Skip to content

Chapter VII: Part 7

Text size

In the case of filters thus raked, a deeper penetration of suspended matter into the sand layer is inevitable, but at Pittsburg, as at Washington, such penetration does not extend more than about 2 in. below the filter surface. When the filter is finally scraped, a deeper layer is removed, of course, but it is clearly more economical to remove a deep layer at one operation than to remove separately several thinner layers of an equal total thickness.

The lost-time element is an important one, and at Washington this was the main reason for trying surface raking. It became necessary to increase the output of the filters, and the ordinary scraping consumed so much time that the sand-handling force was increased, working day and night. The raking expedient introduced at this time overcame this, and Mr. Hardy states that it is still followed when the work is at all pressing. The speaker has found at Pittsburg, as Mr. Hardy has found at Washington, that raking is nearly if not quite as effective as scraping in restoring the filter capacity.

Eleven years ago the speaker was connected with the preliminary investigations into the best methods of purifying the Potomac River water for Washington. It then appeared that while for the greater part of the time during an average year the Potomac River could be classed among the clear waters of the East, there were periods when excessive turbidity made it necessary to consider carefully methods of preparatory treatment before this water could be filtered effectively and economically. As Mr. Hardy has said, considerable prejudice existed against the use of a coagulating chemical, and the expedient was therefore adopted of giving the water a long period of sedimentation in order to remove enough of the suspended matter to allow the clarified water to be treated on slow sand filters. The expert commission, consisting of Messrs. Hering, Fuller, and Hazen, recommended the occasional use of a coagulating chemical, but this recommendation was not carried out.

The Potomac River is somewhat peculiar, in that the turbidity of its waters, as shown by the results presented in Mr. Hardy's paper, ranges from 3,000 to practically nothing. The bacterial content also varies widely, and Mr. Hardy's tables show this variation to be from 76,000 to 325 per cu. cm. Such a water as this requires particularly careful preparatory treatment. The Dalecarlia Reservoir has a capacity of something like 2 days' storage, the Georgetown Reservoir the same, and the McMillan Park Reservoir nearly 3 days, making a total sedimentation of more than 7 days. Without the use of a coagulant, it is significant that during a period of five years, even with 7 days' sedimentation, the average maximum turbidity of the water delivered to the filters was 106 parts per million, and the maximum average turbidity in one month was 250 parts per million. The water filtration engineer can readily understand that waters as turbid as this cannot be treated economically and efficiently in slow sand filters. It would appear that coagulating works might advantageously have been installed at the entrance to the Dalecarlia Reservoir. If this had been done, and coagulant had been added to the water at times when it was excessively turbid, a considerably shorter period of subsequent sedimentation than now exists would in all probability have rendered the water at all times amenable to efficient and economical slow sand filter treatment.

The prejudice in Washington against the use of coagulants has also manifested itself in other localities, but the results which have been obtained during the past twenty years from rapid sand filters and from slow sand filters, treating waters previously coagulated with salts of iron or alumina, have shown how thoroughly unreasonable were these objections. In this connection it is interesting to note that there are in the United States more than 350 rapid sand filter plants, and that nearly 12% of the urban population of Continental United States is being supplied with water filtered through rapid sand filters, in connection with all of which a coagulating chemical is used in the preparatory treatment.

~Table 24--Typhoid Fever Death Rates in Cities of the United
States with Populations in 1910 of 100,000, or More.~

Statistics gathered by correspondence and from Reports of
the Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce and Labor,
Mortality Statistics.

~Note~.--Statistics from Birmingham, Ala., Dayton, Ohio, Fall River,
Mass., Louisville, Ky., Memphis, Tenn., Oakland, Cal., and
Providence, R. I., are not included, as they are
incomplete.

Columns:
A - Average for six years, 1900-05, inclusive.
B - Average for five years, 1906-10, inclusive.
C - Average for 11 years, 1900-11, inclusive.

====================+===============================================
| ~ Typhoid Fever Death Rate
City. | per 100,000 Population~.
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----
| 1906| 1907| 1908| 1909| 1910| A | B | C
--------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----
Albany, N. Y. | 20 | 20 | 11 | 19 | 15 | 25 | 17 | 21
Atlanta, Ga. | 50 | 64 | 47 | 44 | 43 | 65 | 50 | 58
Baltimore, Md. | 34 | 41 | 31 | 23 | 41 | 36 | 34 | 35
Boston, Mass. | 22 | 10 | 26 | 14 | 11 | 23 | 16 | 20
Bridgeport, Conn. | 10 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 9 | 15 | 12 | 14
Buffalo, N. Y. | 24 | 29 | 21 | 23 | 20 | 29 | 23 | 26
Cambridge, Mass. | 18 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 12 | 15
Chicago, Ill. | 18 | 18 | 15 | 12 | 14 | 27 | 16 | 22
Cincinnati, Ohio | 71 | 46 | 19 | 13 | 6 | 54 | 31 | 44
Cleveland, Ohio | 20 | 19 | 13 | 12 | 19 | 51 | 17 | 36
Columbus, Ohio | 45 | 38 | 110 | 17 | 13 | 61 | 45 | 54
Denver, Colo. | 68 | 67 | 58 | 24 | 30 | 37 | 49 | 42
Detroit, Mich. | 22 | 28 | 22 | 19 | 16 | 17 | 22 | 19
Grand Rapids, Mich. | 39 | 30 | 30 | 17 | 27 | 34 | 28 | 31
Indianapolis, Ind. | 39 | 29 | 26 | 22 | 31 | 76 | 30 | 55
Jersey City, N. J. | 20 | 14 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 19 | 12 | 16
Kansas City, Mo. | 38 | 40 | 35 | 23 | 38 | 48 | 35 | 42
Los Angeles, Cal. | 18 | 23 | 19 | 18 | 12 | 35 | 18 | 27
Lowell, Mass. | 7 | 9 | 24 | 11 | 21 | 19 | 14 | 17
Milwaukee, Wis. | 31 | 26 | 17 | 21 | 45 | 19 | 28 | 23
Minneapolis, Minn. | 33 | 26 | 18 | 20 | 58 | 38 | 29 | 34
Nashville, Tenn. | 66 | 85 | 62 | 53 | 48 | 54 | 58 | 56
Newark, N. J. | 18 | 24 | 12 | 11 | 13 | 17 | 16 | 17
New Haven, Conn. | 54 | 30 | 34 | 20 | 17 | 44 | 31 | 38
New York, N. Y. | 15 | 17 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 19 | 14 | 17
New Orleans, La. | 30 | 56 | 31 | 25 | 28 | 40 | 34 | 37
Omaha, Nebr. | 28 | 24 | 22 | 31 | 75 | 20 | 36 | 27
Paterson, N. J. | 4 | 11 | 10 | 5 | 7 | 25 | 7 | 17
Philadelphia, Pa. | 74 | 60 | 36 | 22 | 17 | 47 | 42 | 45
Pittsburg, Pa. | 141 | 135 |53[1]|13[1]|12[1]| 132 | 71 | 104
Richmond, Va. | 44 | 41 | 50 | 24 | 22 | 66 | 36 | 53
Rochester, N. Y. | 17 | 16 | 12 | 9 | 13 | 15 | 13 | 14
St Louis, Mo. | 18 | 16 | 15 | 15 | 14 | 33 | 16 | 25
St Paul, Minn. | 21 | 17 | 12 | 20 | 20 | 14 | 18 | 16
San Francisco, Cal. | ... | 57 | 27 | 17 | 15 | 20 | 29 | 24
Scranton, Pa. | 11 | 76 | 11 | 11 | 14 | 18 | 35 | 26
Syracuse, N. Y. | 10 | 16 | 15 | 12 | 30 | 14 | 17 | 15
Toledo, Ohio | 45 | 36 | 40 | 31 | 32 | 36 | 37 | 36
Worcester, Mass. | 12 | 14 | 10 | 8 | 16 | 17 | 12 | 15
Washington, D. C. | 52 | 36 | 39 | 33 | 23 | 59 | 37 | 49
====================+=====+=====+=====+=====+=====+=====+=====+=====

[Footnote 1: Filtered water section. Allegheny District not
included.]

Attention has repeatedly been called to the fact that the relatively high typhoid death rate in Washington, since the filter plant was installed, was a possible indication that the filters were inefficient. It is true that there has not been the marked reduction in the typhoid death rate in Washington, following the installation of the water filtration works, that has been observed in other cities in America. For the six years prior to the date on which filtered water was supplied to the citizens of Washington, the average typhoid fever death rate was 59 per 100,000 population, as against 37 per 100,000 for the five years following, a reduction of 37 per cent. At Albany, N. Y., where the first modern slow sand filter was built in 1899, the typhoid death rate has been reduced by 75 per cent. At Cincinnati, Ohio, the average death rate from typhoid ranged around 50 per 100,000 for years, but since the installation of the filtration plant it has been reduced to a point which places that city, with respect to freedom from typhoid fever, at the head of all the large cities in America; in 1910 the death rate from typhoid in Cincinnati was 6 per 100,000. Similarly, at Columbus, Ohio, where the typhoid death rate before the installation of the filtration plant in 1906 was even higher than at Cincinnati, it was reduced to less than 13 per 100,000 in 1910, whereas, for the previous five years, it was 61 per 100,000. Philadelphia, before the installation of the filtration works, had a typhoid death rate of 60 or more per 100,000, and in 1910 the death rate from this disease was 17. Pittsburg, at least that part of it now supplied with filtered water, for years had a typhoid death rate of more than 130 per 100,000, but the present rate is about 12 per 100,000.

~Table 25--Average Monthly Results for the
Period, 1905-1910.~

Columns:
A - Period of sedimentation in days.
B - Turbidity in parts per million.
C - Bacteria per cubic centimeter.
============+=====+=====+=======+=====================
| | | |~Percentage Removed~
Reservoirs.| A | B | C |----------+----------
| | | | Turbidity| Bacteria
------------+-----+-----+-------+----------+----------
River | ... | 106 | 6,400 | ... | ...
Dalecarlia | 2.2 | 50 | 5,000 | 53 | 22
Georgetown | 2.2 | 38 | 3,400 | 24 | 32
McMillan | 2.8 | 26 | 2,000 | 31 | 41
------------+-----+-----+-------+----------+----------
Totals and | | | | |
averages | 7.2 | ... | ... | 75 | 69
============+=====+=====+=======+==========+==========

While it may perhaps seem unreasonable to single out Washington as a particular sufferer in this respect, it is highly probable that a large share of the typhoid is still caused by secondary infection, flies, impure milk, and private and public wells. The speaker remembers distinctly that ten years ago, when he made an investigation into the purity of the water of about 100 public wells in that city, a large number of them showed unmistakable evidence of being polluted with sewagic matter. Conclusive evidence would be secured to dispel any doubt as to the sanitary quality of the filtered product if hypochlorite of lime were added to the filtered water throughout one year or throughout the typhoid months. It seems strange to the speaker, that for this, if for no other reason, this safe and non-injurious germicide has not as yet been used at Washington, in view of the fact that at the present time it is being used continuously or intermittently in the treatment of the water supplies of scores of the most important cities of this country, among which may be mentioned New York, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Pittsburg, St. Louis, and Minneapolis.

~Morris Knowles, M. Am. Soc. C. E~. (by letter).--This description of the operation of the Washington Filtration Works is timely and of great interest. It is ten years since the writer, in collaboration with Charles Gilman Hyde, M. ~Am. Soc~. C. E., presented a similar record for the Lawrence, Mass., filter. That paper was the first complete, detailed, and continuous history of the actions and results obtained for a long period of time with such a purification works.[1] Since then, the art of filtration has advanced in many ways, particularly in regard to the methods of cleaning slow sand filters and in the accompanying processes. It is well, therefore, again to take account of stock and see really what progress has been made. Therefore, Mr. Hardy's paper, giving a description of the operations of a system thoughtfully designed, after long consideration of the problem, and of operations carried on under efficient and economical administration, with thorough record of all details, should furnish a groundwork for the careful consideration of the question stated above.

The writer, using as a text some of the ideas given in the paper, but more particularly some of those becoming prevalent elsewhere, desires to discuss methods and costs of operation, especially in relation to sand handling; and to offer suggestions looking toward greater efficiency, as well as economy, in carrying out the standard and well-tried methods.

_Theory of Slow Sand Filtration._--First, what is the process of slow sand filtration? The answer to this question involves many factors, some of which are even yet but imperfectly understood. In the early history of filtration, at the time of the construction of the London filters, only the straining capacity of the sand bed, to remove gross particles, was known. Later, when the organic contents of water had become better understood, the chemical or oxidizing powers of the process were recognized as performing an important part. Finally, co-existent with the discovery of the so-called "germ theory of disease," a study of the bacterial action of filters resulted in the recognition of its importance. It is now universally thought that each of these factors performs its useful function; that the size of the sand, the amount of organic matter remaining on the surface of the bed, the turbidity of the applied water, and the bacterial content of the influent, are some of the things on which depends the determination of the relative importance of each.

[Footnote 1: _Transactions_, Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. XLVI, p. 258.]

Engineers have been taught to believe, by the German school of thought, that the film of organic matter on the surface of the sand plays a very important role in filtration. This _Schmutzdecke_, as it is called, has been considered so precious that stress has been placed on treating it with great care. It was not to be wholly removed at the time of cleaning, and it was not to be walked on, or indented, or in any other way consolidated or destroyed. In fact, in some cases, the wasting of the first water after cleaning has been advocated, for the reason that not a sufficient amount of this organic film would be left on top of the sand to begin the filtration process properly immediately after the cleaning.

In late years, however, there has been a tendency to depart from this fundamental doctrine of slow sand filtration. Various new processes for cleaning the sand surface have been advocated; some of these partly destroy and others completely exterminate any semblance of a bacterial film on the sand bed. These ideas, advanced without any real and serious discussion of their intrinsic merits, or their effects on the public health, are not founded on long continuous records of such results as are necessary to establish confidence in the final value of any of these methods.

Rapid advances along this line have been made more recently, notwithstanding the occurrence of notable instances of trouble and the resultant need of complete repair of filtration beds. Because of the rough treatment of the sand surface, a penetration of organic matter and filth into the bed had taken place. This caused deep clogging, prevented the usual yield of water, and brought about a lessened bacterial efficiency, due to the attempt to force water through the filters, and because some organic matter and growths in the lower part of the bed had furnished a breeding place for more bacteria.

All these endeavors to reduce the work of cleaning have been commendable, because scraping and sand handling are the items of greatest expense in slow sand filter maintenance. Every one has been desirous of minimizing this cost. However, as the writer will endeavor to show, it seems that attempts along this line should be with the idea of doing more economically, as well as efficiently, the things which one knows will accomplish the proper results, rather than unwisely to adopt new methods which have not been tried for a long enough period to determine their effect on the public health.

_Pittsburg Methods._--When first taking up the problem of design in Pittsburg, in 1902, the writer had presented to him for consideration and adoption, a suggestion that a certain method of cleaning sand filters, which would involve the washing of the sand in place (similar to that recently tried at the Jerome Park Experiment Station, New York City), would be advisable and economical. The decision then made has never been regretted. As this plan involved such a complete departure from those principles which had been well tried and had proven successful, it was believed that it was not safe to adopt such a method on the municipal filtration works, from which the people were to derive their drinking water. There is more to be considered in such a problem than mere economy of operation; the economy of human life, the effect on which requires far longer than a few months of trial to determine, is a much more important factor. Believing that no one should depart, until after a long period of conclusive experimentation, from that principle which is known to be safe (viz., to take off a small portion of the clogging surface), the writer studied to determine more efficient and economical methods of accomplishing this end.

A device for scraping the material, in just the same way as with shovels, but more efficiently and more exactly, was developed by George P. Baldwin, M. Am. Soc. C. E., under the general supervision of the Bureau of Filtration, of which the writer was in charge. However, on account of the unfortunate and earlier arrangement of other constructive matters, which the City's Legal Department advised could not be changed without upsetting the contract, the entrance doors to the original forty-six filters were not built large enough to permit the rapid and economical transfer of these machines, and, as this act takes so large a proportion of the total time of operation, it has not been found economical to use them. The additional ten filters, recently constructed, with doors especially designed and large enough to pass the machines, have not yet been placed in operation. This is said to be on account of lack of funds and of employees. Therefore, there has been no opportunity to demonstrate what the scraping machines can do, under the conditions for which they were designed to operate. The restoring machine, a complementary device in mechanical operation, which simply replaces the sand in the same condition that it would be if wheeled back, but, with a small percentage of moisture, has accomplished its purpose well and economically. The sand is placed in the filters so that there is no further settling; with a smooth surface, needing no additional adjustment; with absolutely no possibility of sub-surface clogging; and with the filters starting off exceedingly well in operative results.

_Washington Methods._--In Washington, it is stated that the filters are still cleaned by the old-fashioned method of scraping with shovels, throwing the sand into piles, and afterward removing it with a movable ejector. Between scrapings there is also an occasional mid-period action of raking the unwatered sand surface, for the purpose of stirring up the dirty film. This process does not remove any of the clogging material from the bed, but it is said that no injurious effects are produced, and that it is economical. It is stated that the so-called "Brooklyn method," of stirring the surface of the sand while the water is on the bed, has been tried at Washington, but with unsatisfactory results. It seems to have been advocated with greater fervor in some other places.

The method of dry raking does not remove the dirty material, but loosens up the pores of the surface, and through this porosity permits clogging to penetrate deeper into the filter. The method of raking with water on the bed, although it removes some of the organic dirt, also permits deeper penetration of the remainder. The latest devised system of washing the sand in place, by upward spraying with water, called the "Blaisdell method," thoroughly destroys the _Schmutzdecke_ above, and, at the same time, must permit the formation of a subsidiary one below. In the Nichols method, the material removed by shovel scraping is conveyed by an ejector to a portable separator, where it receives a single washing; the dirty water overflows to the sewer, while the washed sand is discharged through a hose and deposited on the recently scraped surface. As the latter is partly impregnated with impurities, there is, by this process, a tendency toward sub-surface clogging.

All these processes are marked and serious departures from the well-tried method of cleaning slow sand filters, which, it is well known, will operate successfully to purify polluted river waters and make them safe to drink. In all there is the danger that they have not been sufficiently and carefully tried, under scientific observation, as to results and possible effects on the public health, to be sure that the bacterial efficiency can long continue to be satisfactory, with the application of specifically infected waters. It is dangerous, and may even jeopardize the safety of human lives, to experiment on water which is furnished for drinking purposes. There is also the added danger, well known from past experience, that in a few years (it may be more or less, depending on the extent and intensity of the new workings) the filters will need renovation, partly, if not wholly, throughout the entire bed. Thus, considering the total cost during a long term of years, the apparently cheaper method may become the most expensive.

There is also an interesting query in regard to the Washington method of replacing sand in the filters, and it is worthy of most careful thought and attention. If the process described can be carried on with success and safety, it will prove to be a long and progressive step in the methods of operation. The difficulty, however, is in determining from any short-term runs whether such a process can be continued permanently without impairing the efficiency of the sand bed. Apparently good conditions may change, after a few years' trial, and be followed by unsafe results and predicaments. This replacing of sand with whatever dirt and detritus may travel with it in the carrying water is certainly not equivalent to the care with which it has been understood that sand should be deposited in filters. It is not comparable with the care with which it is placed, when wheeled from a washer, where dirty water overflows the lip, or where it is placed by a machine restorer in the filter, where the transporting water also overflows the weir and is carried to the sewer.

These cheap and rapid methods of doing the work, advanced in the interests of economy, and the idea that sand filters, receiving polluting waters, can operate at higher rates than those which we have demonstrated, and, therefore, have been led to believe are safe, is a speeding up of the whole organization and of operating conditions. It is like speeding up a machine for the purpose of getting a greater output, with the usual result that fast running means quicker wearing out of both man and machine. Quicker operations generally mean carelessness in doing the work, especially in municipal service. Carelessness is engendered by the thought that such work can be handled in a rough and rapid way, and, further, by the ridicule of all these things, which we have learned to be careful about, as old-fogyish, out-of-fashion, and archaic. Carelessness in operation breeds contempt for the art. Some of the less efficient filter plants, from the standpoint of effect on the public health, may reflect such ill-considered methods

_Economy with Efficiency in Operation._--It is particularly important to find out whether one can secure the desired economy, and, at the same time, the required efficiency. The development of efficiency in every line of human endeavor is receiving much attention at present, and not the least cause for this is the growing recognition of the demand for a high standard of service for the expense caused. One of the first requirements is to have well-defined ideals and standards. When one knows how to secure a good and safe result, it is unwise to depart therefrom for a mere whim, or to secure a supposedly lessened expense, unless other facts be also determined favorably. The desire for economy must be tempered by good sense, which means that one should be willing to change a method only when the wisdom of such has been clearly demonstrated. Efficient service can only be secured by strict discipline, accompanied by fair dealing. This means employing no more men than are actually necessary, paying them on the basis of the standard of service and output produced, taking an interest in the working conditions, and providing for their health and welfare.

About twelve years ago, the writer made some investigations of the efficiency of laboring gangs in scraping and handling sand at filter beds,[1] and found that ten men was the most economical number to use in scraping the surface of the Lawrence filter, as then built and operated. This result was determined by numerous studies of the output per man per minute, with different numbers of men working under different conditions. This same sort of study has been carried further by adepts in the art, in reference to shop and similar management, but one fails to find corresponding development along this line in municipal organization except by a few of the scattered Bureaus of Municipal Research. These results, also, have related to a few of the more common and general factors, such as determining the cost per mile, or per square yard, of street cleaned, or per million gallons of water pumped.

[Footnote 1: _Transactions,_ Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. XLVI, p. 291.]

The cost of the management of water-works, one of the largest factors of public enterprise, has never been investigated extensively and thoroughly. There is much possibility in planning for greater efficiency and in determining what can be accomplished under economical administration. Every one is aware of the multiplicity of men in municipal service. Some of these are entirely incompetent, others partly so; the recent appointees may be more efficient, but the majority of them gradually deteriorate under the subtle influence of the prevailing atmosphere, and each new incoming administration places more and more men on the work, without reason or necessity. All these tendencies have made the cost and maintenance of public work greater and greater, and, at the same time, have resulted in frequently and steadily decreasing the output and efficiency per employee.

The Washington situation, however, presents an admirable contrast to this, because of the methods of administration of the public works of the District of Columbia and their freedom from petty political influence. The limited number of employees has tended toward economy, and rendered this plant the envy of all who have desired to obtain good management. Its cost items have been looked on as a result long hoped for, but seldom obtained. It is to be regretted, therefore, that such an abrupt change in methods of removing clogging material and replacing sand has taken place without years of experimental trial on filters not furnishing drinking water to the public, and without an attempt, under such excellent conditions, to maintain the efficiency by a better labor output and by improved working and machine methods in the performance of the older and established order of doing things.

In preparing water for the use of the people, the realms of the unknown are so much larger than those which have been investigated and developed that there may be many undiscovered factors affecting the public health, and many ways in which it is dangerous to depart from well-known and surely safe methods. Who can say that in some subtle and, at present, unknown manner, the failure in some places, where filtration is practiced, to reduce the death rate from typhoid fever may not be due to the introduction of radical departures from the older, slower, safer, and more efficient methods which have produced such excellent results, both in America and in Europe? Further, in cases where there has been a falling off in the typhoid death rate, the failure to secure an accompanying improvement in general health conditions, which follows so closely in communities supplied by water filtered in accordance with the more conservative principles, may be due to the introduction of some of these not thoroughly tried processes. Some day full information may be available as to the influence of these methods of plant operation on the health of the community. Until that time, is it not a much better policy to follow the principles which have been proven by many years of experience to produce safe results, and to make the foremost object the improvement of the methods of operation in accordance with these established truths?

There is opportunity for the upbuilding of greater efficiency in the conduct of employees and in securing the maximum output, by establishing more comfortable and healthful conditions than usually exist. The elimination of political influence from municipal service is also a task which challenges the people of to-day, and the operating and managing engineer is in a position to perform an important part in accomplishing this end. The number of employees can be reduced to those actually needed, and the way opened for the employment of men who thoroughly understand the necessities of honesty and efficiency in the conduct of public affairs. It should be remembered that to design and construct well is only half the job; to operate economically and efficiently is even more of a problem than to build, and requires just as good talent, just as keen appreciation of the various problems, and is even more essential to public welfare. It seems to the writer that the logical development of the art of obtaining economy as well as efficiency should be along these lines, rather than to revolutionize methods, without having a long-period test of their value, and at the same time allow political influences to control, to a large extent, the labor item.

_Preliminary Treatment._--The decision as to the preliminary treatment of the Potomac River water before filtration is of interest, particularly because various other conclusions have been reached in different sections of the country. However, in the main, these decisions have been due to differences in the character of the waters, but it must be evident that they have sometimes been the result of ill-considered action, or the desire to promote some special interest. The use of preliminary filters, which involves a large investment, is not always to be commended, particularly because at times of reasonably good water the removal of some of the organic matter is really injurious and lessens the effect of the final filters.

For a long time, the writer has believed that, where other things are equal, and where there is no important reason for double or preliminary filtration, long periods of storage, accompanied by the use of coagulant at times of severe and extreme muddiness, as planned at Washington, solves the problem in the most practical and economical way. It is true that the investment for a large storage basin may equal, or even exceed, that required for preliminary filters; but the influence of storage on the quality of raw water is never injurious, and, by ripening the condition of the water, may be greatly beneficial in the process of filtration.

The storage available in such a basin makes it possible to shut off the supply from the river during the worst conditions of the water. The duration of the most troublesome spells ordinarily does not exceed a few days, and it is usually possible to secure sufficient capacity in the basin to tide over these periods. Then again, long periods of storage, in addition to assisting in breaking up organic matter, permit the dying out of bacteria, particularly many of the pathogenic kind, and, therefore, the water is rendered much safer from this standpoint. In other words, there is additional insurance in long storage against the faulty and careless operation of incompetent filter employees. The addition of coagulant, especially the fact that only a very small investment of capital is required for the necessary apparatus for dosing the water, and that the cost of the coagulating materials has to be met only when used, seems to give the process, in a most satisfactory manner, the requirement for economical management and thoroughness in preparing the water for final filtration.

_Parking Public Works._--It is disappointing that the author has not mentioned some of the steps contemplated in reference to the landscape treatment of the Washington filtration area. Probably every one has been impressed by the barren aspect of the works as they are approached, and as one looks over them. Recently, however, it is stated that some steps have been taken to lay out the grounds, treat the surface in an attractive manner, and make a park of the area. The writer has a firm opinion that when an investment is made for public works, it costs but little in addition to construct buildings along appropriate architectural lines, to treat the grounds in a pleasing manner, and to make the entire works a credit to the municipality from an artistic standpoint. When treated on broad lines, such areas become public parks, and afford open breathing places for the residents, and, if near centers of population, may well be equipped with playground facilities for the children. When thus developed they should have care, that the planting and equipment should not deteriorate and the last state become worse than the first.

The influence which these ever-present examples of attractiveness have on the community is becoming better recognized by students of social progress, and there seems to be no doubt that spending money on such features is not only desirable from the artistic standpoint, but is justified on practical grounds as well. It is cheaper than to create parks, when necessity and demand can no longer be resisted, by buying property and occasionally tearing down buildings and constructing _de novo._ That this work is now being done in Washington, even after construction, is certainly a recognition of the advisability of original efforts in this direction.

~George C. Whipple, M. Am. Soc. C. E.~ (by letter).--Mr. Hardy's paper is an excellent presentation of the results of the operation of the Washington water filtration plant from the time of its construction in 1905 until June, 1910. Papers of this character are altogether too infrequent, and the actual results from the filters now in use are not readily accessible in detailed form. Yet it is only by studying the results obtained by filters in actual use that improvements can be made and the art advanced.

Among the many important facts brought out by Mr. Hardy, only a few can be selected for discussion. One of these is the operation of filters under winter conditions. It is well known that the efficiency of sedimentation basins and filters is lower during winter than at other times, yet it is just at this season of the year that there is the greatest danger of typhoid fever and similar water-borne diseases being transmitted by water. Most of the great typhoid epidemics have occurred during cold weather, and the very use of the term "winter cholera" is of significance. Apparently, typhoid bacilli and similar bacteria are capable of living and retaining their vitality longest during that season of the year. Just why this is so, bacteriologists have not satisfactorily explained. Doubtless many factors are involved. Because of the increased viscosity of the water, sedimentation takes place less readily at lower temperatures, and inasmuch as sand filtration is partly dependent on sedimentation, the efficiency tends to fall off in cold weather. During winter some of the external destroying agencies are less potent, such as the sterilizing effect of sunlight, and the presence and activity of some of the larger forms of microscopic organisms which prey on the bacteria. Another factor may be the greater amount of dissolved oxygen normally present in water during cold weather, as experiments have shown that dissolved oxygen favors longevity.

Still another reason for the larger numbers of bacteria that pass through a water filter during cold weather may be the effect that the low temperature has on the size of the bacteria themselves. A few experiments made recently by the writer appear to indicate that at low temperatures the gelatinous membrane which surrounds the bacterial cells tends to become somewhat contracted, thus decreasing the apparent size of the bacteria as seen under the microscope. Either this contraction occurs, or the cells themselves are smaller when they develop in the cold. It is possible also that low temperature affects the flagella of the organisms in the same way. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the effect of low temperature is to form what may be, in effect, a protective coating around the cells, which tends to make them smaller, less sticky, and less subject to outside influences. This would tend to make them pass through a filter more readily. In line with this idea also is the well-known fact that disinfection is less efficient in cold water than in warm water.

Another way of viewing the matter is that cold retards the growth of bacteria on the filter, thus reducing the effect of the _Schmutzdecke_. Still another view of the greater danger from bacterial contamination in winter is the theory that cold prolongs the life of the bacteria by merely preventing them from living through their life cycle and reaching natural old age and death as rapidly as in warm weather.

Another topic in Mr. Hardy's paper which has interested the writer is that of preliminary filters. The experiments described at length indicate clearly that such devices would prove of little or no benefit under the conditions existing in Washington, and that when the river contains considerable amounts of suspended clay nothing less than chemical coagulation will suffice to treat the water so that the effluent will be perfectly clear. Preliminary filters have been used for a number of years at various places and with varying success. In few instances have they been operated for a sufficient length of time or been studied with sufficient care to determine fully their economy and efficiency as compared with other possible methods of preliminary treatment.

Among other experiments on this matter are those made at Albany, N. Y., and published by Wallace Greenalch, Assoc. M. Am. Soc. C. E., in the Fifty-ninth Annual Report of the Bureau of Water for the year ending September 30th, 1909. The Hudson River water used at Albany is quite different in character from the Potomac River water used at Washington, as it is less turbid and contains rather more organic matter. The results obtained in these experiments showed that during the summer the number of bacteria in the effluent from the experimental sand filter used in connection with a preliminary filter did not differ widely from the number found in the effluent of the city filter where there was no other preliminary treatment than sedimentation. In the winter, however, the numbers of bacteria did not increase in the effluent from the experimental filter as they did in the effluent from the city filter. This is shown by Table 26, taken from the report mentioned.

Apparently, therefore, at Albany the benefits of the preliminary filter, as far as bacterial efficiency is concerned, would be confined to a short period of three or four months in each year. Under such circumstances it may well be questioned whether the advantages of preliminary filtration justify its cost.

~Table 26--Results of Experiments with
Preliminary Filter at Albany, N. Y.~
==========+==========+==========+============+=============
Month, | Bacteria | Bacteria | Bacteria in|Bacteria in
1906. | in raw | in pre- | effluent | effluent
| water. | liminary | from | from
| | filter |experimental|city filter.
| | effluent.|sand filter.|
----------+----------+----------+------------+-------------
March | 133,480 | 36,000 | 151 | 706
April | 77,420 | 4,810 | 72 | 155
May | 15,800 | 2,250 | 48 | 37
June | 4,520 | 358 | 38 | 34
July | 2,090 | 163 | 25 | 22
August | 2,740 | 121 | 36 | 22
September | 8,280 | 445 | 20 | 24
October | 38,350 | 4,235 | 67 | 227
November | 67,910 | 15,570 | 337 | 341
December | 645,500 | 25,440 | 144 | 2,783
----------+----------+----------+------------+-------------
1907. | | | |
January | 127,560 | 4,660 | 48 | 443
February | 28,000 | 1,800 | 13 | 116
==========+==========+==========+============+=============

On the diagram, Figure 11, will be found various data taken from the published records of the Albany filter, from 1899 to 1909. These data include: The numbers of bacteria before and after filtration; the percentage of bacteria remaining in the effluent; the average quantity of water filtered, in millions of gallons per day; the quantities of water filtered between scrapings; the turbidity of the raw water; the cost of filtration, including capital charges and cost of operation; and the typhoid death rates of the city per month. Several points are brought out conspicuously by this diagram. One is the uniformly low death rate from typhoid throughout the entire period. The filter was operated from 1899 until the fall of 1907 with raw water taken from what is known as the "Back Channel." Since then it has been taken from a new intake which extends into the Hudson River itself. Until the fall of 1908 the preliminary treatment consisted merely of sedimentation, but since then the water has received an additional preliminary treatment in mechanical filters operated without coagulant, along the lines of the experiments just mentioned. During this time the average rate of filtration of the sand filter has not changed materially, although it is said that the maximum rate has been increased since the preliminary filters were put in service. The study of the bacteriological analyses shows that the best results were obtained during 1902, 1903, and 1904. Since then the numbers of bacteria in both the raw and filtered water have increased. This was especially noticeable during the winters of 1907 and 1908 when the water was taken from the new intake. It will be interesting to compare the results after the preliminary filters have been operated for a long period to ascertain their normal effect on efficiency and on the increased yield.

Another fact to be drawn from the plotted Albany data is the increase in the cost of filtration, both in capital charges and in operation. From 1899 until 1906 the cost of operation, including the cost of low-lift pumping, was approximately $5 per million gallons of water filtered; and the total cost of filtration, including capital charges, was about $10 per million gallons. During the year ending September 30th, 1909, the cost of operation had increased to $7.63 per million gallons, and the total cost of filtration to $15.92 per million gallons, or approximately 50% in three years.

~Table 27--Results of Bacteriological Analyses of Samples of
Water at Peekskill, N. Y., Before and After Filtration.~

~Bacteria per cubic centimeter.~
==============+=======+=======+========+========+========+========+========
| Raw | Clear |Effluent|Effluent|Effluent|Effluent| Tap in
Date. | water.| reser-| No. 1. | No. 2. | No. 3. | No. 4. | city.
| | voir.| | | | |
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
1909.
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
December 29th | 190 | 100 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ...
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
1910.
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
February 15th | 135 | 10 | 10 | 30 | 20 | ... | 265
March 31st | 225 | 50 | 25 | 45 | 60 | ... | 35
May 18th | 300 | 29 | 22 | 26 | 35 | 43 | 36
July 6th | 300 | 44 | 9 | 3 | 41 | 10 | 31
August 16th | 60 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 13 | 15
October 3d | 550 | 14 | 12 | 14 | 38 | ... | ...
November 21st | 315 | 22 | 26 | 17 | 6 | ... | ...
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
1911.
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
January 25th | 415 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 6 | ... | 7
--------------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
Average | 277 | 30 | 14 | 16 | 26 | 22 | 65
==============+=======+=======+========+========+========+========+========

~Table 17~--(_Continued._)
~Tests for~ _B. Coli._
==================+======================
|~Percentage of Samples
Quantity of water |Containing~ _B. Coli_.
tested. +--------+-------------
| Raw. | Filtered.
------------------+--------+-------------
0.1 cu. cm. | 0 | 0
1.0 cu. cm. | 20 | 0
10.0 cu. cm. | 40 | 0
==================+========+=============

As a matter of record, the results of a series of analyses made at Peekskill, N. Y., during 1910 are presented in Table 27. A sand filter was constructed for the water supply of this city in 1909, and put in operation in December. The filter has a capacity of 4,000,000 gal. per day. The supply is taken from Peekskill Creek, and the water receives about one week's nominal storage before flowing to the filters. An aerator is used before filtration during the summer, when algae are likely to develop in the reservoir. The filter was installed after an epidemic of typhoid which was apparently caused by an infection of the water supply. Normally, the water has been little contaminated, but the supply is subject to accidental contamination at any time, among other possible sources of infection being the camps of workmen now engaged in constructing the Catskill Aqueduct for New York City.

~Table 28--Average Results of Chemical Analysis at Peekskill,
N. Y., Made at Intervals of Six Weeks During 1910.~
=====================+=================+================+=================
| ~Parts per | | ~Parts per
| Million.~ | | Million.~
|--------+--------| |--------+--------
| Raw |Filtered| | Raw |Filtered
| water. | water. | | water. | water.
---------------------+--------+--------+----------------+--------+--------
Turbidity | 2. | 0 |Total residue | 70. | 76.00
Color | 25. | 20. |Loss on ignition| 19.00 | 17.00
Nitrogen as albumi- | | |Fixed residue | 50.00 | 59.00
noid ammonia | 0.112 | 0.076 |Iron | 0.17 | 0.13
Nitrogen as free | | |Total hardness | 38.70 | 45.10
ammonia | 0.024 | 0.006 |Alkalinity | 33.90 | 42.60
Nitrogen as nitrites | 0.001 | 0.001 |Incrustants | 4.60 | 4.50
Nitrogen as nitrates | 0.06 | 0.06 |Chlorine | 2.60 | 2.70
=====================+========+========+================+========+========

~F. F. Longley, Assoc. M. Am. Soc. C. E.~ (by letter).--In this paper the author has presented a mass of data which will be welcomed by engineers engaged in water purification work, because complete operating records form a substantial basis for improvement in the art, and are often the inspiration for interesting discussions and the exchange of experiences of different observers whose views are mutually appreciated.

Recent tendencies in filtration engineering have been largely in the direction of reducing the cost of operation. A comparison of the operating costs of the earlier American plants of about a decade ago, with those here presented of the Washington plant, is very gratifying to those who have been intimately connected with the latter work. Through perfection in design and reasonable care in operation, the cost of filter cleaning, which is a very considerable part of the total cost, has been reduced to an unusually low figure, without any sacrifice in efficiency, and in the interests of the public health.

Table 14 shows that, from the first year, there has been a progressive increase in the total cost of operation per million gallons filtered, but this has not meant an increase in the annual total expenditure. The largest percentage of increase in any item has been in "Care of Grounds and Parking," and covers much-desired landscape improvements. Aside from this, the principal factor affecting the table of costs has been the reduction in water consumption in the District of Columbia. Nothing pertaining to this reduction has produced any corresponding reduction in the force required for the maintenance and operation of the filtration plant, office and laboratory, and pumping station, though probably there has been some reduction in filter cleaning. Obviously, then, the total cost per million gallons would increase.

This decrease in consumption has been brought about by the elimination of waste in the distribution system, which is not in the same department as the filtration plant, but with regard to which a word may not be amiss in connection with this discussion.

The Washington Aqueduct was built half a century ago on lines which at that time were considered extraordinarily generous. Until recently, therefore, there has been no occasion for concern over the high rate of consumption. During recent years, however, the use and waste of water have increased, reaching a climax under unusual conditions in the winter of 1904-05. The maximum capacity of the aqueduct system is about 90,000,000 gal. The maximum daily consumption at the time mentioned arose almost to 100,000,000 gal., with the result that, before normal conditions were restored, the reservoirs of the system were almost depleted.

This had a beneficial effect, as provision was made for an active campaign for reducing the waste of water, which was known to be very large. These investigations, using the pitometer, were begun in July, 1906, and have been pursued continuously since that time, with most excellent results. Up to January, 1909, leaks aggregating about 12,000,000 gal. per day were detected and eliminated, and about half the house services had still to be covered by the pitometer bureau.

Although this reduction in waste has brought about an apparent increase in the cost of filtration, its economical results have been far-reaching. The causes which brought about this investigation also resulted in securing an appropriation for the study of the question of increased supply. The writer was in charge of these studies, and the most significant conclusion was that, owing to the excellent results of the efforts for waste restriction, the total consumption and waste of water in the district during the next few years would be far enough below the safe working capacity of the existing aqueduct system to make it entirely safe to postpone the construction of new works, involving the expenditure of several million dollars, in spite of the threatening conditions of a few years ago.

There has been so much controversy over typhoid fever in the District of Columbia that the writer hesitates to discuss this subject. Viewing the situation through the perspective of several years, however, it does not seem to be as hopeless as the criticisms of four or five years ago would lead one to believe.

In Table 9, showing the typhoid death rates, out of nine years given prior to 1905-06, when the filters were started in operation, only one shows an annual death rate as low as the highest one since that year. Further than this, the annual average typhoid death rate for the period since that year has been one-third lower than for a corresponding period before the filters were started.

The exhaustive researches of the Public Health and Marine Hospital Service into this whole question, covering a period of about four years, have raised the present filtered water supply of the District of Columbia above any well-founded criticism. There has long been a strong and growing feeling that the water supply, before filtration was introduced, had been blamed for more than its share of the typhoid, and this is borne out by much evidence that has been presented from time to time.

Comments

Log in to leave a comment.