You are on page 1of 20

REMOVAL OF COLOIDAL PARTICLES IN SAND ABSTRACTION SYSTEMS (SAS) *C. Mutsvangwa1, M. Kubare1 and B.

Mtaurwa1
1

Department of Civil and Water Eng., National University of Science & Tech., P. O. Box AC 939 Ascot, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. cmutsvangwa@nust.ac.zw, FAX: 263-9-286803

Abstract Sand Abstraction Systems (SAS) are infiltration galleries installed in sandy rivers with intermittent flow and are common in the Southern Africa region. They are a source of potable water for small rural communities. Its a cheap appropriate technology because of the minimal capital and operation costs. Although the sand acts as a natural filter, the water quality is susceptible to contamination from continuous inflow of colloidal particles from the various contaminant sources within the catchment areas of the sandy rivers. The colloidal particles are an important parameter in assessing the water quality because they act as sorbents for other hazardous water contaminants. The advection-dispersion equation with the colloidal theory was applied to relate the time-space removal of the suspended solids. The numerical solution of the equation was compared with field results. The overall objective was to establish whether the removal of colloids in sand abstraction systems is consistent with the principles of colloidal transport. An existing SAS called Nkayi, in the Matabeleland region of Zimbabwe, was used to test and verify the mathematical model. Samples of the subsurface water from Nkayi SAS were collected from observation wells and were analyzed for the indigenous colloidal particles. The simulation results of the model reasonably accounted for the concentration histories of the indigenous colloidal particles appearing in the samples from the observation wells. The removal efficiency of the colloidal particles in SAS was found to be above 85% which is very high and the margin of error of the model was 0.04. Therefore the advection-dispersion equation with the colloidal filtration theory can be applied in the modelling of the removal of colloidal particles in SAS with confidence. At the same time the advection-dispersion model can be localized for any SAS to predict the water quality at existing and new schemes at low cost, which is the concept inherent with consideration of SAS. Key words: infiltration gallery; advection-dispersion; colloidal particles; colloidal attachment rate coefficient.
* To whom all correspondence should be addressed.

INTRODUCTION Ephemeral sand rivers are a common drainage feature in the semi-arid to arid regions of Southern Africa. They form a major historical source of underutilized groundwater for the small rural communities. These systems are known as sand abstraction systems (SAS), or infiltration galleries and are composed of a naturally deposited porous sandy medium. They are a result of siltation in areas where soil erosion is prominent, coupled with poor conservation practices. These systems are recharged by infrequent wet season rainfall, which results in short lived flow or mere trickles along the surface of the channel. Other sources of recharge include the channelaquifer interactions as well as riverbank inflow. During the dry season the river bed becomes dry and the deposited sand bed will now act as a natural filter. The naturally filtered water is potable, although at some schemes disinfection is necessary. Infiltration galleries which are

installed at depths ranging from 4-8m will collect the filtered water into a sump from which the collected water is pumped into the distribution network. Its a low cost technology because of the minimal capital and operational costs. A typical illustration of an infiltration gallery is shown in Fig. 1. Although the water is of high quality, the schemes are susceptible to

contamination especially from suspended particles. Problems have been experienced with a number of existing schemes where the yield has dropped rapidly due to clogging by suspended solids (Clanahan, 1977). The mobile colloidal particles in sand abstraction systems mostly originate from external sources and enter the sandy aquifer through gravity dominated flow and infiltration of silted surface runoff and mainly during the rain season. The major source of colloidal particles is from soil erosion which is continuously taking place in the catchment areas. The colloidal particles are an important parameter in assessing the water quality and are defined as small particles with dimensions roughly ranging between 1nm and 1m (Hunter, 1986;

Rajagopolan, 1977). They have some unique properties like a very large specific surface area (>10m2/g) and therefore present important sorbents for other water contaminants. In fact more contaminants would be attached to colloids than to the solid surface (McDowell, 1986).

To tertiary treatment and distribution

Pump

River bank

Concrete Sandbed top slab


Phreatic surface

Pump

Mainfold Gravel

Tapping well points

Impermeable strata

Fig. 1: Typical schematic illustration of a typical SAS.


Source: Modelling the removal of suspended solids in SAS, Kubare and Mutsvangwa (2005) Such particles provide sites for certain viruses and bacteria and therefore become hazardous pollutants (Kretzschmar et., al, 1997). They also provide means of transport for nutrients and toxic contaminants by chemical processes such as adsorption, exchange and precipitation and bacterial growth (Mutsvangwa et al., 2005; Golterman, 1983; Maunz and Poillon, 1992). Also suspended particles can protect microorganisms from effects of disinfection. Due to all these negative impacts on water quality from SAS, there is need to have an understanding on the removal mechanisms of colloidal particles in SAS. This will enable designers of such schemes to implement adequate measures to reduce the inflows of colloidal particles in SAS. Monitoring of the water quality at most SAS is not carried out due to financial constraints and relevant expertise. The quality also varies throughout the year due to changes in recharge and surface runoff. Hence a model is required that can predict accurately the movement of the 3

subsurface contaminants in order to take the necessary precautionary measures like disinfection or other forms of tertiary treatment. Extensive studies have been carried out on the transport and deposition of colloidal particles in porous media (Elimelech and Omelia, 1991; Ryan and Elimelech, 1996). However most studies were for deep bed filtration in conventional water and wastewater treatment (Tan et al.; Iwasaki, 1937; Yao et al, 1971; Rajagopolan and Tien, 1976; Trussel and Chang, 1999). Application of filtration theory alone to colloidal transport in

subsurface systems will not be adequate because SAS can be classified as unconfined sandy aquifers and the topographical geometry of the SAS is different from conventional filters. The areal extent is large and on average, the effective length is about 500m with depths of about 48m (Mutsvangwa and Kubare, 2005). Evaluating the removal rates of colloidal particles in SAS therefore strongly relies in numerical models and field data. The aim of the study was to determine the efficiencies of SAS in the removal of colloidal particles in existing SAS through field studies and application of colloidal transport equations. The numerical solutions were compared with field results to establish whether the removal of colloids in sand abstraction systems is consistent with the principles of colloidal transport equations. The overall objective was to evaluate their applicability in predicting the water quality for SAS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Theoretical considerations Suspended solids have sorption properties which are adsorption and desorption. The adsorption being the attachment or deposition of particles on the solid phase of the porous medium resulting in a decrease in concentration of the colloidal particles a process described as filtration in water

treatment. The desorption is the release of the colloids from the solid phase back into the fluid flow. Transport and removal of suspended solid particles in a porous medium is by advection, hydrodynamic dispersion and interactive processes between colloids and soil surfaces. For colloidal particles, deposition is negligible at high velocities but is significant when the concentration of the particles is high. (Grolimund and Borkovec, 2001). The adsorption and release processes are generally described by a sorption isotherm, which is the relationship between the suspended solid concentration in the adsorbed phase and in the fluid phase. Also the adsorption and release process in most of the models are described by a first-order kinetic process with fixed rate constants and has been found to be accurate in many situations (Grolimund and Borkovec, 2001; Kretzschmar et., al, 1997). The velocity of flow in SAS is low and hence particles are carried along the flow streamlines, and therefore the flow can be considered as one-dimensional unless a transport mechanism causes transport across the streamline. The contaminant transport in SAS is under saturated flow conditions and the media is assumed to be homogenous for a single population of suspended solids. The reason being that it is assumed that the parent material is homogenous in the catchment area where SAS are located. The one dimensional transport equation for advection-dispersion and for steady-state in saturated conditions for such a process is given as:
C 2C C = D 2 vp kaC t x x

(1)

where C is the colloid concentration in solution, t is the time of travel, x is the travel distance, D is the hydrodynamic dispersion coefficient for the colloidal particles and is equivalent to the

product of the longitudinal dispersivity (L) and the Darcy velocity, vp which is the average travel velocity of colloidal particles through connected interstices, ka is the colloidal attachment rate coefficient. The term kC is the attachment flux governed by the first-order rate law. Straining has been identified as the fundamental mechanism that is operative in the removal of suspended solids (Adin and Rebhin, 1977; 1986, Harvey and Garabedian, 1991 and Tchobanoglous, 1970). The detachment of suspended particles in porous medium is unimportant compared to the attachment process. Carbo-Maldonaldo et al. (1998) reported that the

detachment coefficient is practically zero, implying that the particles do not detach significantly after removal. This has been observed in many colloidal transport experiments (Kretzschmar et., al, 1997; Mutsvangwa and Kubare, 2005). Therefore the release process of the suspended particle can be neglected. Also filter blocking and ripening are neglected. A number of models have been developed to determine the colloidal attachment rate coefficient which accounts for the permanent removal of colloids by filtration onto the solid phase (Harter et al, 2000). For first order deposition kinetics with step-inflow of colloidal particles into the sand column for a clean filter bed, the clean filter bed coefficient (o) can be evaluated from Iwasaki equation (1937):

o = ln f L Co

(2)

Where L is the column length, Co is the influent colloidal concentration; Cf is the final colloidal concentration after the breakthrough curve has reached a plateau. For columns with high Peclet numbers, the colloidal deposition rate coefficient ka can be estimated as:

ka = o v p = o

L tp

(3)

Substituting equation 2 into 3, we get


ka =

1 Cf ln t p Co

(4)

where tp is the average travel time of the colloidal particles. Yao, Habiban and O Melia (1971) presented an expression which relates the single collector efficiency with the colloidal filtration expression of Iwasaki (1937) for conventional filters (in packed beds). The equation is given as:
Cf ln C O = 3 1 c O L 2 dg (5)

Where: =porosity; c=collision efficiency factor; o=single collector efficiency ( = o and is the overall efficiency); dg=representative (effective) grain diameter of porous media. Substituting 5 into 4, we get: ka = 1 3 1 c O L tp 2 dg (6)

The single collector efficiency, o is determined analytically from the trajectory analysis for the processes of particle diffusion, inertia impaction, and settling (Rajagopolan and Tien, 1976; Elimelech, 1995), and the expression is given as:

o = 4( As )

3 3 B T vd p d g Z

dp 8 ( p )g 4H 8 + As + 0.00338 As 1 9 (v )8 d 15 8 18 g
1 13

1.2

2 d pdg

0.4

(v )1.2

(7)

and As is give as:

As =

[2 3(1 )

2 1 (1 )
1 3

+ 3(1 )

2(1 )

(8)

Where: As=porous medium constant; T= temperature in Kelvin; Bz=Boltzman constant; H=Hamaker constant; =dynamic viscosity of fluid; v-average water velocity; dp=colloidal diameter; p=buoyant density of colloids; =solution density and =porosity.

Numerical solution

Equations 1 through to 8 were applied in determining the removal mechanisms and the efficiency in the removal of suspended solids in SAS. The fully implicit finite difference technique was applied to solve equation 1. The results of the computation were compared with actual filed data to verify the model application. The solution of the equation will show how the suspended solids concentration changes at successive distances and time intervals for the entire effective length of the system. The effective length of the SAS is 500m, and is the distance along the river course up to which the source of water for gravity drainage is effective. In a bid to avoid meandering, a straight river reach is selected during the sitting of SAS, which gives the maximum length to which gravitational drainage is effective (Fig. 2). Meandering interrupts direct flow of

groundwater to the abstraction point of SAS (Mutsvangwa and Magombeyi, 2002). Applying the fully implicit finite difference technique and carrying out differencing in space and time about the point (i, k+1), then the difference approximation of equation 1 becomes:
Ci ,k +1 Ci ,k t = v D (Ci+1,k +1 2Ci,k +1 + Ci1,k +1 ) p (Ci ,k +1 Ci1,k +1 ) K a Ci,k +1 2 x x

(9) (10)

Or

ZCi ,k +1 Ci+1,k +1 Ci1,k +1 = Ci ,k


t ; x 2

Where: = D

= vp

t ; x

Z = 1 + 2 + K a t +

= +

(11)

A grid of six observation wells was applied at Nkayi SAS for the verification process of the model. For a grid of six observation wells, the matrix equation to solve for Ci ,k +1 for i=1,2,6 is

formed successively by implementing equation (10) at (2,k+1), (3,k+1).., (5,k+1) and making use of known initial concentrations at Ci ,k . The resulting general matrix equation becomes:
C1,k +1 C 2,k +1 C2,k C3,k +1 C3,k = C4,k +1 C4,k +1 C5,k +1 C5,k +1 C6,k +1

0 z 0 z 0 0 z 0 0 0

0 0 z

0 0 0

(12)

The additional information comes from the boundary conditions and in this case the first-type or Dirichlet boundary conditions have been specified at both boundaries. That is to say suspended solids concentration are known at x=0 or (1,k): k=1,2, and at x=L or (L,k), when L is the distance to the last observation well (x=500m). In other words C1,k +1 and C6,k +1 are known. With these initial and boundary conditions the matrix equation 12 is modified and transformed into the following matrix equation: 0 0 Z Z 0 0 Z 0 Z 0
C2,k +1 C1,k +1 + C2,K C C3,k 3,k +1 = C4,k +1 C 4 ,k C5,k +1 C6,k +1 + C5,k

(13)

Model testing and verification

The model was tested on an existing SAS called Nkayi along the Shangani River, in the Matebeleland Region of Zimbabwe and the study area is shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. The scheme supplies about 400 households with a daily demand of about 3400m3/day.

Water samples were collected from a grid of observation wells along the effective length at various depths and time (Fig. 3). The observation wells were positioned 100m apart (x) along the river length for the entire effective length of the filter bed. The infiltration galleries of the scheme are at a depth of 1.9m below the riverbed surface, which is the unconfined aquifer thickness (ZINWA, 2004). The standard vacuum filtration procedure was carried out with a gravimetric analysis in the laboratory to determine the concentration of suspended solids.

Fig 2(a) Nkayi SAS Locality map


105.0 0

Fig 2(b): 3-Dimensional locality map of Nkayi SAS.

104.0 0
Makalandoda school

Mazheb e 103.0 0

Shangan i

102.0 0

101.0 0

LEGEND
Road

LEGEND
Position of infiltration arm

position of SAS Shangani river

100.0 0

IntakeNkayi well Aerodrome Nkayi Business centre Communal homesteads

Police Camp

99.0 0 98.0 0

99.0 0

100.0 0

101.0 0

102.0 0

103.0 0

104.0 0

105.0 0

Fig. 2 Locality map and three dimensional profile of Nkayi scheme. A sieve analysis was carried out to establish the media characteristics. The analysis showed that the aquifer is made up of predominantly well-graded coarse sand with fine particles, and the effective size is 0.42mm. The aquifer can be considered as homogeneous. The filtration velocity was estimated from Darcys law using the medium permeability and hydraulic gradient. The values of the hydraulic gradient and the permeability for Nkayi were taken as 0.0013m/m and

10

252m/day respectively and are from previous research work (Magombeyi and Mutsvangwa, 2001). The porosity of sandy materials was taken to be 0.35 (Boonstra, 1981).

80.00 60.00 40.00

4 5 6

Eastings

11 10

9 8 7

20.00 12 0.00 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00

200.00

250.00

300.00

350.00

400.00

450.00

500.00

KEY

Ground level contour (m) Water level contour (m) Observation well

Northings

Fig. 3: The study section of the river reach for the Nkayi SAS (Mutsvangwa et al, 2005).

A laboratory longitudinal dispersivity was used and was determined from columns of PVC pipes of diameter 100mm and length of 600mm. A constant head setup was used to maintain constant velocity during the tracer tests. The laboratory apparatus used is shown in Fig. 4. The columns were packed with soil samples collected from Nkayi SAS. The choice of material was such that no distortion due to corrosion, leakage and external influence would affect conductivity of the liquid. The soil samples were cleaned using both an acid (HCL) and a base (NaOH) to remove impurities and to neutralize the soil grains. Sodium chloride (NaCl) was used as the conservative tracer. A known concentration of the tracer was passed through the sand columns and the effluent concentrations were determined using electrical conductance from a calibrated curve obtained from the NaOH solution (Fig. 5). For a pulse input of tracer with a first order decay, the dispersivity is determined from the solution to the one-dimensional advection-dispersion equation with all other processes set to zero. conditions were assumed;
11

In this case, Dirichlet (type-one) boundary

C ( x = 0, t ) = C1,k = C 0 C ( x, t = 0 ) = C i , 0 Where: C0 is the concentration in the reservoir. For such boundary conditions, Ogata and Banks (1961) gave the solution as: C= x vt CO erfc 4vt 2 L x vt CO x erfc exp 4vt 2 L L (14)

Where: v =

L t 50

; =average velocity (m/s); t50=time at which 50% of solute has left the column

(sec); C0=influent NaCl concentration (M/L3); C=effluent NaCl concentration (M/L3), t=elapsed time (sec); L=dispersivity (L).

The results of both the tracer to determine the longitudinal dispersivity and the colloidal filtration to establish the irreversible filtration coefficient were averaged over several runs and break through curves were plotted (Fig 6), with the effluent concentrations approaching a constant maximum value. The laboratory average longitudinal dispersivity, L, for Nkayi SAS was found to be 6.07cm. Charbeneau (2000) and Bobba(1995) reported laboratory values ranging from 0.01 to 1.0cm whilst Packmen (2000) reported a range of 0.19 to 0.25cm. Harvey (2000) reported in-situ values ranging from 2.2 to 5.5cm. Also rough approximation of longitudinal dispersivity is given as (Todd, 2005):

L = 0.1L

(15) (16)

L = 0.0175L1.46

12

Equations 15 and 16 gave values of 6cm and 0.83cm respectively. The value from equation 15 is almost similar to the laboratory value which was applied in this research.

Fig. 4: The laboratory Constant head setup to determine the longitudinal dispersivity The values of the collector efficiency o and collision efficiency c were found to be 6.86x10-4 and 4.48x10-3 respectively from equations 5 and 7. These are typical of laboratory values, which range from 5.4 x 10-3 to 9.7 x 10-3 (Harvey, 1991). However experimental errors are likely as careful controlled chemistry is required like pH, which is supposed to be close to neutral and a high ionic strength of the solution is needed to avoid colloidal media repulsion (Packman, 2000). From equations 3 to 8, the irreversible filtration coefficient was found to be 0.0077. The summary of the transport parameters are in Table 1. With the input parameters in Table 1 the variation of the suspended solids with distance and time were computed from equation 13. The results of the simulated values of the colloidal particles

13

and field data are shown in Table 2.1.

A comparison of the advection-dispersion model

prediction and field data is also graphically illustrated in Fig. 7, which shows the plotted regression lines for the model and superposed on field data. The simulated results of the model reasonably accounted for the concentration histories of the suspended solids appearing in the samples from the observation wells as demonstrated by a good match between the model and field results. The advection-dispersion equation under-estimated the concentration of the

suspended solids at the inlet but became closer at approximately half the effective length. This can be explained by the fact that the dispersion front is not sharply marked but rather elongated and shows a gradual concentration variation with distance from the contaminant source towards the abstraction point. Therefore advection will be dominant at head and this phenomenon, of advection dominance at shorter distances and advection-dispersion equal dominance at large distances is also evident in an earlier work (Kubare, 2004). For the transport process under consideration in this research, flow is laminar and as such dispersion is less pronounced than advection. When advection is dominant steeper concentration profiles are encountered as

depicted in the graphical illustration, where the advection-dispersion model simulations are less steep than the field results.

1.4

Conductivity (mS)

1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Concentration (mg/l)

Fig.5: Conductivity Calibration curve for NaOH solution


14

Relative concentration, c/co

1.5 1 0.5 0 0 100 200 Time (sec) 300 400


Run 1
Run 2

Fig. 6: Tracer break through curves for dispersivity Table 1: Summary of the input parameters.
Parameter Symbol Unit Value

Time interval Permeability Hydraulic gradient Darcy velocity Porosity Colloidal particles velocity Distance interval Longitudinal dispersivity Hydrodynamic dispersion coefficient Porous media constant Collision efficiency Single collector efficiency Effective grain size

t K i v vp x L D As c o dg

days m/day m/m m/day m/day m m m2/day m

13 252.2 0.0013 0.328 0.35 0.936 100 0.0607 0.02 52.52 4.48x10-3 6.86x10-4 4.2x10-4

15

The percentage error of the advection-dispersion model is about 4%, which is quite low. This high accuracy proves the fact that the detachment process can be neglected in the removal of colloidal particles in a porous medium and this fact has been highlighted elsewhere (Kubare, 2005; Carbo-Maldonaldo, 1995; Adin and Rebin, 1977; Harvey and Garabedian, 1991). The difference in concentration from the inlet to the abstraction point will give the efficiency removal. In this study the overall filter efficiency in the colloidal particles was found to be 85 % and thus SAS are very good at the removal of suspended solids. Table 2: Observation well 2 3 4 5 6 Simulated values of the colloidal particles field data. Distance, x(m) 100 200 300 400 500 SS from field results (mg/l) 41.35 30.01 19.80 11.92 10.75 SS from mode (mg/l) 39.72 26.10 19.06 12.47 1.63 3.91 0.73 0.55 Absolute error

16

45

40

35

30

Concentration, C (mg/l)

25
Advection-dispersion model
Experimental results

20

15

10

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Distance, x (m)

Fig. 7: Comparison of model simulations and field results

CONCLUSIONS

The close match between the simulated results and the field data showed that the advectiondispersion equation with the attachment component and excluding detachment can be applied in modeling the removal of suspended solids in SAS with confidence and within a reasonable margin of error. The attachment coefficient can also be accurately estimated from the colloidal filtration theory. Further research is needed on effects of infiltration of colloidal particles from the banks of the river section. Also studies need to be carried out on how clogging of the filter bed and the natural backwashing of the filter system during the rain season will affect the removal efficiencies. Other areas which can be explored include the simplification in the determining of the input parameters, which involve the development of simple empirical relationships to estimate the model parameters.
17

The advection-dispersion model thought tested for Nkayi, the procedure and methods outlined can be localized for any other SAS to predict the water quality at low cost, which is the concept inherent with consideration of SAS. The model will go a long way in predicting the response of the sandy aquifers from future contamination due to the increasing inflow of suspended solids as a result of poor catchment management. Such predictions will help in formulating mitigatory measures to reduce the inflow of colloidal particles into future and current SAS.

REFERENCES

1. Adin, A., and Rebin, N. (1977). The application of Filtration Theory to Pilot Plant Design. Journal of AWWA 71: 17-27. 2. Adin, A., and Rebin, N. (1986). Deep-Bed Filtration: Accumulation-Detachment Model Parameter. Journal of Chemical Engineering Science 42: 1213-1219. 3. Bobba, A.G., and Singh V.P. (1995). Groundwater Contamination Modeling. In: Environmental Hydrology. Singh, V.P. (Ed.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp 225-319. 4. Boonstra, C. (1981). Numerical Modeling of Groundwater Basin. ILRI, Netherlands. 5. Carbo-Maldonaldo, L.D., Silva-araya, W., and Rivera-Santo, S. J. (1998). Hydraulic Characterization of Sink Hole Protection Filters for Highway Drainage. Third International Symposium on Water Resource, American Water Resources Association. 6. Charbeneau, R. (2000). Groundwater Hydraulics and Pollutant Transport. Prentice Hall, USA. 7. Elimelech, M. J., and Omelia, C.R., (1991). Kinetics of deposition of Colloidal particles in porous media. Environmental Science and Technology, 24, pp 1528-1536.

18

8. Golterman, H.C. (1983). Study of the relationships between Water Quality and Sediment Transport. UNESCO, France. 9. Grolimund, D., and Borkovec, M. (2001). Release and Transport of Colloidal Particles in Natural Porous Media. Journal of Water Resource Research 37 No. 3: 559-570. 10. Harvey, R.W., and Garabedian, S.P. (1991). Use of Colloid Filtration Theory in Modelling Movement of Bacteria Through a contaminated Sandy Aquifer. Journal of

Environmental Science Technology 25: 178-185.


11. Harter, T., Atwill, E., and Wagner, S., (2000). Colloidal Transport and Filtration of Cryptosporidium Parvum in Sandy Soils and Aquifer Sediments Journal of

Environmental Science and Technology 34: 62-70.


12. Hunter. (1986), J.B., (1978), The role of Toxicity Test in Water Pollution Control. Water

Pollution Control 77: 384-394.


13. Kretzschmar, R., Barmettler, K., Grolimund, D., Yan Y., Borkovec, M., and Sticher, H. (1997). Experimental Determination of Colloid Deposition rates and collision efficiencies in Natural Porous Media. Journal of Water Resources Research 33 No. 5: 1129-1137. 14. Kubare, M., and Mutsvangwa, C., (2004). A Numerical Solution of the Filtration Equation for the Removal of Suspended Solids in Sand Abstraction Systems, Research Project, National University of Science & Technology, Zimbabwe. 15. Magombeyi, M., and Mutsvangwa, C., (2001). Methodology for quantifying Storage Capacity for Sand Abstraction Schemes, Research Project, National University of Science & Technology, Zimbabwe. 16. Maunzi, S., and Poillon, F., (1992). Restoration of the Aquatic Ecosystem, National Academy Press, USA.

19

17. Mutsvangwa, C., (1995). Sedimentation in Zimbabwe Dam Projects. Unpublished MSc Thesis, Loughborough University, UK. 18. Mutsvangwa, C., and Magombeyi, M., (2002). Improved Yield for Sand Abstraction Systems. Journal of Zimbabwe Institution of Engineers, Zimbabwe. 19. Mutsvangwa, C., and Kubare, M., (2005). Modelling the Removal of Suspended solids in Sand Abstraction Systems. Euro-Asian Journal of Applied Sciences 1 No.3. 20. Packman, A. I., and Ren, C., (2000), and Ren, C., (2000). Correlation of Colloidal Filtration Efficiency with Hydraulic Conductivity of Silica Sand. Journal of Water

Resources Research 36 No. 9: 2493-2500.


21. Rajagopolan, G., and Tien, C., (1976). Trajectory Analysis of Deep Bed Filtration with the Sphere in Cell Porous Media. Journal of AICHE 22(3): 523-533. 22. Tan, Y., and Bond, W., (1995). Modeling Subsurface Transport of Microorganisms. In: Environmental Hydrology. Singh V. P. (Ed.). Netherlands, pp. 226. 23. Iwasaki, T., (1937). Journal of American Water Works Ass. 29: 1591-1597. 24. Todd, D., and Mays, L., (2005). Groundwater Hydrology, John Wiley and Sons, USA. 25. Trussell, R. and Chang, M., (1999). Review of Flow Through Porous Media as Applied to head loss in water filters, Journal of the American Society of Civil Engineering: 9981006. 26. Yao, K, Habiban, M.T., and OMelia, C.R., (1971). Environmental Science Technology 11: 1105-1112. 27. Zimbabwe Water Authority (ZINWA), Design of Sand Abstraction systems, Design Report (2003), Zimbabwe. Kluwer Academic Publishers,

20

You might also like