Technical
Overview
SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEMS
Item Number SFBLTO03
NATIONAL SMALL FLOWS CLEARINGHOUSE
a division of the
National Environmental Services Center at West Virginia University.
PO Box 6064, Morgantown, WV 26506-6064
304-293-4191
http://www.nesc.wvu.edu
Project Staff
Edward Winant – Author
Jennifer Hause – Technical Review
Andrew Lake – Technical Review
Tim Suhrer – Editorial Review
John Fekete – Senior Graphics Designer
Jeanne Allen – Project Coordinator
The contents of this publication are provided for information pur-
poses and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does the mention of
trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
Reprints
Permission to quote from or reproduce this publication is granted
when due acknowledgement is given.
TECHNICAL OVERVIEW
SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEMS
Item Number: SFBLTO03
Cover photo: Installing a drain field Monongalia County, West Virginia. Photo by Ed Winant.
2
INTRODUCTION
Soil absorption systems (SAS) are the conventional and long-accepted solution
to many onsite wastewater treatment needs. Using the soil as part of an onsite waste-
water system provides both wastewater treatment and ultimate dispersal of the water
into the ground. This makes soil systems an excellent, environmentally sound prac-
tice. Soil systems can also be very cost-effective.
The drawback to soil absorption systems is that they can not be used every-
where, relying as they do on the natural soil. There are many sites that lack ade-
quate amounts of soil or have the wrong types. To adequately treat and disperse
wastewater, the soil must have enough permeability (a measure of how quickly water
moves through the soil) but not so much that the effluent flows through without treat-
ment. Further, there must be enough soil vertically to fully remove the contaminants.
Research has shown that 24 inches is sufficient, but many states require 36 inches or
even 48 inches of good soil as a factor of safety.
As soil systems are used, a clogging layer or biomat will grow on the interface
between the gravel and the soil. Naturally occurring soil bacteria use the contaminants
in the effluent as food and use the soil particles to hold themselves in place. As they
eat the contaminants, the bacteria grow in size, forming the biomat and closing off the
pore spaces in the soil. As living organisms, however, they will die and slough
off, to be replaced by younger generations of bacteria.
The best way to control the growth of the biomat is to spread the effluent
out over as wide an area as possible. Spreading out the effluent over a
large area of soil does two things.
First, it applies an amount
of water that can easily
permeate the soil and be
treated. Secondly, spread-
septic tank distribution trench ing out the effluent spreads
box
out the food supply for the
biomat and controls the
growth. As the biomat
grows, the soil permeabil-
ity will decrease. If new
bacteria grow unchecked,
they will quickly clog up all
available pore spaces, and
the soil absorption system
Figure 1: Typical septic will fail as water ponds to
tank soil absorption the surface of the ground. However, with slower growth, the rate at which
layout
bacteria die off will match new growth, and a stable situation will develop.
This is called the long-term acceptance rate (LTAR) of the soil.
DESIGN
There are many different configurations for soil absorption systems. They
3
include: trenches, beds, pressure trenches, low pressure pipes, seri-
al trenches, and contour trenches. In all these configurations, the goal
is to spread the effluent out as widely as possible to let it soak into the
ground. Soil treatment is designed to remove contaminants and disperse
the effluent into the soil.
The conventional design is to place a
layer of gravel in an excavation, install a
perforated pipe (typically a 4-inch PVC
pipe) with holes pointing down and
cover this with gravel. The depth is typ-
ically 2 to 2 1/2 feet. Most designs call
for 6 inches of gravel, then the 4-inch
pipe and 2 more inches of gravel on top
of the pipe. Over the gravel is a layer of
building paper or geotextile to keep soil out of
the gravel pore spaces. About one foot of soil is
then backfilled over the fabric and gravel.
Trench systems use long, narrow excavations, typically 1 to
Figure 5 feet wide and up to 100 feet long, with one pipe in each trench.
2: Perforated Bed systems excavate the whole field, with a large gravel bed and
drainfield pipe a system of three or four pipes laid in a rectangular, closed-loop
pattern. Some states are no longer permitting beds, since there is
evidence that undisturbed soil between pipes is beneficial in allow-
ing air to circulate under the pipes. Research has shown that dif-
fusion of air through the soil is important in controlling the biomat;
thus trenches are more efficient than beds, and narrow trenches
Figure 3:
Typical drainfield
trench layout
4
are better than wide trenches.
Both trench and bed systems distribute the effluent by gravity. The pipe
between the septic tank and the drainfield is sloped to carry the effluent
to the drainfield, but the drainfield pipes are kept level to even out the
flow. In many cases, this means that effluent flows out the nearest holes,
overloading the front of the drainfield and leaving the rest dry. The bio-
mat will grow more quickly here, potentially clogging part of the drainfield.
Pressure trenches are similar to normal drainfield trenches, but
the effluent is pumped to the trench under pressure and flows through
the trench by gravity. This is mainly done when the drainfield is higher
than the septic tank. On the other hand, low pressure pipe (LPP) sys-
tems use smaller pipes (typically 2-inch pipes) and maintain pressure
throughout the pipe to ensure a more even distribution. LPP systems
can be placed uphill of the
tank, using pumps, or down- Pressurized Distribution
hill using dosing siphons and Network
gravity to pressurize the flow.
Pump Chamber
Additionally, LPP systems can From
be placed in more shallow Septic tank
trenches, only one foot deep,
and thus fit in sites with less
vertical separation.
Serial trenches are a
method of gravity distribution to drainfields down slope of the Figure 4: Possible
pressure system layout
tank. Effluent flows to the first trench, and when that trench
is full, passes on to the next trench through an overflow pipe.
Contour trenches are also used for hillside distribution, taking
account of the fact that effluent will flow along the slope on top of
a limiting layer, rather than straight down.
The design of any soil absorption system begins with a
site evaluation and soil test. Some states stipulate a percolation test,
others a soil evaluation by a certified soil scientist, and some allow other
tests to determine the permeability and depth of the soil in the area
selected for the soil absorption system. Once this permeability is known,
state or local codes will provide an application rate (amount of effluent
that can be applied to the soil per square foot).
The size of the house is also important, as this will determine the
design flow, or estimated daily water use. Most commonly, the design
flow is based on the number of bedrooms for houses. To calculate the
required size of the drainfield, simply divide the design flow by the appli-
cation rate. Q
_
A
d
(where A is the drainfield area, Q is the
design flow and d is the application rate).
5
DESIGN: Trenches and Beds
Once the field size is determined, the absorption field can be laid
out. In a trench system, the length of
each trench times the trench width
yields the total area. For
example, if a three-bedroom
house requires 900 square
feet of absorption area based
on soil testing, the field could
be installed as three trench-
es, each 100 feet long and 3
feet wide. In a bed situation,
the pipes would be installed about 5
or 6 feet apart, and the bed would mea-
sure 90 feet long by 10 feet wide. In each
Figure 5: Typical
situation, the effluent pipe from the tank is brought to each
trench layout drain line, either through a header pipe or a distribution box.
The design concept is to evenly distribute the flow to each
line and along each pipe. Beds are further equipped
with a connection pipe at the end of the system that
reconnects all the lines to equalize flow distribution;
thus the closed-loop concept.
DESIGN: Serial Distribution
For soil absorption systems on slopes, the serial
drainfield is most common. In this design, the three
trenches would be placed across the slope, with
the second trench farther down the hill than the first
Figure 6: drainbed and the third lowest of all. Connections between
the trenches are by crossover relief pipes, coming
Flow from pretreatment unit out of the top of each drain line. Serial
Ends
Capped distribution forces one trench to accept
Distribution Pipe A
all the design flow, so a biomat will rapid-
Absorption ly develop. As the biomat builds up, the
Trenches
Follow Contours
Relief line serial trench makes full use of the bottom
and sidewall infiltration surfaces, and the
ponding in the trench serves to force water
A Distribution through the biomat or on to the next drain
Pipe and
Relief line Trench to line. However, this ponding also leads
be Level
serial drainfields to suffer hydraulic failure
more rapidly than normal trenches or beds
because the infiltrative surfaces can not be
Distribution Pipe Relief line regenerated. (EPA 2002)
An alternative method of hillside dis-
tribution is to use distribution boxes to get
Figure 7a: Typical serial drain field layout.
6
Figure 7b: Section A-A showing cross-
over relief line.
more even gravity distribution among all the lines. This leads to a slightly
more complicated system but will protect the life of the drainfield longer.
When the hillside is above the septic tank, a pump can be used to lift
the water to the drain lines. This is the essence of the pressure trench.
Trench design and sizing is similar to a normal trench system, but a pump
chamber and pump must be added after the septic tank.
DESIGN: Contour Trenches
Contour trenches can also be used
for effluent dispersal on sloped sites, espe-
cially ones with high bedrock. In this sys-
tem, one trench is laid along the contour of
the hill. The underlying concept is a bit dif-
ferent, however, as it assumes effluent will
descend to the bedrock and then flow along
the bedrock down the hill. The vertical sep-
aration distance used is along the slope of
the ground rather than straight down.
Figure 8: Distribution boxes on gravity mani-
Contour trench systems require fold to equalize flow among drainfield lines.
a more detailed site evaluation, since
the depth to and
inclination of the Line of
bedrock must be Natural
Contour
determined. If the
bedrock does not Distribution
parallel the ground Pipe
slope, it may cause
a premature break-
out of the effluent
along the slope. Original soil
Sand
Gravel
Semi-permiable barrier
Figure 9: Typical cross section of a contour trench.
7
DESIGN: Low Pressure Pipes
Low pressure systems are the culmination of the absorption system theory. In
this design, pressure is used along with smaller pipes to fully spread the effluent out
over the entire drainfield. This reduces the hydraulic load on the soil while the dosing
allows periods of rest for the soil to recover. This maximizes the flow of air through the
soil while keeping biomat growth low.
To achieve pressure, a pump is
used to raise the effluent above the
level of the septic tank, requiring an
additional construction and main-
tenance cost. Further, the system
requires more detailed design to
properly size the pump, the amount
of effluent dosed, and the pressure
in the system. These additions
make LPP systems more expen-
sive than gravity trench systems.
However, they do have the advan-
tage of less required area and are
sometimes allowed with less ver-
Figure 10: Demonstration of LPP systen with pipes above ground. tical separation. This allows their
placement on sites too restrictive for
gravity trenches or beds.
If the drainfield location is below
the septic tank, gravity can be used
to pressurize the system. In this
system, a dosing siphon is used
instead of the pump. The siphon
sends out effluent in doses, allowing
the system to rest, while the eleva-
tion difference between the siphon
tank and the drainfield provides the
necessary pressure to evenly dis-
tribute the flow.
SITING ADVANTAGES AND
DISADVANTAGES
Several advantages are com-
monly cited for onsite systems.
Treating wastewater in small batch-
es and at the source provides
good environmental protection and
recharges the groundwater. In rural
Figure 11: LPP system in ground, showing inspection ports. areas, onsite treatment is by far the
most cost-effective. In some areas,
8
it is not possible to sewer,
and onsite systems are the
only possibility to achieve
proper wastewater treatment.
Opposing these
advantages are the draw-
backs. The major draw-
back is that onsite systems
must be maintained by the
homeowner, who frequently
does not want to be both-
ered thinking about sewage.
Management by an outside
responsible entity will alle- Figure 12: Siphon in dosing tank
viate this problem, but at
a cost to the homeowner in
monthly fees. Further, there is usually little oversight by community officials to ensure
that systems are properly maintained. Finally, good soils and large areas are not
always present for constructing onsite systems.
Site conditions are the lynchpin of soil absorption systems. When enough area
is present and good soils exist to the proper depth, the conventional septic tank-SAS
provides excellent treatment at the lowest cost. On sloping sites, different configura-
tions for the SAS can be used, from serial drainfields to contour trenches to LPP sys-
tems. Where a site lacks area or depth of soil, some form of secondary treatment may
be used before the SAS to gain reductions and allow subsurface dispersal to be safely
used.
However, with small lots, shallow soils and/or high housing densities, individual
on-site systems may not be
the best alternative. When
houses are crowded togeth-
er, some form of clustered
sewer and community treat-
ment may be more feasible
in protecting both public
health and environmental
quality.
OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE
Taking care of the SAS
is part and parcel of onsite
system maintenance. The
Figure 13: Using a “sludge judge” to inspect solids accumulation in a septic tank or ATU should be
septic tank.
9
pumped regularly to ensure that solids are not washed into the SAS. Water conser-
vation measures should be practiced in the house to prevent hydraulically overloading
the drainfield. Trees and large shrubs (especially the
roots) should be kept away from the drainfield to
protect the pipes. Cars or heavy machinery
should be kept away from the SAS so as
not to compact the soil.
To prolong the life of the drain-
field, two fields can be installed and
used alternatively. For more informa-
tion on this aspect of drainfield main-
tenance, see the National Small Flows
Clearinghouse’s Technical Overview 1, Alternating
Drainfields. WWBKTO01
For LPPs, maintenance must be done on the pumps
or siphons. Pumps require a bit more maintenance, hav-
ing more components, but both types of pressure systems
should be checked regularly by trained maintenance personal. All mechanical and
electrical components should be serviced by personnel approved by the system install-
er or local health department. Ideally, a perpetual service contract will be provided
along with installation.
Additives are not needed to maintain the system, and in most cases, only result
in the homeowner flushing money down the drain. Chemical additives, however, can
wash solids out of the septic tank into the drainfield and cause early failure of the SAS.
Regular pumping of the tank is the most effective maintenance for the system and is
usually less expensive than a monthly additive, anyway.
COSTS
The major cost in constructing an SAS is usually labor. Costs will vary by geo-
graphic region, size of the system, and choice of materials, but in general, a typical
single-family SAS would cost in the neighborhood of $2—3,000. This would include
a day or two of labor and backhoe operation, around 300 feet of 4-inch PVC pipe, 40
tons of gravel, and all the plumbing connections. A bed system would be slightly more
expensive, as there is more excavation required and more gravel to lay in the bed than
in trenches. A typical bed would cost around $4,000. To complete the system, a sep-
tic tank must be installed at a typical cost of $500 to $1000.
LPP systems would be slightly more expensive. There are some savings in
using less pipe and smaller trenches, but the pump or siphon chamber adds to the
costs. These systems, including the septic tank, are usually $5—6,000.
10
REFERENCES
Coldham, B. “Beyond the Basic Septic System: Practical Alternatives.” Journal of Light Construction
(November 1988).
Dix, S.P. and R. May “A Review of the Field Performance of Chamber Leaching Systems.” 9th
Northwest On-Site Wastewater Treatment Short Course and Equipment Exhibition, Seattle, WA, 1997.
Lukin, J. “Understanding Septic Systems.” Rural Housing Improvement (1992).
Miller, E., D. Jones, and J. Yahner “Construction Guidelines for Conventional Septic Systems.” Purdue
University Cooperative Extension Service, West Lafayette, IN, 1987.
Rubin, A.R. “General Guidelines for Subsurface Treatment of Wastewater.” Department of Biological
and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 1985.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual 2002 (EPA
625R00/008).
Venhuizen, D. “Disposal Field Design Beyond the Trench.” 3rd Annual On-Site Wastewater Treatment
Research Conference Council, Austin, TX, 1995.
11
