YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Environmental Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Environmental Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Influence of Model Parameters and Inlet Turbulence Boundary Specification Methods in Secondary Settling Tanks: Computational Fluid Dynamics Study

    Source: Journal of Environmental Engineering:;2020:;Volume ( 146 ):;issue: 005
    Author:
    Haiwen Gao
    ,
    M. K. Stenstrom
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0001689
    Publisher: ASCE
    Abstract: Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been applied in secondary settling tank (SST) analysis for more than 30 years. Although great progresses has been achieved, there are still some uncertainties in CFD SST modeling. In this study, a numerical model is used to understand the effects of two model parameters: rp, accounting for particles with poor settling properties in the Takács settling model; and ρp, the dry solids density. Both parameters are used in the user-defined functions to couple solids transport on settling velocity. Also, the differences in turbulence specification methods in prediction of SST performance are evaluated. The results show that the prediction of effluent suspended solids (ESS) is very sensitive to rp. The incorrect specification of rp may mask real improvements in SST geometry, and may even cause clarification failure prediction under the normal inflow conditions. The value of ρp has less impact on ESS prediction, and its specification is less critical to maintain ESS prediction consistently with field data. Neither return activated sludge concentration (RAS) nor sludge blanket height (SBH) is sensitive to the effects of rp and ρp. Additionally, the initial turbulent kinetic energy and turbulent dissipation rate specification methods produce only local effects on the hydrodynamics near the inlet boundary, and none of the performance indicators (ESS, RAS, or SBH) are sensitive to inlet boundary turbulence specification methods.
    • Download: (2.207Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Influence of Model Parameters and Inlet Turbulence Boundary Specification Methods in Secondary Settling Tanks: Computational Fluid Dynamics Study

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4265363
    Collections
    • Journal of Environmental Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorHaiwen Gao
    contributor authorM. K. Stenstrom
    date accessioned2022-01-30T19:28:24Z
    date available2022-01-30T19:28:24Z
    date issued2020
    identifier other%28ASCE%29EE.1943-7870.0001689.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4265363
    description abstractComputational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been applied in secondary settling tank (SST) analysis for more than 30 years. Although great progresses has been achieved, there are still some uncertainties in CFD SST modeling. In this study, a numerical model is used to understand the effects of two model parameters: rp, accounting for particles with poor settling properties in the Takács settling model; and ρp, the dry solids density. Both parameters are used in the user-defined functions to couple solids transport on settling velocity. Also, the differences in turbulence specification methods in prediction of SST performance are evaluated. The results show that the prediction of effluent suspended solids (ESS) is very sensitive to rp. The incorrect specification of rp may mask real improvements in SST geometry, and may even cause clarification failure prediction under the normal inflow conditions. The value of ρp has less impact on ESS prediction, and its specification is less critical to maintain ESS prediction consistently with field data. Neither return activated sludge concentration (RAS) nor sludge blanket height (SBH) is sensitive to the effects of rp and ρp. Additionally, the initial turbulent kinetic energy and turbulent dissipation rate specification methods produce only local effects on the hydrodynamics near the inlet boundary, and none of the performance indicators (ESS, RAS, or SBH) are sensitive to inlet boundary turbulence specification methods.
    publisherASCE
    titleInfluence of Model Parameters and Inlet Turbulence Boundary Specification Methods in Secondary Settling Tanks: Computational Fluid Dynamics Study
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume146
    journal issue5
    journal titleJournal of Environmental Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0001689
    page04020028
    treeJournal of Environmental Engineering:;2020:;Volume ( 146 ):;issue: 005
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian