Question 1

Peaking for large trunk mains: For trunk sewers with diameters greater than 1.25 m, the ratio of maximum sewage flow to average sewage flow is typically:

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Large trunk mains experience flow attenuation due to substantial storage and long travel times. Consequently, the peaking factor (max/average) is lower than for small laterals or branch sewers. Given Data / Assumptions: Diameter > 1.25 m implies significant hydraulic storage and wave smoothing. Diurnal peaks are damped by upstream networks and in-sewer storage. Standard peaking factors are used for preliminary design. Concept / Approach: Empirical peaking factors reduce with increasing contributing area and pipe size. For large trunks, a value near 1.5 is commonly adopted to reflect reduced peak-to-average variation. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize that larger systems peak less sharply.Choose a conservative yet typical factor.Select 1.5 as a representative ratio for large trunks. Verification / Alternative check: Several design guides present peaking factors decreasing toward ~1.3–1.7 for major interceptors, depending on catchment size and infiltration/inflow characteristics. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2.0–4.0: represent small sewers or localized peaks; high for large trunks.1.2: optimistic and may under-design capacity. Common Pitfalls: Applying small-system peaking factors to city-scale interceptors. Ignoring wet-weather inflow that can modify effective peaks. Final Answer: 1.5

Question 2

Sewer hydraulics — velocities for efficient service: For efficient working of a sewer, which condition(s) should be ensured regarding velocities at minimum and maximum flows?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Sewer performance depends on maintaining velocities that avoid deposition at low flows and prevent abrasion or structural issues at high flows. Practical velocity bands are often specified in local codes or standard practice documents. Given Data / Assumptions: Minimum velocity target is stated as about 0.45 m/s at low flow. Maximum velocity cap is stated as about 0.90 m/s at high flow. Question asks which condition(s) should be ensured. Concept / Approach: Self-cleansing requires attaining a lower-bound velocity to keep solids in motion; conversely, an upper bound prevents scouring and damage. The problem statement embeds these target figures and asks whether both apply. Step-by-Step Solution: Accept the given minimum and maximum velocity criteria as design targets.Ensure the sewer gradient/diameter meets or exceeds the minimum and does not exceed the maximum.Therefore, both conditions together are required for efficient service. Verification / Alternative check: While many handbooks cite ~0.6–0.75 m/s minimum and up to ~3 m/s maximum depending on material, within the scope of this problem the stated limits define the acceptability band. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Only (a) or only (b) satisfies half the requirement and can lead to either silting or abrasion.“Neither” contradicts basic hydraulic serviceability checks. Common Pitfalls: Assuming one universal pair of values; actual limits depend on pipe material and sediment. Ignoring partial-flow velocity behavior in circular conduits. Final Answer: Both (a) and (b)

Question 3

Sludge digestion temperature regimes and rates: Select the correct comprehensive statement about digestion rate, thermophilic and mesophilic ranges, and a typical mesophilic performance benchmark.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Biological sludge stabilization rates depend strongly on temperature. Understanding mesophilic and thermophilic ranges and related performance is crucial for selecting digester type and detention time. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard municipal sludge characteristics and conventional digesters. Mesophilic operation around 25–40°C; thermophilic around 40–60°C. Performance benchmarks are rule-of-thumb values for design studies. Concept / Approach: Temperature effect: Within biological limits, higher temperature generally increases reaction rates and gas production. Thermophilic vs. mesophilic: Two common operating bands used in design. Benchmark: Around 30 days at ~29°C can achieve high digestion in many systems. Step-by-Step Solution: Assess each statement for correctness relative to standard operational knowledge.All statements are consistent with accepted descriptions of digestion behavior.Therefore, the combined option “All the above” is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Design handbooks present similar temperature bands and show reduced detention times at higher temperatures due to increased microbial activity. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Selecting only one ignores the equally correct complementary statements. Common Pitfalls: Confusing the precise boundaries of temperature bands (they are approximate ranges). Assuming rate increases indefinitely with temperature; beyond limits, organisms are inhibited. Final Answer: All the above

Question 4

Chezy application to a full circular sewer: In Chezy’s relation V = C √(R * S) for a circular sewer of diameter D running full, the hydraulic mean radius R equals:

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The hydraulic mean radius R (also called hydraulic radius) is A/P, where A is the cross-sectional area of flow and P is the wetted perimeter. It is fundamental in Chezy and Manning equations used for sewer design. Given Data / Assumptions: Circular sewer of diameter D is flowing full. Chezy formulation uses R = A / P. Standard geometry of a circle applies. Concept / Approach: For a full circular pipe, calculate A and P, then form their ratio to obtain R. This value is constant for full-flowing circular sections and is frequently used in uniform flow calculations. Step-by-Step Solution: Area, A = π D^2 / 4Wetted perimeter, P = π DHydraulic radius, R = A / P = (π D^2 / 4) / (π D) = D / 4 Verification / Alternative check: Dimensional reasoning confirms that R must scale with length, and D/4 is consistent with known results for a full circular conduit. Why Other Options Are Wrong: D and D/2: overestimate R; ratio A/P does not support such large values.D/8 and D/16: underestimate R; computation shows D/4 exactly. Common Pitfalls: Using hydraulic diameter (4A/P) instead of hydraulic radius (A/P). Confusing part-full and full-flow geometry; R varies with depth for part-full flow. Final Answer: D/4

Question 5

In wastewater engineering, which pumping arrangement is most suitable for conveying sewage that contains appreciable suspended solids without clogging the pump or impeller?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A common design challenge in wastewater engineering is selecting pumping equipment that can handle raw sewage containing rags, grit, and other solids without frequent clogging. This question tests knowledge of pump types and the special case where air pressure is used to move sewage without a rotating impeller in contact with solids. Given Data / Assumptions: Sewage contains suspended and settleable solids that may clog narrow passages. Continuous, reliable operation with minimal maintenance is desired. Pumped medium is a mixture of liquid sewage and entrained solids. Concept / Approach: Many pumps (e.g., centrifugal, gear, reciprocating) have moving parts and small clearances that can become obstructed by fibrous materials and solids. A pneumatic ejector (also called an air-operated ejector) uses compressed air to displace sewage from a sealed receiver into the discharge line. Because no impeller or piston must pass solids through tight clearances, the risk of clogging is greatly reduced. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify whether the pumping method exposes solids to narrow passages or rotating elements.2) Centrifugal, reciprocating, gear, and propeller pumps all feature moving elements with finite clearances that can snag rags or plug with grit.3) A pneumatic ejector collects sewage in a sump or receiver. When a level sensor trips, compressed air is admitted.4) The compressed air increases pressure in the receiver and pushes the sewage slug into the force main, with solids riding along.5) Because solids do not encounter an impeller or check-valve passages of small size, clogging likelihood is minimal. Verification / Alternative check: Facilities with chronic clogging often adopt ejectors for grit-heavy or rag-laden flows, especially at small to medium capacities and where screenings are not perfect. This operational history supports the selection. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Centrifugal pump: Standard sewage impellers can pass some solids but still clog with fibrous materials; grinders add complexity and maintenance. Reciprocating pump: Valves and small clearances are prone to blockage by rags and grit. Gear pump: Tight gear clearances make it unsuitable for solids-laden sewage. Submersible propeller pump: Intended for high-flow, low-head applications such as storm water; not ideal for mixed solids without pretreatment. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “any sewage pump” will be non-clog; solids size and fibrous content matter. Confusing ejectors with air-lift pumps; ejectors use a sealed receiver and compressed air displacement. Final Answer: pneumatic ejector

Question 6

For cement concrete sewers, select the acceptable range of non-scouring (safe maximum) velocity so that the pipe surface is not eroded by the flowing sewage.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Designing a gravity sewer requires keeping velocities within a safe band. The lower bound (self-cleansing velocity) prevents sediment deposition, and the upper bound (non-scouring or safe maximum velocity) prevents erosion of the pipe material. This problem asks about the permissible upper range for cement concrete sewers. Given Data / Assumptions: Material: cement concrete (plain or reinforced cement concrete). Flowing fluid: municipal sewage containing grit. Objective: avoid abrasion and erosion of the concrete lining by keeping maximum velocity below the scouring threshold. Concept / Approach: Non-scouring velocity is the maximum velocity that a sewer can safely withstand without damaging its interior surface. For concrete, grit-laden flows can abrade the matrix at high velocities, so design manuals specify a safe range. Typical practice places concrete's upper safe velocity between about 3.5 m/sec and 4.5 m/sec, above which erosion risk rises sharply, especially during peak wet-weather flows. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify the material-specific scouring limit: concrete has a moderate resistance to abrasion compared to cast iron or ductile iron.2) Compare the provided velocity ranges with commonly accepted limits.3) The band 3.5 to 4.5 m/sec is widely cited as the safe upper range for cement concrete sewers.4) Select the option that matches this safe non-scouring range. Verification / Alternative check: As a cross-check, note that minimum self-cleansing velocities for sanitary sewers are typically around 0.6 to 0.9 m/sec, much lower than the scouring limit. The correct option represents the upper bound, not the lower bound, which aligns with standard design practice for concrete conduits. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2.5 to 3.0 m/sec: Too low for the non-scouring limit of concrete; usually still safe but unnecessarily restrictive as a maximum. 3.0 to 4.0 m/sec: Lower portion overlaps safe range but does not capture the commonly accepted upper bound of approximately 4.5 m/sec. 4.5 to 5.5 m/sec.: Velocities above about 4.5 m/sec risk abrasion and surface damage in concrete sewers. 2.0 to 2.5 m/sec: Far below typical upper limits; may be used for other materials or conservative designs, but not the standard concrete scouring threshold. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up self-cleansing (minimum) velocity with non-scouring (maximum) velocity. Ignoring that grit concentration during storms increases abrasion risk, justifying a realistic but safe upper design limit. Final Answer: 3.5 to 4.5 m/sec

Question 7

Detritus (grit) tanks in wastewater treatment: What is the typical design flow velocity maintained through a detritus (grit) tank to allow heavy inorganic particles to settle while keeping organics in suspension?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A detritus (grit) tank is a preliminary wastewater treatment unit that removes heavy inorganic solids such as sand, gravel, and silt. The design objective is to maintain a controlled low velocity that lets grit settle without causing excessive deposition of organic matter. This question checks the typical target velocity used by designers for efficient grit removal and odor control. Given Data / Assumptions: Unit type: detritus or grit-removal channel/tank in a sewage treatment works. Objective: settle heavy inorganics, carry organics forward. Uniform section and steady approach flow are assumed for design. Concept / Approach: Settling behavior of sand-sized particles is sensitive to horizontal velocity. Too high a velocity carries grit through; too low a velocity causes organic deposition and septic conditions. Practice commonly adopts a low, near-laminar regime velocity. While simple grit channels may use around 0.3 m/s, detritus tanks that focus on finer grit often target lower velocities near about 0.09 m/s, striking a balance between capture and preventing septicity. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the unit: detritus/grit tank with controlled low velocity.Recall typical low-velocity design bands used in practice.Select the representative value 0.09 m/s that aligns with low-velocity detritus removal while minimizing organic settlement. Verification / Alternative check: Design references list low horizontal velocities for detritus tanks, often an order of magnitude below pipe velocities, ensuring sand-sized particle capture. Field experience confirms that the value chosen yields effective removal without sludge-like deposition when detention and aeration (if used) are adequate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 0.05 m/s: Can be too low, risking organic deposition and septic conditions.1.25 m/s: Far too high; grit will not settle at such velocities.0.30 m/s: More typical of simple grit channels; detritus tanks often use lower velocities for finer grit.None of these: Incorrect because 0.09 m/s is a valid design choice. Common Pitfalls: Confusing velocities used in aerated grit chambers or channels with those in detritus tanks. Assuming “slower is always better”; excessively low velocity causes organic deposition and odor. Final Answer: 0.09 m/s

Question 8

Pumping power calculation in wastewater systems: Find the brake horsepower (BHP) required for a pump delivering 0.075 m^3/s against a total head of 12 m, if overall motor efficiency is 60%.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Determining the brake horsepower for pumps is a core calculation in water and wastewater design. It links hydraulic power requirements with motor efficiency to select an adequate drive. This problem reinforces unit handling and the relationship between flow, head, efficiency, and power. Given Data / Assumptions: Discharge, Q = 0.075 m^3/s Total head, H = 12 m Overall efficiency (motor + pump), η = 0.60 Density of water, rho_w = 1000 kg/m^3; g = 9.81 m/s^2 Concept / Approach: Hydraulic power Ph is rho_w * g * Q * H (in watts). Shaft power Ps equals Ph / η. Brake horsepower (BHP) is the shaft power expressed in horsepower. Use 1 HP = 0.746 kW for conversion. Step-by-Step Solution: Ph = rho_w * g * Q * HPh = 1000 * 9.81 * 0.075 * 12Compute: 9.81 * 12 = 117.72; 117.72 * 0.075 = 8.829; 8.829 * 1000 = 8829 WPs = Ph / η = 8829 / 0.60 = 14715 W = 14.715 kWBHP = 14.715 / 0.746 ≈ 19.73 HP ≈ 20 HP Verification / Alternative check: Cross-check by back-converting 20 HP to kW (≈14.92 kW) and multiplying by 0.60 to ensure hydraulic power close to 8.83 kW. This is consistent with the computed Ph = 8.829 kW. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 10 HP, 15 HP: Too low for the specified flow and head; would under-drive the pump.25 HP: Overestimates required power for the given duty and efficiency.18 HP: Still below the calculated requirement. Common Pitfalls: Mistaking hydraulic power for motor power (forgetting to divide by efficiency). Using wrong HP–kW conversion or omitting rho_w and g. Rounding too early, causing noticeable error in final BHP. Final Answer: 20 HP

Question 9

Operation cost terminology in wastewater plants: R.M.O. (Running, Maintenance, and Operation) expenses in a pumping station or treatment plant include which components?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Lifecycle costing of wastewater facilities distinguishes capital costs from recurring R.M.O. (Running, Maintenance, Operation) costs. Accurate budgeting requires knowing what belongs in R.M.O. so that utilities can forecast tariffs and sustainability metrics. Given Data / Assumptions: Facility type may include pumping stations, preliminary/primary/secondary units. Recurring costs considered over the asset’s service life. Concept / Approach: R.M.O. collectively includes energy and consumables (running), labor and routine tasks (operation), and planned/unplanned upkeep (maintenance). These ensure performance targets (flow, quality, uptime) are sustained after commissioning. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify recurring cost heads: running, operation, and maintenance.Confirm each head contributes to annual operating budgets.Select the comprehensive option. Verification / Alternative check: Utility accounting frameworks uniformly categorize R.M.O. as core O&M line items alongside sludge handling, chemicals, and power. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Single components (only running/only operation/only maintenance) are incomplete.Capital depreciation: Not an R.M.O. expense; it is a separate financial accounting item. Common Pitfalls: Confusing “operation” and “running”; operation includes staffing, monitoring, control. Omitting preventive maintenance from budgets, leading to higher corrective costs later. Final Answer: All of the above

Question 10

Safety in sewer manholes: If a miner’s safety lamp flame extinguishes within about 5 minutes in a manhole, which gas (or condition) is most strongly indicated?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Confined space entry into sewers is hazardous because toxic and asphyxiating gases may accumulate. Historically, miner’s safety lamps were used as crude indicators. Understanding which gas condition extinguishes a flame helps reinforce gas-monitoring protocols before entry. Given Data / Assumptions: A sewer manhole with poor ventilation. Flame extinguishes within minutes after lowering. No modern multi-gas meter is assumed in this scenario (for learning purposes only). Concept / Approach: Flames need sufficient oxygen; excess carbon dioxide displaces oxygen and does not support combustion, so flames go out. Methane is combustible and would not extinguish a flame by itself (it may ignite with oxygen present). Hydrogen sulphide is toxic and flammable, but low O2/high CO2 is the classic reason for flame extinction without ignition. Thus, rapid extinction signals high CO2 (and/or low O2). Step-by-Step Solution: Observation: Lamp extinguishes quickly without explosion.Inference: Atmosphere is oxygen-deficient, commonly due to elevated CO2.Select CO2 as the indicator gas associated with flame extinction. Verification / Alternative check: Modern practice requires calibrated multi-gas meters (O2, H2S, CH4, CO, etc.) and ventilation. The historical lamp observation aligns with oxygen displacement by CO2. Why Other Options Are Wrong: H2S: Highly toxic; may burn with a blue flame—does not inherently snuff flame without oxygen depletion.CH4: Explosive risk; in the right range it may ignite rather than extinguish a flame.O2 enrichment: Would enhance, not extinguish, a flame.None of these: Incorrect because CO2 is a known cause. Common Pitfalls: Assuming any dangerous gas will extinguish a flame; only oxygen-deficient or CO2-rich atmospheres do. Relying on flames instead of proper gas detection for real-world safety. Final Answer: Carbon dioxide (CO2)

Question 11

Ejector sizing in sewage handling: A cylindrical ejector chamber 2 m high fills every 10 minutes under a peak sewage inflow of 0.0157 m^3/s. Determine the required chamber diameter (assume full usable height).

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Sewage ejectors lift wastewater intermittently. Correct chamber sizing prevents excessive cycling and provides surge storage. This problem applies basic volume and geometry to determine a chamber diameter for a given fill time and inflow. Given Data / Assumptions: Cylindrical chamber height, h = 2 m (usable volume assumed full height). Peak inflow, Q = 0.0157 m^3/s. Fill time between cycles, t = 10 minutes = 600 s. Concept / Approach: Volume required V equals inflow rate times time. For a cylinder, V = (π/4) * d^2 * h. Solve for d by equating volumes. This is a straightforward sizing step used prior to mechanical selection and control strategy (on/off levels). Step-by-Step Solution: V = Q * t = 0.0157 * 600 = 9.42 m^3V = (π/4) * d^2 * h → d^2 = 4V / (πh)d^2 = 4 * 9.42 / (π * 2) = 37.68 / 6.28318 ≈ 6.00d = sqrt(6.00) ≈ 2.449 m ≈ 2.45 m Verification / Alternative check: Back-calculate V using d = 2.45 m: V ≈ (π/4)*(2.45^2)*2 ≈ 9.42 m^3, consistent with Q * t. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2.30 m, 2.40 m: Undersized; volume would be lower than 9.42 m^3.2.50 m: Slightly oversized; more volume than required by the target fill time.2.35 m: Also undersized. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting to convert minutes to seconds. Not accounting for usable height; in detailed design, high- and low-level set points reduce usable volume. Neglecting future peak factors which may require additional storage. Final Answer: 2.45 m

Question 12

Coagulants in sewage treatment: Which of the following is generally not used as a coagulant for treating sewage (wastewater)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Chemical coagulation is sometimes applied to wastewater for enhanced primary treatment or tertiary polishing. Knowing which coagulants are typical for sewage, as opposed to potable water, helps in selecting cost-effective chemicals and avoiding side effects. Given Data / Assumptions: Sewage characteristics: higher organics, variable pH/alkalinity compared with raw surface water. Goal: identify coagulants conventionally adopted for sewage. Concept / Approach: In wastewater, ferric salts (ferric chloride/sulfate) and alum are commonly used for chemical phosphorus removal, suspended solids reduction, and enhanced clarification. “Chlorinated copperas” (chlorinated ferrous sulfate) has niche or historical use, more associated with water treatment/odor control contexts, and is generally not a standard coagulant for sewage treatment trains. Step-by-Step Solution: List typical sewage coagulants: alum, ferric chloride, ferric sulfate, PAC.Assess chlorinated copperas: not commonly deployed for municipal sewage coagulation.Select the exception. Verification / Alternative check: Practice guidelines and plant case studies widely report ferric and alum chemistry for sewage; chlorinated copperas seldom appears as a standard choice for coagulation in municipal wastewater. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Alum, ferric chloride/sulfate, and PAC are widely used in wastewater for solids and phosphorus removal. Common Pitfalls: Assuming chemicals popular in water treatment are equally prevalent in wastewater. Ignoring impacts on alkalinity and sludge production when choosing coagulants. Final Answer: Chlorinated copperas

Question 13

Gas hazards in sewers: If the flame of a miner’s safety lamp in the upper layers of a sewer atmosphere forms an explosive condition, which gas is most strongly implicated?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Explosive atmospheres in sewers are serious hazards. Recognizing which gas is the principal cause helps enforce ventilation and monitoring. Methane, produced by anaerobic decomposition, is the classic flammable constituent in sewer headspaces. Given Data / Assumptions: Upper layers of a sewer, where lighter-than-air gases may collect. Observation of an explosive response with a flame (historical indicator). Concept / Approach: Methane is a combustible gas with lower and upper explosive limits in air. In oxygen-deficient conditions methane may not ignite; however, when mixed in explosive proportions with sufficient oxygen, it can form an explosive atmosphere. CO2 is asphyxiating but non-combustible; H2S is toxic and flammable but less commonly the primary driver of widespread explosivity compared with CH4 in sewers. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the gas associated with explosive atmospheres in sewers: methane.Recall that sewage generates CH4 under anaerobic digestion conditions.Select methane as the correct answer. Verification / Alternative check: Confined space entry procedures require monitoring of %LEL (lower explosive limit), typically linked to methane for sewer systems, alongside O2 and H2S monitoring. Why Other Options Are Wrong: CO2: Non-flammable; cannot create explosive mixtures.H2S: Flammable but usually present at lower concentrations; the more universal explosive concern is methane.O2: Not a fuel; it supports combustion but is not itself explosive here. Common Pitfalls: Confusing asphyxiation risk (CO2, low O2) with explosivity risk (CH4). Relying on flame tests instead of mandated calibrated gas monitors. Final Answer: Methane (CH4)

Question 14

Sewer network terminology: Which sewer specifically conveys sewage from the collection system to the treatment works (i.e., unloads at the treatment point)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Correct terminology prevents design and O&M confusion. The outfall sewer links the collection system to the treatment plant or final disposal location. Knowing this term helps when reading layout drawings and preparing specifications. Given Data / Assumptions: Hierarchical sewer system: house/lateral → branch → main/trunk → outfall. Final destination: treatment works. Concept / Approach: Outfall sewer is the terminal conduit of the collection system. It carries large combined flows, often with minimal local connections, and is sized for peak wet-weather conditions where applicable. It “unloads” the sewage at the plant headworks. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the last link before the plant.Match term to function: “outfall sewer”. Verification / Alternative check: Standard sewer system schematics clearly label the final conduit to the plant as the outfall sewer. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Main/branch/lateral/house sewers are upstream collectors with different service areas. Common Pitfalls: Using “main” and “outfall” interchangeably; the outfall is specifically the delivery line to the plant. Final Answer: Outfall sewer

Question 15

Maintenance of preliminary treatment units: Grit chambers in sewage treatment plants are typically cleaned at what interval under routine operation?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Grit chambers remove sand and silt that would otherwise abrade pumps and reduce tank volumes. Regular cleaning is essential to maintain capture efficiency and prevent odors. This question reinforces typical maintenance frequencies used in many municipal plants. Given Data / Assumptions: Municipal grit chamber with manual or mechanical cleaning. Average loading conditions without extraordinary storm events. Concept / Approach: The cleaning frequency depends on grit load, chamber volume, and equipment. Weekly (about 7 days) is a common baseline for manual-cleaned units, with more frequent removal during high-inflow seasons. Mechanized systems may operate daily, but the question asks typical interval under routine operation. Step-by-Step Solution: Consider routine municipal practice and typical grit accumulation rates.Select the commonly cited weekly interval. Verification / Alternative check: O&M manuals often suggest scheduled weekly removal, with adjustments based on observed accumulation and odor complaints. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2–5 days: Possible for heavy loads, but not the typical baseline.12–14 days: Risk of excessive accumulation and odor if left that long under normal loads. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring seasonality (storms increase grit inflow). Assuming mechanized removal schedules apply universally to manual systems. Final Answer: 7 days

Question 16

Character of fresh domestic sewage: Freshly produced municipal sewage (before significant decomposition) is generally…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Sewage quality changes with time. Recognizing the characteristics of “fresh” sewage versus “stale” or septic sewage is important for process selection and odor control. The initial pH and odor profile indicate the biological state of the wastewater. Given Data / Assumptions: Domestic sewage with minimal travel time in the collection system. No significant industrial acidic discharges. Concept / Approach: Fresh sewage typically has a slightly alkaline pH (often above 7), mild odor, and higher dissolved oxygen. As it becomes stale, bacterial activity consumes oxygen, producing acids and gases (H2S), lowering pH, and creating strong odors. Therefore, “fresh” correlates with “alkaline” rather than “acidic” or “highly decomposed.” Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the state: “fresh” (short residence time, limited decomposition).Relate to pH: slightly alkaline due to bicarbonate alkalinity and minimal acid formation so far.Select “Alkaline in reaction”. Verification / Alternative check: Field sampling commonly shows pH above 7 for fresh domestic sewage; septic conditions can drive pH downward and increase sulfide-related odors. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Acidic: More characteristic of stale/septic wastewater or specific industrial inputs.Highly decomposed/strong odor: Describes aged or septic sewage, not fresh.Neutral in all cases: Not accurate; typical domestic sewage is slightly alkaline. Common Pitfalls: Assuming all sewage smells strongly; fresh flows may have mild odor only. Ignoring industrial contributions which can alter pH; the question states “generally.” Final Answer: Alkaline in reaction

Question 17

In municipal wastewater treatment, what is the typical clear spacing between bars for perforations on a coarse screen (i.e., the first stage of preliminary treatment handling rags and large debris)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Coarse screens form the first barrier in preliminary sewage treatment, protecting pumps and downstream units from rags, plastics, and large floating matter. Choosing an appropriate bar spacing is essential to balance debris removal with headloss and maintenance. Given Data / Assumptions: Coarse screens target large solids before grit chambers and primary sedimentation. Clear spacing refers to the gap between adjacent bars. Typical practice sets a representative standard value within the common coarse range. Concept / Approach: Industry references commonly cite coarse screen spacings in the broad range of about 25 mm to 100 mm. For municipal plants, a representative standard design value near the middle of this range (often 40–50 mm) is widely used because it effectively captures large debris without causing excessive headloss or frequent blinding. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the category: coarse screening (not fine screens or micro-screens).Select a typical design spacing within standard practice for municipal works.A commonly adopted value for coarse screens is 50 mm. Verification / Alternative check: Comparing different manuals shows coarse screening spacings clustered near 40–50 mm for municipal duty. Plants handling unusually large debris may go wider; those wanting tighter capture may adopt smaller spacing but at the cost of higher maintenance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 20 mm and 30 mm: drift toward fine or medium screening, not typical for coarse screens. 40 mm: plausible but 50 mm is more standard as a representative coarse spacing. 100 mm: too wide for reliable debris interception in most municipal plants. Common Pitfalls: Confusing clear spacing (gap) with bar thickness; mixing fine screen values with coarse screen design; ignoring headloss implications of very tight spacing. Final Answer: 50 mm.

Question 18

For continuous-flow primary sedimentation tanks used in municipal wastewater treatment, which of the following design statements is generally adopted in practice?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Primary sedimentation tanks remove settleable solids and reduce the organic load before biological treatment. Their geometric proportions and hydraulic limits are chosen to prevent sludge resuspension, short-circuiting, and scum carryover. Given Data / Assumptions: Continuous-flow rectangular tanks are under discussion. Common design heuristics for municipal plants are acceptable. Velocity limits are intended to avoid scouring. Concept / Approach: Standard practice uses rules-of-thumb to set width, length-to-width ratio, and surface overflow rates. Keeping velocities low (around 0.3 m/min) maintains quiescent conditions to promote settling. Sizing by volume against maximum daily flow ensures adequate detention during peak conditions. Step-by-Step Solution: Width ≈ 6 m: provides practical construction modules and manageable sludge collection spans.Length ≈ 4–5 × width: improves plug-flow behavior and reduces short-circuiting.Max horizontal velocity ≈ 0.3 m/min: limits turbulence and resuspension.Daily capacity matched to maximum day flow: ensures minimum detention under peak loading. Verification / Alternative check: These figures align with many municipal design handbooks that target stable hydraulic conditions and effective solids capture while keeping construction economical. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each individual statement is valid; hence only the combined choice captures the complete set of accepted practices. Common Pitfalls: Overemphasizing a single parameter (e.g., only velocity) while neglecting geometric ratios that control short-circuiting and sludge transport. Final Answer: All of the above.

Question 19

In municipal sanitation terminology, identify the incorrect statement about sewage and sewerage systems.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Accurate use of sanitation terminology is foundational for design, regulation, and public communication. This question checks understanding of basic definitions and system comparisons. Given Data / Assumptions: Sewage includes domestic, commercial, and in some cases industrial wastewater with varying dilution. Effluent reuse for irrigation is practiced under guidelines. Conservancy systems historically relied on manual collection rather than water-carriage. Concept / Approach: The water-carried sewerage system is globally preferred over the conservancy system due to hygiene, labor safety, odor control, and scalability. Definitions of sewage and sewerage are standardized across engineering literature. Step-by-Step Solution: Check (a): correct—sewage is wastewater plus carried waste products.Check (b): correct—treated effluent irrigation is practiced where standards permit.Check (c): correct—sewerage encompasses the full system and processes.Check (d): incorrect—conservancy is outdated and inferior on public-health grounds. Verification / Alternative check: Modern codes mandate water-carried sewerage or on-site systems meeting strict criteria; conservancy is maintained only in exceptional legacy contexts. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (a), (b), and (c) are standard definitions and practices. (e) is wrong because (d) is demonstrably incorrect. Common Pitfalls: Confusing the terms sewage (the wastewater) and sewerage (the system). Also assuming all effluents are reusable without treatment—standards must be met first. Final Answer: The old conservancy system was definitely better than the water-carried sewerage system.

Question 20

In wastewater engineering, temperature variation most significantly affects which of the following characteristics of sewage?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Temperature is a master variable in wastewater systems. It influences biological kinetics, oxygen transfer and solubility, and hydraulic behavior through viscosity changes, impacting both treatment efficiency and conveyance. Given Data / Assumptions: Municipal sewage subject to normal seasonal temperature swings. Typical treatment processes include biological reactors and sedimentation. Concept / Approach: Biological activity: Reaction rates often follow an Arrhenius-type temperature dependence; warmer conditions accelerate biodegradation up to optimal limits. Gas solubility: As temperature increases, oxygen solubility decreases, reducing available DO for aerobic processes. Viscosity: Warmer temperatures reduce viscosity, generally improving settling and mixing while altering headloss. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize temperature's triple role in biology, chemistry (gas solubility), and fluid mechanics.Each listed factor is temperature-dependent in a way that materially affects plant performance.Therefore, the combined option is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Operations data show wintertime oxygen demand rises (due to slower kinetics) while oxygen solubility increases; conversely, summer operations see higher kinetics but lower DO solubility and different viscosity behavior—consistent with the stated effects. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Focusing on only one parameter ignores the coupled impacts observed daily in treatment plants. Common Pitfalls: Assuming temperature helps in every way; in reality it improves kinetics but can impair oxygen availability and change hydraulics simultaneously. Final Answer: All of the above.

Waste Water Engineering Questions