"'T.‘~"‘"°""“~"':"W‘-‘ ' ""~W"‘“"° WWW‘TWVT '7"“~‘fi"“- ' "v“
. . Q . ' I , . ‘ v’. _ ~ . ‘I' ' r v
' O

       

. . . . 0
I

 

             

 

 

     

   

 

 

 

" AI
‘- I I , .t'
V‘ > "t
' '0.
‘ ' I I
I v , II;
' .‘
. ‘ _ v.
' ' ovo“ ll.v.0r,;’.o r..;'.'.0_'-.\ ...."“Q. '.
" o o v-
. o o O A .
‘ Ont. ... ..,'...' 'I‘Ov , '
I . '..' ' ‘ _
.- v 0- l
' u, . ". . ,
’. .I .. I ‘ ' u ,‘ ..
' .. ‘ I. ,
' a . . . .
0 _ 'V . I '
. o . . ._ .
. . .
4.. .. .',. I
.
' . . . V . .
. 0 ' _‘ I I
. , ..
0, - v ‘ .
I . ' .
v ‘ .
'1
a o . . - I .
. ' . ' .
.
. -
. r .
I
. I . '.
.. . >
. l ._
. ... .
I. ' I
. ' I.I r
I I 0
'~ ' I
\ . ' Io.
- , . .
. ' " ' . _‘ o
. ,‘ . . .
. . .
' - v.. 'o- " I . . - ., I ‘
' . . n 'I I" u . , v
. O b '. o
.. A. .
a - . o
I I,. "l ' .
. . '-- . 7. ,, '
, l . v , ‘ I-‘I"1.. '. . . .
II V. . .'
' ' , " 1-H ‘ '(. t ‘
- I ’ ' . -o ‘
. . 3?} I. ‘.'l l.r,'
. ' ‘I ,II ‘ _,' . _ - .
' ‘I. . 0". A“ | .‘ .‘
a I ’I .
. "'qu‘ ’ ‘.p -
.I u I , .
' ' . II. .' . I '
t " I
l "I
I ‘ ’ . I
. .
' 0' I
O
I ‘ ‘ .Vv
. , . .
. ' ' O _ ' .
. Q
'l I o
I . I I
I . I I I
' v
u I O. I
. - v .
I
. I
' 0
‘0
V II ‘
. , .
I. _ . -,
. H
. I
J. I . .
I v .\
. . v .
t .I
Q.
' €
. '.
- l
l I
I
‘
. .
.
V I
.
t
.
. I. ._. 1
I ‘.
0.
.
.
. I . §
. I ~
I O
.
.
. , .
>
I
. . . .
I. I
I . .
. ' ' .I
. I
. - I
. . . v , I -
. . , -
I . . . I , . -
. _ I ' _ ' ' -. . . ..
. - . .
_ . . .. .
. . .
c . |
. I . .
. ' ' I I -.
a . . _ ‘
I
' . ' I ' I o. ‘
'I . - a . .
‘ i ' I. ’ . ‘-. o .
. . .‘
‘ ‘ I.
I I . . ‘
. .. . ,. I
u A O - I I I
. . .
I ... .. _ . 7
..
.I. . . ‘ I - . .‘l-
I l .' "‘ . . ‘ .5. .
. I _ I ‘. ..
I . - O 0'
. . . . .... . . .. . - n .
l . ' _. .. I u - ‘ .
‘ . .' ‘ . ' ' 1‘ ' .~I" '
O s , . . . - . '-o' o g:
. ' .‘ ' ‘ v... . . 0 ~
. . I ' D Q I
' ' “ . . A. . l
I I I I. o ..
O ' b . l o
. O ‘ > .‘ D... o ‘-I I I I
'l‘ ' . l-‘. O- ' I ‘ ‘ " v
, “ . ' g ‘ ... h ‘ In 0"'| '. " -
. .‘ I. . I .' 0 'I. ‘ "a ‘ .0
., n I .. I ' ‘Q
. 0 I I Q. !~. . I o
. "' - .‘ ' O .. . '.
..... ~ ‘ . . '0‘. . ....a. .‘. ‘
t ' t ' . r . .Io. . .‘. .
. . . . -
' o v. .
. . ~ ., ‘ ... ." '.,. ..‘
. ’ . -‘ 'C- ‘ <6“ -
" . ‘ .... Ion”. . .
' “ ‘0 .. . a .
a ’ I .

   

n n

.2. no.» “,

 

 

 

 

 

A COMPARISON OF THE
EAST LANSII‘IG, MICHIGAN
ZEOLITE WATER TREATMENI PLANTS

 

N’-

 

A Comparison of the
East Lansing, Michigan

Zeolite water Treatment Plants

A Thesis Submitted to

The Faculty of
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
of
AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE

by

Nils Reinhold Hammarskjold
N
Candidate for the Degree of

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

June l9hl

3&3

“he

(Jr II. ’1‘; /

 

MW.

PREFACE

This comparison of the two water treatment plants was
undertaken for two reasons. They were (1) a desire to aid,
in some small way, the City of East Lansing in its efforts
to supply a pure and soft water to the consumers more
effeciently and economically than before, and (2) a means
by which the author could, on his own, solve some of the
problems encountered in the zeolite type of water softening
plant.

If this thesis should add one grain of knowledge to the
everemounting heap being built, it will not have failed in
its purpose. Of necessity, the whole field of water-
softening in East Lansing could not be covered in any great
detail, due to the limited time available.

The author is greatly indebted to Professor Frank R.
Theroux for the valuable aid and counsel which was freely
given, and is also grateful to the officials of the City of
East Lansing for their cooperation and permission to carry

out the necessary tests in the water plants.

N. R. H.

East Lansing, Michigan
may, 1941

Preface

General

Pumping
7.

8.

9.

10.

ll.

12.

Contents

Part I

Considerations.

Early Water Supplies ————————————
Present Water Supplies -----------
Growth of East Lansing : ----------
Past Water Demands -------------

Future Water Demands ____________

Adequacy of Design _____________

Part II
Effecioncy'Tosts
Introduction - - ——————————————
Notes on Electric Meters - — l — — — _ _ _ -
East Plant - Pump #1 Tests —————————
East Plant - Pump #2 Tests ---------
West Plant - Pump Tests ——————————

Summary of Tests --------------

\OO\\J'|\»Jl-‘

12

13
13
1h
18
22

29

Part III

Power Consumption

13.
1h.
15.
16.
17.

Electric Rate Scheduals — - - -v -------
East Plant - Pump #1 ____________

East Plant - Pump #2 ____________
West Plant -----------------

Summary of Tests - - —- __________

Part IV

Salt Consumption

18. Introduction ________________
19. East Plant - Well #1 ____________
20. East Plant - Well #2 ____________
21. West Plant _________________
22. Summary of Tests _______________
23. Notes on a Brine Well - _ - _ ________
Part V
Chemical Composition
2h. Uses of Chemicals ______________
25. Caustic Soda Used ______________
26. Potassium.Permangonate Used _ _ __ _ _,- _ _
27 . Summary of Costs ______________

30
31
33

35
36

39
Al
A2
1+3
at
46

48
A8
49
A9

Part VI

Page
Cost of Treatment
28. Fixed Charges -------------- 51
29. Labor Charges -------------- 51
30. Miscellaneous -------------- 52
31. Conclusions -------------- 52

Bibliography

Appendix

List of Illustrations

Figure Before Page

1.

A.

Curves for Estimating Per Capita

Water Consumption -------------- 9

East Lansing, Kichigan - Prediction

of Future Water Consumption --------- 10

Portion of East Plant Flow Chart ------- 19

Method of Finding Height of Lift

In 8. “fell --------------- 23

l.

A Comparison 9}: the

East Lansing, Michigan

 

 

Zeolite Water Treatment Plants
Part I
General Considerations

1. Early Water Supplies. The first well of which we have

 

any records” seems to be a drilled well, 6 inches diameter
and 362 feet deep. It was located between Grand River and
Oakhill Avenues. Water was more than ampleforthe needs of
that time, as in November, 1909, the well was pumped only
an average of five hours a day.

The well was first put into operation on October 20,
1909 and it was noted that the drawdown was very little, 1?
feet being measured once. No well log was kept at the time
of drilling, and no exhaustibility tests were thought
necessary. Knecht and McKenna, in their investigation*,
wanted to make a 2A hour drawdown test, but were not granted
permission to do so by the city officials. They were

forced to conclude that the supply was inexhaustible because

*
Knehht,J. W., and MCKenna, P. G., "An Investigation of the
Water Supply of East Lansing, Michigan", pp. 1-8
unpublished B. S. Thesis, M. S. G., 1910.

2.

of the little drawdown, andthe high level of the water
maintained in the well.

This 6 inch well was pumped by a gasoline driven double-
acting reciprocating pump, with a 5 inch by 12 inch cylinder.
On a capacity test run by Knecht and MCKenna, the pump
delivered 63 g.p.m., with a pump and motor effeciency of
hl.h percent. Cost of water delivered was 5.03 cents per
1,000 gallons, with electric rate for the motor at 0.5 cents
per K.W}H. This well serviced 90 connections, of which 60
were metered.

In addition to the city-owned supply just described,
we also find mention of the water system.known only as
'"Chase's", which was connected to 25 residences. Only two
connections were not metered. The well was 3 inch bored, and
was 80 feet deep. The maximum rate it could be pumped was
60 g.p.m., but the electric motor and pump were capable of
delivering only #0 g.p.m. The Chase system.was worth about
$1,750. 'Water cost was 6 cents per 1,000 gallons. h .
Chase, in an estimate, stated that the average rate of use
was 6,000 - 7,000 per connection per month. An emergency
.connection existed between Chase's supply system and the city
mains. No mention can be found of the final fate of Chase's
system, but it must have been taken over by the city later on.

The next time reference is made to the city well, was

in 1923 in an investigation by L. M; Z. Van NoppenJ* The

* Van Noppen, L. M. Z., "An Analysis of East Lansing's
Water Supply System, and Recommendations for Enlargement.",
pp. 1-2, unpublished B. S. Thesis, M; S. G., 1923

drawdown was now at least 30 feet, as evidenced by the failure
of a hand pump to work. The reciprocating pump was still
on the job, driven by an electric motor. An auxiliary gas-
engine was also ready at all times to stand by in case of
power being shut Eff. The pump was in operation 2A hours a
day, and delivered a maximum of 125 g.p.m. The elevated
tank of 10,000 gallon capacity had to be filled every other
day from the college supply. Things were in a critical A
state, and the city was not "getting by", as they had to
depend on the college for help in supplying enough water.
Evidently something was done about the situation quickly,
because in 1925, three wells were in existence. The original
6 inch well, which now delivered only 60 g.p.m. was being
used as a standby only. Miller and Slack* mention a new
dwell on the site of the old well. They state that it was
12 inch diameter, 450 feet deep, and operated by a 9 3/A
inch Downie deep well pump at a rate of 250 g.p.m. This is
still standing, but not operated.
Another well was drilled at this same time (1925) on
the site of the present East plant, on Orchard Street. It
is a 12 inch well, A20 feet deep, and was operated by a 10
inch American well Pump at 250 g.p.m.

2. Present Water Supplies. The three wells mentioned

* Miller, C. H., and Slack, P. H., "East Lansing's Fire
Protection", pp. 1 - 2, unpublished B. S. Thesis, M. S. C.

in the previous article ( the 6 inch and 12 inch at Oakhill
Street, and the 12 inch at Orchard Street) served the city
until 1935 very adequately. When the new softening plant
was put up at Chittenden Drive and Orchard Street, the
American well pump which had been in service since 1925 was
replaced by a Byron Jackson deep well turbine pump. This
pump (now called Pump #1) is located inside the present East
treatment plant.

The two wells at the Oakhill plant were discontinued.

To replace them, another well was drilled in 1935 at the

same time the treatment plant was constructed. This well
draws from about the same water vein as does the Well #1.
The rock samppes encountered in the drilling are to be seen
hanging just inside the East plant front door. From these,
the character ofthe substrate may be studied for future plant
extensions.

This well (called # 2 in the records) is located in the
street circle at the intersection of Beech and Orchard
Streets. The driving unit is aTE.P. Induction motor operating
at 1,765 r.p.m. Rate of delivery may be adjusted by means of
a nut at the top of the impeller shaft. Delivery is by means
of a 12 inch main to the East plant, underground. The well
is a 12 inch diameter, and is 392 feet deep.

Before the West treatment plant, out on Saginaw Street
near Grand River, was built, it was necessary to secure a
well which would deliver the water necessary. Quite a bit of

difficulty was encountered, and the only way the yeild could

5.

be increased was to dynamite the well. This was quite
succesful, but the well is still a little short of good on
delivery.

The West well, put into service late in 1939, is pumped
by a Layne well pump (deep well turbine), and is powered
with a 50 H.P. Induction motor, operating at 1,770 r.p.m.
The well is AlO feet deep, and 12 inches in diameter.

3. Growth of East LansingL To be able to predict closely

 

what the life of a water supply system.should be, it is
necessary to determine what the future water demands will
be. Population growth trends must be studied closely, and
then future approximations made,with that as a basis.

East Lansing is a hard city to do this with, because
the population is dependent upon two variables: (1) the
growth of the city itself, due to the influences from
Lansing industries, and the proximity ofthe college, and
(2) the growth of the college, with an increased number of
students living "off campus" in faternity houses, sororities,
and rooming houses as a natural result.

The men and women housing directors for the college,
(Mr. Ron Heath and Miss Mabel Petersen, respectively), were
consulted for approximate figures on the number of men and
women students living off-campus. The women have numbered
from 211 in 193# to a high of only 3A3 in 1939, as the
college building program.has kept pace with the increased

enrollment of women, Men numbered about 500 in the

faternity houses, while an additional 1,700 to 2,200 live
in rooming houses. A recent estimate is 250 women, 500 men
in faternities, and 1,700 men in private homes, giving a
total of 2,450.

Figure 2 shows the population trends. The "U. S. Census"
figures are plotted. The dotted line above, called "U. S.
Census and Assumed College Off-Campus Students" shows the
total consuming population. This, of course, is only an
estimate, and it should not be used too closely, even though
it gives good results. The prediction of "Water Users" is
quite conservative. The tendency always is to over-estimate
when drawing such a line, and this has been corrected for
over-zealous estimation. Future records will determine the

accuracy of this prediction.

A. Past Water Demands. In order to predict with any

 

degree of accuracy the future demands of East Lansing, it

is first necessary to dig into all the old available records
to find out what the past water demands have been. Such
data was very scaree, and it was found necessary to depend
upon three previous theses (listed in the footnotes for the
.previous pages) for data. The accuracy is limited, as the
authors of these theses depended upon estimates for the
larger part. Their estimates have weight, though, because
they each were in close contact with the operators of the
plant back in 1910, 1923 and 1925 respectively.

Computations follow for each period:

 

City‘Well
Pumped average of 19,000 ga1./day
Chase's Well

Estimate of 6,500 gal./connection/mon.
for 25 connections.

Total

1 2 :

Pumped 2A hours a day
@ 125 g.p.m. I 180,000 g.p.d.

Add 15 tank fillings @ 10,000 gal.

Total

1925: (Based on Data gathered in 1923)

 

Pumped 240,000 g.p.d.

7.

- 570,000 ga1./
mon O

- 160,000 ga1./
mon.

-- 830,000 ga177
mon.

. 5,100,000
. 150,000
= 5,550,000

=- 6,019,000

ga1./
men.

8810/
mono

gal./
mon.

Since the operation of the East plant, meter reading

records have been kept, and the totals follow:

Table I

'Water Metered from.Plant
(Thousands of Gallons)

Total Percent
Year for Year of 1935
1936 125,050 100
1936 161,920 128
1937 148.400 119
1938 179,190 1&3
1939 204,970 16A
l9h0* 219,hl6 175

* both East and West Plants operating.

Monthly
Average

11,368

13,h93
12,367

1A,993
17,061
18,285

8.

If we take these monthly averages and divide them by 30
times the estimated population, we obtain the consumption of
water in gallons per cdpitdper day. We do this so that we
may plot in Figure 1 the corresponding values of (ey- ga1./
cdp./day) and p = population in thousands, to find the

equation of a curve for East Lansing.

 

 

1210 .
(P = 0.85) gggégggb 32.5 gal./cap./day
.1232 5,550,000
(P 3 14-01-39) 30 X [+139 - [13.5 gale/CQPo/day
1925
00
(P - 1.639) 3503:3633 43.5 ga1./cap./day

181285,000
30 x 8306

 

(P 73.1 gal./0dp./day.
After plotting these values of G and P on logarithmic
graph paper in Figure 1, we draw two curves which may apply.
The long dashed curve G I 13.5 130'779 considers the
1923, 1925, and 19A0 values as cnrrect, but gives us a curve
which is way too high. The heavy lined curve G = 3A.1 P0353
considers the 1910 and 1940 values as indicative of the trend,
and gives a more reasonable curve.
C. H. Capen, Jr., in his studies* of water consumption

in American cities found that two curves seem.to apply. They‘

* C en, C.H.

Jr., Jour. A.W.W.A., Vol. XXIX, No. 2, p. 201,
Fe ruary, 1937

u m...

 

. -. t ZVLQEMVWW_

IV .VOVURI.

889.18.. a

 

 

Q N Catt-QWNVQQN CV CQVXQ\DOVQQV

.0

-0498.- ..- 0.3 001.38.96“ 9.0 0V... . ....

NMVV {1.03.388
.3013 .‘N .2. «xix Von
‘-<.1:1<.u‘\d°\1 \n“. wt-qau .IV ‘

 

.Lxfl\u.\u.n. ”$00313. .

 

881.330 whammy .

I‘l‘III-Il)

FVXO$OE1 thtIxoVfixoM) MVVG Q NW. KG .2

. M w 5030.33... . .
- .. . onouvswV-nglz . Q. an 0 t

“‘51..
..?M.V...P\ John .... s. _ lithvbamu.-. W1...m.\ REV. -

USPR 0582.3. V901... 0.3%. V--.8.0.... 0

 

\.

0
D/xo’o) 452d $U0//0£)

99V

.3333 3 3 3 _ -3

—‘—

:2 50/17 19d

9

9.

have been plotted on the same paper as the East Lansing values,
and show good resemblances. The East Lansing curve G =

3h.l PO'353 is a trifle high, and probably should be corrected
so that a line parallel to G =.54 P 0°125 would pass

through the l9hO plotted point. This would give a more con—
servative value, which is in keeping with the non-industrial

character of the city.

5. Future Water Demands. Figure 2 is then related to

 

Figure l in the prediction of future water consumption, we
are able to note. Average Mbnthly consumption aalues for
1910, 1923, 1925 and Table I are plotted in a "water demand
curve", on Figure 2. Prediction based on G = 3A.l P 0°353
is made by converting the population curve values (given in
Figure 2) by means of the curve in Figure l to gallons per
capita per day values, (G), and then multiplying them out so
as to be in terms of monthly averages.

Table II shows some interesting things concerning monthly
flow records. It was made up from the records kept since
1935, in an attempt to determine which months are the peak
months, and which are the more nearly average. July is by
far the heaviest month of all, the maximum of lh9.l percent
being recorded in 1939.

By means of this Table II, it is possible, by estimating
from.Figure 2 the millions of gallons average monthly

consumption for a definite year in the future, to predict

what the consumption for each month of that year will be.

{MI
7 .

 

RE

I
I
~ I
.-_ “all -_..._¢_.+_ -

Fun/25 I WA me QNSUMPTMN

 

Ml'chIEan;

 

I ‘55,.2 ‘7"
Lansiry +

I ‘Eeéo/c 770M

. !
15.4251‘

i

I

 

_ .5... 1.--.- . _-.__._... _.._1-

I
0...--.—

I!

-..._.

 

-_ m...

 

. ’----

--... .‘

....._---

 

 

I

may. {/94/ {

vI‘tlnItI'Il I

I
z

.......

I
o
I
I

——.—
l
. y . .
I
._.—......_~ *’.~T_.- _ _.-__.__._ ...
u .

'iI ‘Ii‘I. -1
h
.

. u

- _

. .

_ _

. _

. . .

. .

. .

. V

_ . .

_ _

. .

II II III I I» I I I

 

(CCQEDOCOD \..VV.\\CQX\ MWUKNSV. hoso\\00 KO

. . _ . . . . . . . . . . -

- I -II.-- II”. .IIIrIIIIIvI- II. I- II II.I I. f.
.

. o . 1 . . . . . . . .

«I.YOV\\.V\<

 

9
.7..-“ ..I.

l

.

.

l- ;

l.

“

 

I-

 

- I
- .-.. . - 4--....“ V....-...._.-. “"—I b
I
0 - I ' ' ' I h
I
I
-........ pi... - ._.

.....

I
I
. __-.-l-_l-1--
I
I
I
I
I
I

 

 

0

 

I970

'uau

L96 0

I
I.
I95 0

 

 

Yea r'

10.

Table II
Consumption of Water as Shown By

Ionthly Flow Records

1935 - 1940

Percent of Percent of
Month Monthly Average Mbnth MOnthly Average

Aver. Max. Min. Aver. max. Min.
Jan. 89.6 96.6 78.8 July* 132.1 139.1 112.3
Feb. 88.2 106.6 76.4 August*ll7.0 126.3 96.0
Mar. 91.h 110.0 80.6 Sept. 10h.2 122.0 88.7
April 87.8 102.8 79.0 Oct. 103.8 117.7 83.9
May 100.7 117.1 86.3 Név. 99.2 116.2 82.1
June 106.0 125.7 87.9 Dec. 95.6 113.0 78.3

* Indicates water by-passed in summers of 1938-39, due to high

sprinkling loads.

For instance, suppose we want to know what the
consumption in 1950 will be. Looking on Figure 2, we find
that the average monthly consumption will be 22,500,000
gallons. Then we may estimate that in January, we will
pump 89.6 percent, or 20,200,000 gallons, in February,

88.2 percent, or 19,820,000 gallons, and so on. It gives
us some sort of a yardstick by which we may guage our future
needs. The highest maximum ever encountered was 188.1 percent,

and this could be 33,750,000 gallons, which could ppssibly

 

occur during the year, especially in a summer with heavy
lawn sprinkling.
Table III, which follows, is really what we have been

striving for: a prediction of future water needs in East

ll.

Lansing. In brief, this is how it was made up:

(1)

(2)

(3)
(h)
(5)

It is for

to handle, and

Population for year desired is obtained from
the "Prediction odf water users" curve of
Figure 2.

This "P" i? looked up on the curve G =

36.1 P 0° 3 and a value of "G" obtained
from.Eigure 1.

This G times the population equals the total
daily demand.

The daily demand is multiplied by 30 to get
the average monthly demand.

This monthly demand is converted to maximym
possible demand by taking 150% for the
maximum.

this monthly maximum that we must be prepared

for which we shall check our plant capacities

Table III

Estimated Future Water Consumption

Item. 1940 1950 1960 1970
Estimated Population 8,300 9,700 11,000 12,500
G 3 3h.l P00353 gal./Cop/

day 73.1 77 8O 83
Tot. Daily Consump.
(Thous. of Gallons) 609 750 ‘ 880 1,000
Av. Monthly Consump.
(Thous. of Gallons) 18,285 22,500 26,600 30,000
Max. Monthly Consump.
(Thous. of Gallons)* 25,000 33,750 39,600 h5,000

* 0n the basis that the maximum - 150% of the monthly

average.

later in this thesis.

6. ,Adequacy of Design. The East water plant has a
maximum softening capacity of 1,000,000 g.p.d. using both
wells, with one throttled down to avoid over-running of the

A zeolite sand. The West plant has a softening capacity of
1,400,000 g.p.d., but the present well can supply only enough
To deliver 600,000 g.p.d. of softened water.

Therefore thepresent softening capacity is equal to.
1,600,000 g.p.d., or 48,000,000 g.p. month. This is enough
to take care of the average needs, but a protracted dry spell
will cause the plants to deliver not nearly anywhere the
needed quafifity.

, In 1940 summer months, the softening facilities were
severely taxed to supply the water needs. In 1941, there
will be even greater demands. To keep up with the demands,
the city should drill another well to utilize the West plant
to its full capacity. If this were done, the softening
rate could jump 50 percent, to a value of 2,400,000 g.p.d. or
77,000,000 g.p. month.

This should be fairly adequate up until 1950 to take care
of monthly demands, and most of the dry-spell runs on the
supply which could occur in the early fortmes. Difficulty
would be encountered, however, in the late forties, as a
' sufficient reserve could not be maintained, due to heavy

consumption.

13.

Part II

Pumping Efficiency Tests

7. Introduction. These tests are quite important to the

 

economical operation of a plant. The main purpose of the
tests is to determine with what efficiency the pumps are

converting electrical energy purchased to useful work in

pumping up water for the softening tanks to process.

If the efficiency of a pump is very much lower than the
rating guaranteed, then quite a bit of power is being wasted.
In the pressure type of zeoliye plant, power cost is a consid-
erable item, and should be kept as low as possible. It is to-
ward better efficiencies that we are looking, and we will
investigate what conditions exist in the present pumping

arrangements.

8. Notes on Electric Meters. This is a brief summary of
the use of the necessary formuage in making effeciency tests
on pumps.

K= Disc Constant of the meter

- Watt Hours per Revolution

_ (Rev./ secl_x 3600 sec./hour
(1,000 watts/KW

=3.8K -%-

Kilowatts

where R = Revolution
/ . time in seconds

ICoVJo - 1031;]. H.P.
Horsepower - (3.6) (1.341) Kkgk-

- [1.826 Ké

M1: the product ofthe current transformer ratio and the
potential transformer ratio. This is sometimes required in
the formula as KW a 3.6 KM;§ , but this is usually included
in the disc constant. Before using a K for any meter, it is
well to check on this fact of using Mlor not. Here at East

Lansing we do not use M separately.

9. East Plant - Pump #1 Tests. Several tests were made

 

on the pump, to determine as closely as possible the average
efficiency, for different conditions of flow.

As is the case in well #2 also, there is no means
provided for measurement of the distance down to the water
surface in the well column. From.previous tests run on this
well when there was an altitude tube abd guage, readings of
85 to 90 feet were encountered. We shall use 90 feet in these
tests, as the pump had been in operation long enough to
stabilize the drawdown reasonably well.

Electric meter—disc revolutions were counted, to determ-
ine the KW of current used, and then the actual Horsepower
used to raise the water, as compared with the theoretical.
Efficiency is equal to the theoretical H. P. divided by the

actual H. P.

Gage readings noted under computation of 'head are those

15.

taken fron the gage at the base of the pump.

Test results follow:

(a)

(b)

May 14, 1941 Test (all soften):
Electric Meter — 110 disc revolution in 778 seconds.~

R _ 110
71 " 778
Flow when all the tanks were softening was

760,000 g.p.d. This gives a pumping

760 000
Q = ‘ifijfi“' - 528 g.p.m.

Head Computations:

WEI]. " 55lg/Sqo in. X 2031 ft. = 127 ft.

Depth to water 90
Dynamic Head 217 ft.

Theor. H. P. Needed

 

_ (E’W'h 528 X 8.31). X 217 - 29.0 I'loP.
33,000 33.000 .

Actual H.P. = 4.826 KIE’ I 4.826 x 80 x-%%%-

- 54.6 H.P.

2 .0
Efficiency = ‘—§Ejg— - 53.0 %

May 15, 1941 Test (#3 Wash last half):
Electric Meter - 7O revolutions in 537 seconds

R : 7O

1‘ 537

Flow when all tanks softening (after 15 min. of

operation to stabilize drawdown) was 875,000 g.p.d.

8 4,000
This gives a pumping Q = Z340 : 607 g.p.m.

16.

Head Computations:

 

 

Well - 53#/sq. in. x 2.31 ft. = 122.5 ft.
Depth to Water 90
Dynamic Head 212.5 ft.
Theor. H. P. Needed
607 X 8'3“ X 212.5 - 32.6 H.P.
33,000
70
Actual H.P. = 4.826 x 80 x '337— = 50.3 H.P.
Efficiency = --%%f%— - 64.9%

This is rather high, and is probably due to the little
time ofoperation before making the test. Probably the

depth to water allowance was too great in this case.

(0) May 16, 1941 Test (#3 tank rfiéing):
Electric Meter - 70 disc revolutions in 556 seconds
R - 7O
1 556

Flow when all tanks were softening was 760,000 gp.d.

60
This gives a pumping Q = ‘Ziztggg— = 528 8.Pom.

Head Computations:

 

 

Well - 54#/sq. in x 2.31 ft. = 124.9 ft.
Depth to Water 90

Dynamic Head 214.9 ft.
Theor. H.P. . 528 X 8-34 X 2142 _

 

O
ho826 X 80 X Z56 ' 48.6 H.P.

3%g%%‘ = 59.0p

Actual H.P.

Efficiency

17.
(d) May 18, 1941 Test (all soften):

Electric Meter - 8O disc revolutions in 570 seconds

 

 

 

R = 80
f 570
Flow when all the tanks were softening was 750,000 g.p.
d.
. . 750.000
Th1 um in = = 20 . .m.
s g1ves a p p g Q 1440 5 8 P
Head Computaions :
Well - 55#/sq. in x 2.31 ft. = 127 ft.
Depth to Water 90
Dynamic Head , 217 ft.
Theor. H.P. Needed

33,000

Actnal H.P. = 4.826 x 80 x_%%0_ - 54.1 H.P.

' 28.5 3?
Effe01ency - .—___—_ ,6 %
54.1 53

Summarizing these effeciencies as follows:

 

 

Flow in g.p.m. Effeciency
520 52.6%
528 53.0%
528 59.0%
607 64.9%

We can see that there is alittle trend towards greater
effeciencies in the greater flows. The only way to prove this
would be to insefit a drop tube with an altitude gage and
connection for a tire pump so that the exact depth down to
water may bemeasured. 0n the basis of these four tests, we

may say that the average effeciency lies at about 54 percent,

18.

As this is a constant setting pump, the only way to
change the setting is to pull the whole well, which is quite
a lengthy and tiresome job. To make several different
settings, to determine the maximum pumping effeciency would
take several weeks, to get accurate results. The cost of
pulling the well might offset any power savings thich could
result.

' To compare the change which slight adjustments ofthe
height of the impeller vanes make on the effeciency of the
pump, note the results ofthe tests on Pump #2, which follow
this discussion.

If ever another power head were installed on this well,
it would be wise to make provision to obtain a motor which

is made so that impeller adjustments are possible.

 

10. East Plant_#2 Tests. It would be well to state briefly
how these tests were made. Pump # 2 is on the well north of
the plant, at Beech and Orchard Streets circle. By changing I

the setting of the bolt on the motor end of the impeller

shaft, it is possible to change the clearance between the fig

 

impeller vanes and the impeller bowls. By lowering the
vanes completely down so that they rest on the bowls, we can
obtain a starting point for the counting of the notches, as
we pull the impeller Vbneshigher up.

The smaller the clearance between the vanes and the
bowls(smaller corresponding number of notches up from.the

bottom) the greater the flow from.the well. Nine notches

 

 

 

.3 " ( ‘ &
‘,.-;,7) ‘3, y 1
. n I//// ’ ' _
' / 7K 9 gig/”fl 15:1 7"”
V ‘ 'l’l”;;5;.";lllll ////////

 

 

 

’F/Gy. 3-

PoeT/ON 0F [As-r pLANT f2 ow CHAz/

 

51,0n’1'ng e/fr‘cfs (f (hang/r79 m» "nice/Afr- guff/n‘g.

“M10552 4’:7C'é_Ié/\_/-/1\_/fr_ (goals; ‘ ‘

LIE — yif"!

\\\\\\\\\\ // ,4 ,,,_, ._.

\\\\\ ‘9 fi/Ine

I W’nh
-/5 L. _ 3A1] 58mm

j A// 50f fen

a_.>.

 

«-
~Jeq u¢“n( c

 

 

I
,3

 

 

19.

up will cause the pump to deliver more water than eleven or
sixteen, as we have tested.

There is an effeciency consideration to be dealt with
however. A pump setting of nine notches may delmver more
water than eleven, but may do so less cheaply or less
effeciently than does it under a smaller flow. It is to
determine roughly the relative pumping effeciencies that we
have tested the various settings. From these effeciency
values we may be able to judge approximately what pump setting
is best for use for long periods of time.

The electric meter disc revolutions were counted, as
this is the most accurate means we have of determining the
power consumed by the motor to pump the water. Each
revolution is 80 watt-hours of current.

The depth to water could not he measures exactly, as
there is no inside drop tube provided to test the altitude
in the well column. Readings ofprevious tests have been
used, and average 75 feet. The gage readings noted are those
which were read in theplant at the point of entering the
plant. The sum.of these two readings, converted into feet,
give the dynamic pumping head for the measured flow.

Test results are figured below:

(Note: All these tests were made on April 14, 1941

(a) Impeller Vane @ 16 notches up from.the bowl:
Electric meter - 10 disc revolutions in 64 seconds

mule
,z a?

 

(b)

20.

From April 14, 1941 chart, flow when all tanks

softening was 775,000 g.p.d. This gives a pumping

Q : ZZIZEfig— - 538 g.p.m.

Head Computations:

Well - 48#/sq. in. x 2.31 ft. = 111 ft.
Depth to Water 75
Dynamic Head 186 ft.

538 x 8.34 x 186
33.000

= 25.2 H.P.

Theor. H.P. Needed =

Efficiency . —32:3_- - 41.8%
60.4

Impeller Vane @ Nine notches up from bowl:

Electric meter - 10 disc revolutions in 48 seconds
From the April 14, 1941 chart, we can read that the
all soften pumping rate was 1,050,000 g.p.d.

1,0 0,000
Then the pumping Q I 5440 - 729 g.p.m.

 

Head Computations:

Well - 53f/sq. in. x 2.31 ft. = 122 ft.

 

Depth to Water 75
Dynamic Head 197 ft
Theor. H.P. Needed . 729 X 8°34 X 197 = 36.3 H.P.
33.000
10

 

Actual H.P. = 4.826 x 80 x . 80.4 H.P.

l.

Effeciency = ‘%%L%- ' 45.1%

 

21.

(c) Impeller Vane @ ll notches up from the bowl:

Electric Meter - 10 disc revolutions in 53 seconds

R _ 10
'77- ‘ "55‘
From April 14, 1941 chart, we can see that thetsll
softening pumping rate was 1,020,000 g.p.d.
Then pumping Q - 1.0i25000 - 708 g.p.m.

Head Com putations:

Well - 54#/sq. in. x 2.31 ft. = 125 ft.
Depth to Water ' 75
Dynamic Head 200 ft.

708 x 8.34 x 200 _
33,000 ‘

Theor. H.P. Needed =

 

35.8 H.P.

 

Aetual H.P. = [+0826 X 80 X 15(3) . 72.8 H.P.

Effeciency = '%§‘§ = 49.2%

We may tabulate the data obtained as follows:

 

 

#Notches Flow in g,p.m. Efjgpiency
9 729 45.1%
11 708 49.2%
16 538 41.8%

 

Inspection of this shows that the highest effeciency and almost
the highest flow occurs with the setting at 11 notches.

The effeciency curves flattens out near 49.2 percent,
so it is more economical to pump only 708 g.p.m. with an
effeciency of 49.2 percent than it is to pump 729 g.p.m.

with only 45.1 percent.

 

 

l.‘

'V

The value of effeciency tests may be readily perceived

here.

11. West Plant - Pump Tests. Theonly new item.encountere
in conducting the effeciency tests on this well is that of
measuring the height of lift ofwater being pumped. Figure

4 shows briefly the main items of consideration.

A tire punm>is attached to the upper end of the drop
tmbe and pumped till a constant reading is obtained on the
altitude gage. This gage reading (in feet) is the height
(AB) of the column of water in the well when being pumped and
the bottom of the drop tube (A).‘ If this gage reading is
subtracted from the known length of the drop tube (AC), the
height of the ligt in the well has been computed. (BC).

BC B AC aFAB

With this depth down to the water known, the
effeciency may be computed more exactly than was possible
with wells # 1 and # 2 at the East Plant.

This depth may also be used when making well capacity
tests for exhaustion. The Normal ground water surface is
uncovered when thepump has been shut off for quite a long
period. Then the pump is started up, and at certain regular
time intervals, the depth down to the water is measured.
From a set of these readings it is possible to determine how
fast the water elevation in the well drops when being pumped.

Details ofthe pump tests ran are tabulated below.

22.

d

 

; ,, a. a. w my.)

T/r»? ‘ "I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

;)€/fl)/) , e ‘.
4-72 “222 1 , I ‘7 11 , .4
X
‘ ‘\
«C
j. x.
K C /‘¢"._rz rna/ 11:1”(7 fr“, ,fJCg-
_ -- - K - . _ _ _
1‘ x \ C
2* a i
x. 0‘ ‘ g
6‘, g. . ‘~
'V \‘ I
. \ i .5
‘s I 1‘5
’2 ‘ : B K.
_ ‘ V .1 Y
, I r it «I‘
Q a . x
"t I .
a» 1 C ‘/ fc var/0*) 9/ WWI/(4 M‘
'1 3N ‘ , .
E C E H/f -// ‘4’th brunt]
\ \ I‘
w \, .~ H PU”’P€°’
‘1 I,
I I ) LJ 4
{lo/INK?) of [/12 ’e X/
-_ F—,, (7) 4 -
M 5 I: a”? (’5 f1” 0 , N 67 tie 49H 7‘ 0F 55 I“ f

_/_ > .8 41/42-};

23.
(a) November, 1940

Water Meter Readings

Tank #1 #2 #3 #4 Plant
Stop 5,592,200 806,500 7,042,000 15,186,500 110,926,000

Start 5,590,000 804,800 7,039,600 15,186,000 110,920,000

 

 

Diff. 2,200 1,700 2,400 500 6,000
Stop 4:52:37 4:51:09 4:51:14 4:53:07 4:54:04
Start 4:38:20 4:36:11 4:37:12 4:43:20 4:41:37
Diff. 14:17 14:58 14:02 9:47 12:27
G.P.M. 154 113 171 51 481
Sum.Tanks #1-4 489gpm
Average 485
Gage Readings Start Stop Average
Pump(#/sq.in.) 52.8 53 52.9
Altitude (ft.) ‘ 80 75 77.5
Trial #1 Trial #2
Electric Meter
Stop 4:44:56 4:49:41
Start 4:43:21 4:48:05
t for 20 rev. 1:35 1:36
Average t - 20 rev. in lm 35.58 = 95.5 sec.

(K = 53 1/3 for Meter at-the west Plant)

20

.48. . .___
1‘ 95.5

 

 

Head Computaions:

 

 

Length of Air tube 210 ft.
Less Altitude Reading 77% ft.
Depth to water 132.50 ft.
Altitude gage to pressure gage
(138m.) 1.08
Pressure gage 52.9#/sq.in
x 2.31 ft. 122.00
Loss in 200' of 8" pipe
@ 5'/1000 1.00
Dynamic Head 256.58 ft.
485 x 8.34 x 256.58 ,
= = x 0 OP.
Theor. H.P. 33,000 1 4 H
Actual H.P. = 4.826 X 53 1/3 x—égz-g = 53.9 H.P.
Effeciency = -%%4%- : 58.4%

 

 

24.

 

25.

(b) May 15, 1941

Water Meter Readings

Tank #1 #2 #3 #4 Plant
Stop 1,431,300 6,803,500 5,712,300 23,533,200 174,131,000
Start 1,429,000 6,810,500 5,710,400 23,532,500 174,124,000

Diff. 2,2000 2,000 1,9000 700 7,000
Stop 4:59:28 4:59:52 5:0D:38 5:03:40 5:04:42
Start 4:44:47 4:45:22 4:46:26 4:47:25 4:88:57
Diff. 14:41 14:30 15:32 16:15 15:45
14:68 14:50 15353 16.25 15.75
G.P.M. 150 138 122 43 444
Sum Tanks #1-4 453
Average 447
Gage Readings Start Stop Average
Pump (#/Sq.in.) 86 85 85.5
Altitude (ft. 78 80 79.0

Electric Meter -
Stop 4:56:40
Start 4:50:55

 

t for 70 rev. 5:45 = 345 sec.

R 70

/ 345

 

Head Computations:

 

 

Length of Air tube 210 ft.
Less Altitude Reading 79

Depth to Water 131.00 ft.
Altitude Gage to Pressure

Gage (13%in.) 1.08
Pressure Gage 5311

#/Sq.in. x 2.31 ft. 123.00
Loss in 200' of 8" pipe

@ 5'11000' 1.00
Dynamic Head 256.08 ft-

[1,4,7 X 8031+ X 256.08

Theor. H.P. = = 28.9 H.P.

33,000
Actual H.P. = 1,4826 X 531/3 X ZQ... = 52.1 H.P.
345-
28. 07'
Effeciency = = 55.4w

26.

 

 

27.

(0) May 18, 1941
Water Meter Readings
Tank #1 #2 #3 #4 Plant
Stop 1,776,300 7,140,900 6,037,600 23,735,000 175,2 0,000
Start 1,774,300 7,139,000 6,035,900 23,734,100 175,234,000

 

 

 

 

Diff.’ 2,000 1,900 1,700 900 6,000
Stop 4:25:25 4:25:50 4:26:10 4:26:50 4:29:06
Start 4:10:37 4:11:20 4:12:25 4:13:32 4:14:48
Diff. 14:48 14:30 13:45 13:18 14:18 -
G.P.M. 135 131 124 67 421 89m.
Sum Tanks #1-4 457 "
Average 439 "
Gage Readings Start Stop Average
Pump(#/sq.in.) 85 85 85
Altitude 81 83 82
T“
Electric Meter - Trial #1 Trial #2 Fl
Stop 4:23:17 4:31:15 5
Start 4:18:23 4:28:00 i‘
60 rev. in 4:54 40 rev.3115
1n
33—832: i=8:
Average R -l2—

 

% - 49

Head Computations:
Length of Air tube

Altitude Reading

 

Depth 06 Water

Altitude gage to Pressure

ease (13%in.)

Pressure Gage 53#/sq.in.
x 2.31 ft.

Loss in 200' of 8" pipe
o 4'/1000'

Dynamic Head

Theor. Requiréd H.P.

439 x 8.34 x 251.38

 

210 ft.
82
128.00 ft.
1.08
122.50
0.80
251.38 ft.

27.8 H.P.

33.000

10
Actual H.P. = 4.826 x 53% x“Z§‘ - 52.5 H.P.

27.8
5

 

Effeciency

(\J

53.0%

 

 

29.

12. Summary of Tests. Results of the test are repeated
here:
Flow in G. P. M. Effeciency
439 53.0%
447 55.44

Here again we notice a tendency to exist that as the flow
increases, so does the effeciency. To find the highest
effeciency would require more readings on both Sides of the
peak effeciency to establish a definite peak.

This pump is operating quite well, as average deep well
pumping effeciences of 50-55 percent are in the common class.
When new, this pump operated at 62 percent, and the present

dropping off may be due to need for adjustments.

7. a
'1 a .
.cs‘

 

30.

Part III

Power Consumption

13. Electric Rate Schedules. In years to come, when

 

these results are refer ed to for cost data, it will help to
have the method of computing power costs available. It will
also aid in following the computations listed in this thesis.

Rate No. 5 - Regular Primary Power Rate

Used at the East Plant, Pumps #1 and #2

Second Metering

Any power user in the City of Lansing or East Lansing,
Michigan, or in the vicinity thereof, with a demand load
of 50 kilowatts or over, using city owned transformers.

Rate Charges
Primary Metering
Demand Charge
Transformer installation owned by the Board of
Water and Light.
82.75 per kilowatt per month for the first 100
kilowatts of maximum demand.
81.75 per kilowatt per month for the next 4900
kilowatts of maximum.demdnd.
Energy Charge
Plus the Following:
1.05 cents per kilowatt hour for the first
160,000 kilowatts hours used per month
:0;75 cents per kilowatt hour for the next
900,000 kilowatt hours used per month.
Secondary Metering
Discountx .
t The above primary rate metered, plus 83%
\A.discount of 5% will be allowed on above rates
ifmbills are paid on or before last discount
day shown on bill.
MonthlyiMaximum.Demand
The maximum.demand will be obtained by the use
of a demand meter or demand indicator attached
to the meter, which registers the maximum demand
for a period of 15 minutes; or at the option of
the Board, the maximum demand will be considered

 

 

14.

31.

as 75% of the connected load in kilowatts.

Rate No. 4
(Used at the West Plant)
Optional Commercial Lighting and miscellaneous Power
Service.
Rate Charge
4 cents per kilowatt hour for the first 25

hours used per month per meter.

5 cents per kilowatt hour for the next 25 kilo-
watt hour used per month per meter.

3 3/5 cents per kilowatt hour for the next 450
kilowatt hours used per month per meter.

2% cents per kilowatt hour for all over 500
kilowatt hours used per month per meter.
Discount .
A discount of 20% of the above rate will be
allowed on all bills that are paid on or before
the last discount day Shown on bill.
East Plant — Pump %1

(BaSed on the 30-day month April 21, through May 20, 1941)

Water Metered:
May 20 622,900,000 gal.

April 21 613,000,000 " ha
9,900,000 gal. -

Power Consumed:

 

 

 

 

May 20 104,1381udi
April 21 884845 ".1
15.293ICEI

Cost of Power (Rate No. 5

 

 

60 KW Demand Q $2.75 $165.00
15,293 KWH @ 4.0105 4160.58
Plus 83% ' $325.58

. 27.67

Gross $353.25
Less 5% Discount 17.66

 

Net $335.59

32.

7335059 a $.0339

Pumping cost per 1,000 gal. 9 000
.’/

KWH per million gal. ‘

-l§L§%% ,= 1,543 run

The demand indicator on the electric meter Shows that
pump #1 has éiHW demand. This is less than the 60 KW demand
that the plant is being billed for. The lighting board
may bill one of two ways, whichever is the largest.

One way is to bill maximum demand. This would be
41.5 KW in the case of this well alone. The other is to
consider it as 75 percent of the connected load in KW. It

is for the whole plant as follows:

 

Well #1 5O H.P. Motor

Well #2 6O H.P. Motor

Lights, etc. 1 H.P. Motor
111 H.P.

In KW, this

111 H.P. x .746 KW/H.P.

82.806 KW:
75% x 82.806 - 62.1 KW.

The meter is 150 amp., 480 volts - so it will roughly take

care of 72.0 KW. Then 75% of 72 KW. is equal to 54 KW.‘s
Which checks approxiamtely.

When the whole plant is being billed on a 60 KW. demand,
the city is getting a saving of 2 x $2.75 = $5.50 a month.
But if Well #1 were being operated continuously and alone,
power costs could be reduced by 417.00 a month. This is out

of the question, however, as both wells must be in operation

 

33-

at the same time. The advantages balance the ddsadvantages

over the year, and make the costs still quite reasonable.

15. East Plant - Pumpfi2
(A) Impeller vane 16 notches up from the bottom:
Based on the 7-day period April 7 through April 14, 1941.)
Water Metered:
April 14 610,780,000 gal.
April 7 608,550,000

 

2,230,000 gal.
To get this on a 30 day basis, to compare with Pump #1,
we will correct it to 30 days.

2,230,000 x -29- = 9,557,000 gal.

 

 

 

7
Power Consumed:
April 14 85,420 KWH
April 7 81,680
3,740 KWH
Correcting this for 30 days to figure the power costS‘
on a monthly basis, we obtain 3,740 x '2%- : 16,030 KHH
Cost of Power (Rate No. 5)
6O KW Demand @ 42.75 8165.00
16,030 KWH @ 9.0105 8168;32
#333332
Plus 8%% 28.33
Gross 8361'55
18.08

Less 5% Discount

 

Net $343.47

 

___. A)

Pumping cost per 1,000 gal. 6343.47

9,557

KWH per milldon ga1._=

16,030 a

9557

(b) Imperiler vane @ ll notches up:

Based on the 4% day period from 4:30

April 14 to 8:00 a.m. April 19,1941

Water Metered:

31h

- 0.0359

1,679 KWH

p.111.

 

April 19 612,020,000 gal.
April 14 610,840,000
1,180,000 gal.

To correct this for a 30-day period,

0 x 1,180,000 gal.

42

7,867,000

Power Consumed:

 

April 19 87,340 KWH
April 14 85,513
1,827 KWH

1,827 x '2%—— . 12,2000 KWH

Cost of Power (Rate N6. 5)

we will multiply

£81 0

 

 

6O KW Demand @ 82.75 8165.00
12,200 KWH @ 8.0105 128.10
53293 .10
Plus 88% 24 .91
$4318.01
Less 5% Discount 15.90

 

Net $302.11

‘14.- I

 

35.

Pumping cost per 1,000 gal. = 8202.11

: 3.0 8
7,867 ~ 3 h

KWH per million gallons. = 12,200 - 1,550 KWH
73867

The maximum demand read on this pump was 68.5 KWH, so the
City of East Lansing is saving 8.5 KW. X i2.75 = 923.38
a month on this pump operation. This makes up for the

low demand on the Well #1.

West Plant.

 

Based on the 30-day month - April 21 through May 20,
191.1 .
Watered Metered:
May 20 175,832,000 gal.
April 21 166,0079000

 

9,825,000 gal.'

Power Consumed:

 

May 20 88,001 KWH 17,092 KWH
April 21 70,909 500 Stepped Charges
17,092 KWH 16,592 KWH @ 22¢

Cost of Power (Rate No. A)

 

25 KWH @ 6%¢ $1.5625

25 EWHI @ 5¢ 1.2500

450 KWHI @ 3 3/h ¢ 16.8750
16,512 KWH @ 2%¢ 118.8000
h3h.h875

Less 20% 86.8975

 

Net Power Cost 3h7o5900

 

17.

36.

Pumping cost per 1 000 gal.
. ’ 9,825

, . , _ l 0 2 n,
KUH per mlllion gal. - 9,825 1,739 LJH
If another well was installed at the West Plant, pumping
costs based on the same power rate as at the East Plant

would be figured on Rate No. 5, with secondary metering.

Based on the same 60 KW power demand, power cost would

be:

60 Km demand @ 2.75 = $165.00
17,092 ICE @ 8.0105 179.16

1,4 01334-15046
Plus 85% 29.28
Gross $373.7h
Less 5% Discount , 18.69
Net $355.05

We can see that the present power rate is cheapest under
conditions of usage maintained now. It would not be
advantageous to change over unless another pump demanded
it, due to increased power consumption. An additional
pump would mean more power used, and the advantage of
the cheaper power rate would be felt, as enough current
could be used to affect some saving.

.The pumping cost per 1,000 gal. based onra 60 KW

demand would be '2giggg $.0362, a 2.3% increaSe
9

over the present cost.

Summary of the Tests.h The results and costs of power

 

 

 

37.

per 1,000 gallons delivered are very interesting. The diff-

erences between the various pumps shows up very markedly when

tabulated:

Av. Water* Pump. v YWH er
Pump Soft. Metered Costs 000 millgon Remarks

er

Rf}:- gtglailfs ° p gal : gallon
East #1 473 9.900 8.0339 1,523 -- -- --
East #2 (16) 255 9,557 .0359 1,679 16 notches
East #2 (11) 618 7,867 .OSBA 1,550 11 notches
West - 9,825 .035h 1,739 -- -- --

* On a 30-day basis (computed)

The West well takes more K.W.H. of power to pump a million
gallons of water than does either of the wells as the East p
plant, regardless of setting. Due however to a diffeunnt
way of billing the power, it does it cheaper than well#2 at
either setting. Of all three pumps, East #1 does the best
job of pumping for the best amount. Therecords on this well
are quite accurate, as they cover a full 30-day month,

In all fairness to East well #2, it should be said that
records over a longer period of time might show that the
tests here are on the high side. The only factor we have to‘
jugge the relative merits really is the K.W.H. per million
gallons, which shows that this well #2 pump does quite a
good job.

The 16 notch setting on pump #2 does not cost as much
to pump a 1,000 gallons, as does the 11 notch setting, but
it takes more K.W.H. to do the same job. This seeming
contradiction is due to the method of demand billing, and
also to the fact that the pumping costs for 11 notches was

not figured for as many million gallons as was the 16. In

 

38.

this case, the demand billing shoots the cost up.

Reference is made to the effeciency of 16 notches as
against 11 notches again. 16 was 01.8%, while 11 was h9.2%.
Therefore, it should be seen that, if the tests were made on
the basis of,cost of the same number of million gallons
pumped in a month, the 11 notch well would eventually show
up as the cheapest and more effecient setting of the two

settings tested.

 

Wen-1.37m
.1. -.

39.

Part IV

Salt Consumption

18. Introduction. As has been previously stated, alt

 

costs rank on about the same level as do power costs. We shall
try to analyse the reasons for this, and arrive at some defin—
ite cost figures.

When the exchange capacity of the Zeolite has been used
up, the zeolites are in the form of calcium.and magnesium
zeolites. They are changed back to sodium zeolites by the
addition of a sodium chloride brine through the zeolite bed.

The reactions are shown by these equations:

CaZ % 2 Na C1 Na2 Z / Ca Cl2

J) . I T :,
LgZ/ 2Na 01 Razz, {174.3012

The excess salt, and the Calcium.and magnesium chlorides

are then washed out of the zeolite bed before it is put into
softening service again.

The brine is stored in'a large underground tank, which
is kept quite full of salt, covered with water. The solution
is saturated, and contains, at the temperature common, 19.6
lbs. of salt per cubic foot of brine. The brine is draWn
into the softener by a hydraulic injector, which gives the

brine a dilution of about 5 to 1.

 

#0.

There have been many schemes devised for the saving of
salt which otherwise would be wasted. A patent, U. S.
1,510,569 has been granted on the following process:

Separate out the lass-contaminated portions which were

wasted at the end of the bring period. The first one-

quarter or one-half of the brine used does the greatest
job of regenerating, as chemical reactions proceed faster
then. If the last three-quarters or one-half of the
brine is reused, an economy will result.*

This plan was tried at the East plant, and was one of
the main design features. Tests and investigations proved
however that the cost of recovering the brine did not merit
the brine saved.

Another system for reduction of the salt consumption
does it without mechanical brine recovery systems**. The
method in brief is this: (1) Reduce the rated softening
capacity of the zeolite sand per cubic foot; and (2)
compensate for this by using more cubic feet in the bed, to
get the same volume of the softened water.

An example will illustrate the method. With a good gel

zeolite, the exchange capacity is about 12,000 gallons per

cubic foot, with the salt used for regeneration about 0.05 lbs.

 

* Hoover, C.P., "Present Status of Municiple Water Softening",
Jour. A. W. W. A., Vol. XXV} No. 2, p. 186, February, 1933.

** Behoman, A.S., "Progeess in Municiple Zeolite Water Soft-
ening", Jour. A. W. W. A., Vol. XXVI, No. 5, p. 625,
Llay 3 1931),.

per Kg, of hardness. Reducing the vuted capacity down to
9,000 ot 10,000 ga1./cu. ft., we find that the salt consumption
id down to 0.30 lbs./kg. hardness. For a salt saving of 33 1/3
percent, the decrease in the exchange capacity per cubic foot
is equal to 20 to 25 percent.

Results of the tests rum at both plants follow:

19. East Plant - Well #18

Drawdown in small brine tank = 18 3/h inches per
regeneration.

l8 3 I" s
5 ft. x 1.5 ft. x n x 19.6 fi/Cu. ft. =230 lbs.
12 salt
per regeneration of tanks 1-5

12" of big tank - 888 lbs. salt per regeneration tank
#6 \
(For the 30-day maonth April 20, through May 19, 1941)

Water metered:

May 19 622,810,000 gal.

 

April 20 612,h60,000 r1
10,350,000 gal. '
Salt Consumption:

L60 Page erations (tank 1-5) @ 230 lbs. salt ,
- ' = 105,800 1bS. E

 

17 " ( " 6)
@ 888 lbs. 15.096 lbsL
120,896 lbs.
Salt used per 1,000 gallons delivered

= 129L829_ . 11.68 lbs.
10,350

11.68 lbs. @ 86.70 ton

Cost of salt per 1,000 gal. I
2,000 lbs.

8.0391

(Average Softening Rate A73 g.p.m.)

20. East Plant - Well§2

 

(a) Impeller vane @ 16 notches up:
(For the 8 day period April 6 through 13, 1941)
Water hetered:

April 13 610,630,000 gal.

April 6 607,940,000

 

2,690,000 gal.
Salt Consumption:
118 Regenerations (tank 1-5)
@ 230 lbs. salt = 37,140 lbs.

5 Regenerations (tank 6)
@ 888 lbs. salt 2 huh/gr)
‘ 41,580 lbs.

 

Salt used per 1,000 gallons delivered -

M - 15.1,6 lbs.

 

2,690
l . 6 b . @ 8 . 0 t W
00st of salt per 1,000 gal. - 5 5~ 1 S ,6 7 on r-
2,000 lbs.
= $.05i8*

(Average Softening Rate = #55 g.p.m.)

 

*Records for March 1921, indicate that this is rather 8?
high.

92.520 lbs. = 10.01 lbs.
9,230 thous. gal.

10.01 x 6.70
2,000
value. The short test period magnifies any errors which

 

= $.0336, which is a more reasonable

may have occured.

(b)

figured in though, just as if the regenerations had occured. '8

21.

A3.

Impeller vane @ 11 notches up:

(For the A day period April 15 through 18, 19A1)
Water Metered:

April 18 612,010,000 gal.

April 13 610,990,000

 

1,020,000 gal.
Salt Consumption:

32* Regeneration (tanks 1-5)

 

@ 230 lbs. salt = 7,360 lbs.
2 Regenerations (tank 6)
@ 888 lbs. salt = 11776
9,136 lbs 0

Salt used per gallons delivered 3 9,136 = 8,05 lbs.
1,020 '

8.95 lbs. X 26.70 ton

Cost of salt per 1,000 gal .
2,000 lbs.

i 8.0300

(Average Softening Rate a 618 g.P.m‘) ;rw

* 3 Regenerations skipped April 15, 19A1. Salt is

 

West Plant.

Drawdown in brine tank is 25 inches per regeneration.

25"
2 fto X 9 ft° X 12"”x 19.6#/cu.lb. salt per reaeneration
of tanks #1-3

(For the 30-day month April through May,l9,l9hl)

44.

Water Lu’etered:
May 19 175,744,000 gal.

April 20 165,604,000

 

10,140,000 gal.

Salt Consumption:
128 Regenerations @ 735 lbs. salt = 94,080 lbs.

, - _ 91 080
Salt used per 1,000 gallons delivered _ '107130- 2 9,28 lbs.

Cost of salt per 1,000 gal.

. 9.28 lbs.@ $6.70 ton
@ 86.70 / ton

2,000 lbs.

 

8.0312

23. Summary of Tests. Reviewing the results we have

 

obtained, they may briefly be tabulated thus:

Av. lbs. Cost of
Well Soft. Salt Salt Remarks
Rate ,
East i1 473 11.68 8.0391 *- - -
East 2 (16) 455 10.01 .0336* 16 notches
East #2 (11) 618 8.95 .0300 11 notches
Best - 9,28 .0312 - - -

* Based March, 1941 Records, not on the test run April 6
through 13, 1911.10

The values for the first two tests(East #1, and East #2,
16 nothhes) are quite common to the average operating
conditions at the plant. They are very near in value to
what has been experienced before. It is for about these flows
that the softening cycle of 50 minutes has been set for.

It would be dangerous to maintain the flow of 618 g.p.m.

45.
on the East #2 set at only 9 or 11 notches, as the tanks
stand a very good chance of being overrun, The saving in
salt which would result from continuous operation at this
rate would not pay for the damage which could result in the
running over of the zeolite. Repeated extra brinings
would have to be made to assure the good condition of the
tanks.

It is not considered good practice to run the tanks
"to the limit" of their softening capacity because it
takes excessive amounts of salt to "recharge" them.again.
The plant operator watched the tanks closely in the Last
plant while working the East #2 11 notches test, because of
the danger of over-running many times. The test was run
only long enoughto get semi-complete data, enough for a
good calculation of salt and power costs.

The Nest plant, on the other hand, is more econdmical
on salt than the East plant. This is because this plant is
not on a time cycle, but instead, on a definite "gallonage"
cycle. This is based on the fact that each tank, as soon as
the meter registers the total amount thetank is set to
soften, automatically regenerates itself. This results in an
economy, because the regenerations aan come independently of
time. The zeolite is regenerated only when it needs it.

A time cycle is not so flexable as a rate cycle

(gallonage), because df the rate fluctuates, the same time
cycle continues regardless of whether twice as much water is

passing through, or only half the average computed amount.

1,6.

23. “otes onta Brine Well. Near the ocean, enterprising

 

waterworks en;ineers have used sea water (after purification
for bacteria) to regenerate their zeolite beds. here in Mich-
igan, we are quite a distance from the ocean, measured along
the earth's surface. But if we go straight down, we are not
very far from brine deposites, corparatively speaking.
Investigation into the depth of salt brines in the
vicinity of East Lansing brought forth some interesting
information. Advice and information were obtained fromr
R. A. Smith, and 0. F. Poindexter of the Geological Survey
Division, Michigan Department of Conservation as to the
availability of salt in this region.
The facts brought out were: '
(1) The Marshall Formation, 760 to 815 feet down in Ingham
County, bears salt water. Typical results of well tests have

been, for karshall Brines:

Calcium magnesium Sodium
Location Chloride Chloride Chloride
Gratiot Co. ' 2.21 _ 0.87 7.97
Midland Co. 9.71 3.45 10.98

(2) The next formation that bears salt water also has a

high percentage of magnesium and calcium, which renders it
unfit for softener regeneration, because the reactions

could never go to completion. This formation is at 2,200 feet.

A typical analysis shows:

[#70

Calcium Carbonate 103,860 p.p.m.
Sodium Chloride 220,2h0 "
Magnesdum Carbonate 80,560 "

(3) The Salina formation, 3,600 feet down is quite high in
sodium, and low in magnesium and Calcium, the undesirable
elements. Of all the brines "near the surface" this would
be the most promising and the most useful. It is almost
saturated wdth Sodium chloride (sat. @ 270,000 p.p.m.). An

analysis shows the following constituents:

Sodium Chloride 2h7,h00 p.p.m.
Magnesium.0hloride 2,015 "
Calcium.Sulfate 5,660 "

(4) Cost of such a well into the Salina (8" or 12") would

be about $15,000 to $20,000. The pumping head on the brine
would be very low, but the difficulty of getting the brine

to both plants would have to overcome in some manner.

§20,000 would buy a large amount of salt, but might be an
economical method of getting a brine if LIrge quanities

were used yearly. A city ten times the size of East Lansing,
using zeolite for softening, might put down a salt well to

a great advantage. The scheme does not seem.practical for

East Lansing.

.Pwllvlr'IL.

Arr-r; aux“

.‘E’DIIj r

 

Part V

Chemical Consumption

2h. Uses of Chemicals. At the present time, only two

 

chemicals are in use: caustic soda is used at each plant

for the purpose of reducing the corrosiveness of the treated
water. The cost nay'be apportioned equally for each pdant,

as it really is an item to be charged to maintainahce of its
delivery mains, necessary to reduce complaints of "red water".
The permanganate is used solely for the regeneration of the

iron — removed tanks at the plants.

25. Caustic Soda Used. The rate of application of the
caustic soda should be proportional to the rate of delivery
of water. It has been approximately proportional, and for
the purposes of this paper, will be considered as such.

Costs (based on the 30-day month from April 20 through
Lay 14, lghl) are as follows:

Water Metered (previously computed under Power

 

Consumption);

 

East Plant 10,350,000 gal.
West Plant 10,1h0j000
Total 20,h90,000 gal.

Caustic Soda:
East Plant 13 applications @ l75#each - 2,275 lbs.
West Plant 30’ " @ 60# each --l;800 lbs.

 

till I! ll. Jul

(«3

#9.
Total I [.9075 lbs.

 

Caustic Soda used per 1,000 gallons delivered

h075

= 0.1 lbs.
20,t90 99

Cost of Caustic Soda per 1,000 gal. .199 lbs. G 90.08

0.0159 at each plant.

26. Potassium Permanganate Used.

 

(a) East Plant - The iron removal tank (#7) is
regenerated once every month at least, on at every 1,080,000
gal. passing through it. About 3/20 of the total plant
flow passes through this tank. Computing on this basis, we
find that each regeneration takes 18 lbs. @ 80.20 a lb.
for a monthly cost of $3.60. Getting this into a cost

basis for 1,000 gallons, we find (for the same month as used
$3.60
10,350

 

for caustic soda) that - 3.000308 (East Plant).

(b) West Plant - Figuring on the same basis as we did
for the East Plant, we find that about 3/20 of the total
flow passes through the iron-removal tank (#h). Design
capacity is 1,300,000 gal. It is regenerated once a month.
It takes 23% more than does the #7 tank.

23 lbs. x 90.20 per lb. = Sh.60 per month

—4—-————- : 0.000453 per 1,000 gal.
10,140
27. Summary of Costs. We find that the cost of caustic

 

soda is quite a lot more than the iron, but very much less

50.

than either power or salt. The results may be tabulated as

follows:
Costs per 1,000 gal.
Plant Caustic Soda Potass. Permanganate
East 8.0159 3.0003h8
West .0159 .000053

There are no significant differences between the two

plants, as far as the chemicals are concerned.

51.

Part VI

Cost of Treatment

28. Fixed Charges. The East plant, completely equipped

 

cost $21,000. The West plant completely equipped, cost
$60,000, including total construction costs and engineering
costs.

The fixed charges will be based on a 4% interest on the
money invested, and a 3%% general average depreciation value
common to waterworks. The fixed charges are then computed
on the basis of 1900 pumping values.

( ) E t Pl t $214000 x 7%% ” 0185
1 in = J.
a as 5 86,051 thous. gal. “

iii311h’800 X 7222/0
133,365 thous. gal.

 

(b) West Plant : $.0251

29. Labor Charges. If a man worked full time at

 

supervising theplants,(ha1f of histime at each plant), he
could abhy do all the mainmnance work necessary. For the
purpose of this thesis, we will hire just one man, at $1,800
per year for maintenance.

Then the cost to each plant per 1,000 gallons would be

fiix $1800

 

' 0.00410

52.

’ 30 Miscellaneous. To take care of items, as small

 

pump repairs, pipe repairs, charts, tools, and other costs,
let us assume 3.00100 per 1,000 gallons per plant to be on

the safe side.

31. Conclusions. Because the softening plants operate

 

on units, we must consider total costs in each case. Naming
the various combinations is by referring to:the pump and well
number.

It is surprising how little difference there is in the
cost of treating water between East #1 and the West Plant.
Wide differences are apparent in the cost of fixed charges,
power and salt, but the differences are compensating: They
make up for each other.

East #2 well delivers the water more cheaply than does
East Well #1 and West. The 9-notch setting though might
prove too expensive, if the zeolite were over-run too many
times, dme to the little excess softening capacity remaining,
when the tank has softened its quota.

Further detailed cost studies should be made, under longer
periods of time for well #2, East, to get more significant
data. The power costs and the salt costs are the ones which
should be watched more closely. There is a great deal more
work which may be done. It is hoped that this thesis will

point out what should be done, and that the City Officials

will be able to benifit by this study.

Table IV

Summary of Treatment Costs

(Costs per 1,000 gal. Based on l9h0 Yearly Flow)

Item

Fixed Charges
( 72376
Power
Salt
Chemicals-
Soda Caustic
Potass. Perm.

Labor Charges

hiscellaneous

Total

% of West Plant

(Erom.Each Plant)

East #1 East #2
16 note.

0.01850 0.01850
.03390 .03590
.03910 .03360*
.01590 .01590
.00035 .00035
.00100 .00100
0.11285 $.10935
99.5% 96.t%

East #2
11 note.

3.01850

.O38AO
.03000
.01590
.00035
.OOth

.OOlOO

$.10825
95.5%

West

fi.02510

.0351'.O

.03120

.01590

.00045
.00th

.00100

0.11315

100%

* Based on March 1941 Records, not on the test run April

6 through 13,19Al.

53.

Behr

Cape

E001

Kne<

Van

54.

Bibligraphy

Behrman, A. 8., "Progress in Hunicipal Zeolite Water
Softening", Journal A. W. W. A., Vol. XXVI, No.5,
pp0618-28, I-Lay, 1931+.

Capen, C. H., Jr., "How Much Water Do We Consume?", Journal
A. H. W. A., Vol. XXIX, No.2, pp. 201-12, February 1937.

Hoover, C. P.. "Present Status of Eunicipal Water Softening",
Journal A. W. W. A., Vol. XXV, No. 2 pp. 181—91, February
1933.

Knecht, J. W., and thenna, P. G., "An Investigation of the
Water Supply of East Lansing, Kichi an," an unpublished
B.S. Thesis, Michigan State College, 1910.

killer, C. H., and Slack, P. H., "East Lansing's Fire
Protection", and unpublished B.S. Thesis, Michigan
State College, 1925.

Van Noppen, L. M. Z., "An Analysis of East Lansing's Water
Supply System, and Reccommendations for Enlargement,"
an unpublished B.S. Thesis, Michigan State College,
1923.

flan—w." #-

 

 

|.- '3. ill. .

- J. :1. it

‘1

120:"! W
USE can”

I! lII'I'flIl.{.‘l':M"!1H’l

MI
H
3 03084 8208

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES
i

III
I I" If}, HII J
3 9

12