either the final in a series of anaerobic and facultative ponds
to improve the quality of the effluent produced. On occasions they are also
employed as tertiary treatment units following conventional secondary treatment.
The functions of maturation ponds are:

• To further reduce the content of biodegradable material

• To reduce the bacterial content of the effluent
• To remove suspended solids
• To oxidize ammonia in the effluent to nitrate
• To remove nutrient salts

The BOD removal is between 30 to 70% depending on: 1) the strength of influent;
2) retention period; 3) the number of ponds in series and, 3) the build-up of algae.
When operated to reduce the BOD of the effluent these ponds can be regarded as
extension of the facultative system and are designed in a similar manner.
Maturation ponds are most effective for the reduction of the bacteria count in the
effluent and appreciably low levels of bacterial concentration can result from this
treatment. The die off of bacteria may be due to the antagonistic organisms in the
pond water or to the bactericidal effect of the UV radiation in sunlight or merely as
the result of bacteria being held for an extended period in a foreign and unfavorable
environment. Again as with the reduction of BOD, a first order expression is
employed to predict the reduction in bacteria. The equation for a single pond is
given as:

If employed as a tertiary treatment process following conventional aerobic biological

treatment, fully aerobic ponds can be useful to reduce the content of suspended
solids in the effluent. (operating as an additional settlement unit). If the reduction in
solids is the purpose for a maturation pond it is necessary to limit strictly the
retention time to a matter of few hours in order to discourage the build up of algae
or the total suspended solids concentration can increase considerably. Should the
retention period be greater than 24 to 48 hours, the production of algae in the pond
can dramatically increase rather than decrease the suspended solid content.

13

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-14

There will be some form of nitrification-denitrification in the maturation ponds

resulting in the loss of nitrates. The autotrophic bacteria, which oxidize the
ammonia to nitrate, can be inhibited by low temperature. Some phosphate and
nitrate is lost through the incorporation into algae cells.

Fully aerobic ponds are best employed in series with the purification capability for a
given pond increasing with the number of ponds in series. However the larger the
number of ponds the greater the expense of construction and usually three or four
ponds only are constructed in series.

Ni
Ne = (18)
1 + k bθ

Where: Ni = influent bacteria, count, count/100ml

Ne =effluent bacteria, count/100ml
kb = The die-off rate coefficient
θ = Retention time in days

The die-off rate coefficient, kb is considered appreciably temperature dependent:

k b (T ) = k b ( 20) 1.19T − 20 (19)

Also the die-off rate coefficient is specific for a particular type of bacteria, being
perhaps 2.6 days-1 at 20o C for Coliform bacteria. For a series of anaerobic
facultative and anaerobic ponds, equation becomes:

Ni
Ne = (20)
[( 1 + k bθ a )(1 + k bθ f )(1 + k bθ m )n
Where: subscripts a, f and m refer to anaerobic, facultative and maturation
ponds and n is the number of maturation ponds. It is assumed that all
the maturation ponds are equally sized. When it’s not possible due to
topographical conditions, the third term of the denominator in equation
is replaced by: [(1 + k b t m1 )(1 + k b t m 2 )...(1 + k b t mn )]

Equation contains two unknowns, tm and n and can be solved by calculating the
values of tm corresponding to n=2, 3, n and then select the most appropriate
combination of tm and n from:

a) θm <θ f
b) θ m > θ mmin

14

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-15

θ mmin =minimum (3-5 days) acceptable retention time in a maturation pond (to
prevent short-circuiting and algae washout). The maturation pond area is
calculated from rearranging equation:

2Qiθ m
Am = (21)
2 D + 0.001eθ m

The BOD loading on the first maturation pond must not be higher than the
preceding facultative pond. The influent BOD to the first maturation pond is
calculated on the assumption that 70 % has been removed in the preceding
anaerobic and facultative ponds. A depth of 1.5 is recommended for maturation
ponds. The BOD loading is computed as:

⎡ Q ⎤
λ sm1 = 10⎢0.3Li ⎥ (22)
⎣ Am1 ⎦

A freeboard should be allowed for wind action and the following freeboards are
recommended:

Ponds less than 1 ha 0.5m

Ponds between 1ha and 3 ha 0.5 to 1m

For greater ponds, the freeboard should be calculated from the following equation
(Mara, 1997):

F = (log 10 A)
1
2 −1
(23)

Where; F = freeboard, m
A = pond area at TWL, m2

Example 3
Design the maturation ponds for unrestricted irrigation. Assume that the
wastewater contains 5x107 faecal Coliforms per 100 ml and the net evaporation is
5mm/day. The final effluent should contain less than 1000 count/100ml of faecal
coliforms.

Solution:
The retention times in the anaerobic and facultative ponds are 2.5 and 19 days
respectively (previously calculated).

15

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-16

⎧⎡ ⎤ n ⎫⎪
1
⎪ Ni
⎨⎢ ⎥ − 1⎬
⎪⎩⎣⎢ N e (1 + k bθ a )(1 + k bθ f )⎦⎥ ⎪⎭
From equation, θm =
kb

At 14oC, k b = 2.6(1.19)
14 − 20
=0.92 day-1

⎧⎡ ⎤ n ⎫⎪
1
⎪ 5 x10 7
⎨⎢ ⎥ − 1⎬
⎪ ⎣1000(1 + 0.92 × 2.5 )(1 + 0.92 × 19 ) ⎦ ⎪⎭
θm = ⎩
0.92

for n=1, θm= 890 day, not OK

for n=2, θm=32 days, not OK
for n=3 θm=9 days

Three maturation ponds satisfy the conditions i.e. θm<θf and θm> θ mmin =(3-5 days)

The area of the pond is calculated from:

2Qiθ m 2 × 40600 × 9
Am = =
2 D + 0.001eθ m 2 × 1.5 + 0.001 × 5 × 9

=240000m2

Check for the BOD loading:

Assuming 70 % cumulative BOD removal in the anaerobic and facultative ponds:
⎡ Q ⎤ ⎡ 40600 ⎤
λ sm1 = 10⎢0.3Li ⎥ = 10 ⎢0.3 × 430 ×
⎣ Am1 ⎦ ⎣ 240000 ⎥⎦

=218 kg/ha.day> λ f =20T-90=190 kg/ha.day not OK

Redo calculation by increasing the retention period or the number of maturation
ponds until all the conditions are satisfied.

ASPECTS OF CONSTRUCTION

Aspects of construction
Actual pond dimensions, consistent with the available site, must be calculated. The
embankments, pond inlet and outlet structures must be designed.

16

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-17

Geotechnical considerations
The principal geotechnical investigations are to ensure correct embankment design
and to determine whether the soil is sufficiently permeable to require the pond to be
lined. The maximum height of the groundwater table should be determined and the
following soil properties and the pond site should be investigated:

• particle size distribution

• maximum dry density and optimum soil moisture content
• organic content
• coefficient of permeability

Organic particles, medium/coarse sands, are not suitable for embankment

construction. The vegetation cover and sandy soils must be removed before
construction of the embankments. If suitable material is not available, an
impermeable core can be incorporated in the design.

Ideally, embankments should be constructed from the soil excavated from the site,
and there should be a balance between cut and fill. The soil used for the
construction of the embankments should be compacted in 150 –250 mm layers to
90% of the maximum dry density. After compaction, the soil should have a
coefficient of permeability, as determined in situ of 10-7 m/s. The embankment
design should allow for vehicle access to facilitate maintenance.

The embankment slopes depend on the material and generally slopes are
commonly 1:3 to 1:4 on the wet side. On the dry side the slopes are made as
steep as the earth permits and commonly vary from 1:3 to 1:5. Embankments
should be planted with grass to increase stability. External embankments should be
protected from stormwater erosion by providing adequate drainage. Internal
embankments require protection against erosion by wave action and this is best
achieved by precast concrete slabs or stone rip-rap (Fig. ). This prevents the growth
of vegetation preventing the development of a suitable habitat for mosquito or snail
breeding.

Hydraulic balance
The liquid level in the ponds must be maintained at all times and therefore the inflow
must be greater than the net evaporation and seepage. Therefore the following
balance must be maintained:

Qi ≥ 0.001A(e + s ) (24)

Where: Qi = inflow to first pond, m3/day

A =total area of pond series, m2
e =net evaporation (evaporation less rainfall), mm/d
s =seepage, mm/d

17

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-18

Fig. Embankment protection by stone rip-rap

Fig. Embankment protection by precast concrete slabs

The maximum permissible permeability of the soil layer making up the pond base
can be determine from:

⎡ QS ⎤ ⎡ ∆l ⎤
k=⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ (25)
⎣ 86400 A ⎦ ⎣ ∆h ⎦

Where: k =maximum permissible permeability, m/s

18

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-19

Qs =maximum permissible seepage flow (Qi-0.001Ae), m3/d

A =base area of pond, m2
∆l =depth of soil layer below pond base to aquifer or more
permeable stratum, m
∆h =hydraulic head (pond depth + ∆l), m

If the permeability of the soil is more than the maximum permissible, the pond must
be lined. The following guidelines may be used:

k>10-6 m/s the soil is too permeable and the ponds must be lined
k>10-7 m/s some seepage may occur but not sufficiently to prevent the ponds
from filling
k<18-8 m/s the ponds will seal naturally
k<10-9 m/s there is no risk of groundwater contamination

The sealing may be accomplished by:

• synthetic membranes (polyethylene, PVC)
• soil cement or mass cement
• bentonite
• sprayed or rolled asphalt
• clay
• chemical sealants/additives

Inlet and outlet structures

There is a wide variety of designs for the inlet and outlet structures and should
permit samples of the effluent to be taken with ease. They should be simple and
inexpensive. A simple point outlet is the cheapest but a multiple point makes better
use of the pond volume. The inlet to the anaerobic and facultative ponds should
discharge well below the liquid level to reduce short-circuiting.

The outlet of the ponds should be protected against the discharge of scum by the
provision of a scum board. The following effluent takes off levels from the surface
are recommended:

Anaerobic pond 300mm

Facultative ponds 600mm
Maturation ponds 50 mm

There is need to maximize operation flexibility and ability to move water around and
hence the need to design ponds in parallel with cross connections (to by-pass
ponds).

19

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-20

Fig 4 Inlet structure of a facultative and maturation pond

Fig. 1 Inlet structure for anaerobic and primary facultative ponds. The scum box is
for the removal of floating solids

20

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-21

Fig. Inlet structure for secondary facultative and maturation ponds

Fig, Outlet weir structure

Operation and maintenance

Commissioning
It is preferably to commission the ponds during the hot season to establish as quick
as possible the microbial populations to effect waste stabilization. Facultative
ponds should be commissioned before the anaerobic ponds to avoid odour release
when the anaerobic pond effluent discharges into an empty facultative pond. It is
recommended to fill the facultative and maturation ponds with water from a river or
well if it is available so as to permit the gradual development of algae heterotrophic
bacterial populations. If freshwater is not available, facultative ponds should be filed

21

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-22

with raw sewage and left for three to four weeks to allow the microbial population to
develop.

Anaerobic ponds should be filled with raw sewage and seeded where possible with
digested sludge from a conventional treatment plant or with sludge from septic
tanks. The ponds should then be gradually loaded up to the design loading rate
over the following week. The pH should be maintained above 7 to permit the
development of methanogenic bacteria, and it may be necessary during the first
month or so to dose the pond with lime or soda ash.

Fig 6 Outlet weir structure

Routine maintenance
Maintenance should be carried regularly otherwise there will be serious odour, fly
and mosquito nuisance. The maintenance includes;

• Removal of screenings and grit from the inlet works

• cutting of grass on the embankments
• removal of floating scum to maximize photosynthesis and surface re-
aeration and prevent fly and mosquito breeding

22

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-23

• spraying the scum on the anaerobic ponds with clean water, pond
effluent, suitable biodegradable larvicide to prevent fly breeding ( scum on
the anaerobic ponds should not be removed as it aids the treatment
process)
• removal of any accumulated solids in the inlet and outlets
• repair of any damage to the embankments caused by rodents, rabbits or
animal
• repair of damaged fences

The operators must be given specific precise instructions on the frequency at which
these tasks should be done and their work must be constantly supervised. A
weekly pond maintenance record sheet should be completed. Periodic sampling is
necessary to monitor the quality of effluent. The recommended staffing levels
based on the population saved is given in Table 8.

Table 4 Recommended-staffing levels for WSP systems

Population served 10000 25000 50000 10000 250000

Supervisor 1 1 1
Mechanical Engineer(a) 1 1
Laboratory technician(b) 1 1 1 2
Assistant supervisor 1 2 2 2
Labourers 1 2 4 6 10
Driver(c) 1 1 1 2
Guard(d) 1 1 3 5 5
Total 2 6 10 15 23
(a)
Dependent upon amount of mechanical equipment used
(b)
Dependent upon existence of laboratory facilities
(c)
Dependent upon use of vehicle towed lawn mowers etc
(d)
Dependent upon location and amount of equipment used

Source; Mara (1997), Design of Waste Stabilisation Ponds in India.

Desludging and sludge disposal

The accumulation of sludge is approximately 0.03-0.04m3/ha.ca.yr and the
desludging is required when the pond is half full of sludge. This occurs every n
years where n is given as:
n=1/2 pond volume ÷ (sludge accumulation rate x population)

Anaerobic ponds require desludging when they are one third full of sludge by
volume. This occurs every n year where n is given by:

23

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds

cmutsvangwa: Wastewater Engineering, Dept. of Civil and Water Eng., NUST 23/10/2006 10-24

Va
n= (27)
3Ps

Where: Va =volume of anaerobic pond, m3

P =population served
s =sludge accumulation rate, m3/ca. yr

Sludge may be removed by raft mounted sludge pumps or the pond is drained and
left to dry and then excavate the dried sludge. The sludge is discharged to lagoons,
landfills, agricultural land or other suitable disposal location.

Effluent quality monitoring

A routine monitoring program should be put in place to determine the quality of the
effluent and compliance with the local discharge or reuse standards. Also the
results from the monitoring program will give an indication on the possible causes of
pond failure. The data is important since it provides information on whether the
pond is underloaded or overloaded. If its underloaded, it will be easier to determine
how much extra wastewater can the ponds accommodate due to further expanding
community.

The monitoring systems should be simple but should nonetheless provide reliable
data. A representative sample of the influent and the final effluent should be taken
at least monthly. When the effluent shows that the pond is failing to meet its
discharge or reuse quality, a more detailed study is necessary.

References
1. Department of Water Development, (1993), Design and Training Manual for
Rural Water Supplies in Zimbabwe, GTZ, Zimbabwe.
2. Ellis K., (1995), Unpublished Lecture Notes in Wastewater Engineering,
Loughborough University, UK
3. Gray N., (1992), Biology of Wastewater, Oxford Science, UK
4. IWPC, (1972), Manual for Small Works, UK
5. Mara D., (1976), Sewage Treatment in Hot Climates, John Wiley, UK
6. Mara D., (1997), Design of Waste Stabilisation Ponds in India, Lagoon
Technology, UK
7. Mutamba J., (1998), Design of Cowdry Park BNR, NUST, Zimbabwe
8. Mutavayi T., (1999), Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Alternatives in
Bulawayo, NUST, Zimbabwe
9. Nicoll H.E., (1988), Small Water Pollution Control Works, Design and Practice,
Ellis Horwood, New York.
10. Smith .M., (1995), Unpublished Lecture Notes in Wastewater Engineering,
Loughborough University, UK

24

Chapter 10 Wastewater stabilisation ponds