Water Analysis Laboratory

Environmental Engineering I - CVNG 3007

Item
No.

Student Name

Kevin Blache

Student ID No.

813117777

Date Performed

Wednesday 30th September, 2015

Date Submitted

Wednesday 14th October, 2015

Report Sections

Page
No.

Marks Allocated

Title Page

Abstract

Objectives

Introduction

Theory

Procedures

Results

5-7

10

Discussion

8-12

10

Conclusion

12

10

Appendix

13-15

11

Questions

15-17

10

12

References

18

TOTAL

Marks Received

50

Abstract:
This report deals with various aspects of water analysis. Its basis is related to the need for potable
and palatable water for human use and consumption, given that water that is readily available
may not be to a standard that is acceptable based on International Stipulations. Adequate
knowledge of the methodologies associated with ascertaining the different characteristics of
water is included within and delved into so as to perform the requisite tasks in order to ascertain
said characteristics. The results of said analyses is presented and discussed at length so as to
achieve the objectives presented. These objectives include but are not limited to, determining the
bacteriological status of three (3) water samples (raw river water, river water treated with bleach
and tap water), determining the best coagulant dosage for turbidity removal and the source of
origin for three (3) water samples (from a river, a saltwater aquifer and seawater). The
conclusions drawn are correlated to documented standards (as shown in appendices and
reference section) and subsequently several questions are answered, which reinforce the concepts
throughout the course of the laboratory experiments.

Objectives:
The aim of this experiment is to carry out an analysis of various aspects of water, in order to
ultimately gain a better understanding of the water treatment process. This is done via the
following objectives:
1. To demonstrate standard procedures/ methods, tools, apparatus and equipment used in an
environmental laboratory;
2. To classify water based on source;
3. To provide experience in analyzing laboratory test results;
4. To illustrate the shortcomings of some laboratory tests.
Introduction:
Water covers roughly 70% of the Earths surface and coincidentally it also makes up
approximately 70% of the human body, and is thus essential for survival. It is safe to say that in
no way can we as humans get away from water.
Water is used in many ways by humans, including but not limited to, drinking, bathing and other
hygienic purposes. The water we use must thus possess certain characteristics, for example, be
both potable and palatable.
The hydrologic cycle is natures way of purifying and redistributing water over the Earths
surface, but this water is subsequently contaminated through natural means and due to the action
of humans. It is because of this contamination that several agencies across the World, such as the
World Health Organization (WHO) set standards as to what the aforementioned characteristics
should be. On a smaller scale, that is, from country to country, local agencies have adopted and
adapted some of the criteria. These modifications were to suit various intrinsic factors.
The water which is readily (sometimes not so readily) available come from a plethora of sources,
such as rivers, lakes and streams (surface), aquifers and wells (groundwater) and the oceans
(seawater). Given the vagary of sources and their interaction with the Earths surface, soil and
human activities, physical, biological and chemical changes occur.
These changes therefore have to be reversed in order to return to levels that are safe for
consumption and use as stipulated.

Theory:
During the course of the analyses carried out, several terms and concepts are introduced and used
throughout. In this regard it is of utmost importance that these terms are defined and additional
pertinent information be stated, in order to properly assess the various aspects of the water
analysis process.
The following definitions were found in the Penguin Dictionary of Civil Engineering:
(A) Bacteriological Analysis
1. Bacteriological analysis: is a laboratory test performed to determine the type and
concentration of microscopic disease causing organisms (pathogens) present in a water
sample.
(B) Jar Test
1. Jar test: is a laboratory test to estimate the ideal or minimum dose of coagulant required
to achieve particular water-quality objectives.
2. Turbidity: is a measure of the light scattering properties of water caused by suspended
matter.
(C) Source Determination
1. pH: is a logarithmic measure (negative logarithmic value of H+ ion concentration) of the
hydrogen concentration of a solution; each unit represents a tenfold change in acidity or
alkalinity.
2. Chlorine Residual: is the amount of chlorine that remains in water after a certain period
or contact time.
(i)
Free - composed of dissolved hypochlorite ions, hypochlorous acid and chlorine gas.
(ii)
Combined - composed of chloramines that kill bacteria and oxidize organic matter.
(iii)
Total - the sum of free and combined residual chlorine.
3. Chloride: a compound of chlorine with another element or group, especially a salt of the
anion Cl-.
4. Hardness: is the total concentration of calcium and magnesium ions in water, expressed
as a calcium carbonate equivalent.
5. Alkalinity: is the capacity of water to neutralize acids though content of carbonate,
bicarbonate and/or hydroxide.
Procedure:
The procedures for all experiments were performed in accordance with stipulations of the
laboratory manual, except for the following:
(A) Bacteriological Analysis
4

- No Changes
(B) Jar Test
- pH determined using an electrometric - pH meter.
- Alum concentrations of 0, 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100 mg/L
(C) Source Determination
- pH determined using an electrometric - pH meter.
Results:
The following results were obtained from the various laboratory tests:
(A) Bacteriological Analysis
Table 1. Showing the Results of the Bacteriological Analysis.
Sample
A
B
C1
C2
C3

Volume
100
50
25
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.0001
0.00001

Total Coliform
0
0
0
115
8
5
0
0

Fecal Coliform
0
0
0
16
6
0
0
0

Total Coliform
0
0
0
115000
80000
500000
0
0

Fecal Coliform
0
0
0
16000
60000
0
0
0

The following sample calculations was done using the sample C1:
ColiformColonies for 100 ml of Sample=

No . of ColoniesCounted 100 115 100

=
=115000 colonies
Volume of Sample Tested
0.1

Results (Continued):
(B) Jar Test
Table 2. Showing the Results of the Jar Test.
Sample Concentration

Turbidity

pH

(mg/L)

(C)

5.1

7.8

6.1

7.59

6.8

7.36

6.2

7.2

4.1

7.02

10

2.6

6.86

Source Determination

Table 3. Showing the Results of the Source Determination Tests.

Source

pH

7.33

7.56

7.17

Initial

0.5

6.5

7.4

Final

6.5

7.4

9.9

Titration

0.9

2.5

CaCO3

240

36

100

Initial

8.2

Final

23.2

8.2

Titration

15

6.2

150

20

62

Initial

12.4

10.4

16.2

Final

16.2

12.4

18.1

Titration

3.8

1.9

Cl-

76

40

38

Free

3.8

0.7

2.1

Total

4.4

0.8

2.9

Hardness

Alkalinity

Chloride

Chlorine Residual

Sample Calculations:
The following sample calculations were done using the sample from Source X:
Hardness=

Titre Value 100

6 100
mg
=
=240
of CaCO3
Volume of Sample Tested
25
L

Alkalinity (T )=

TitreValue 0.02 50000 15 0.02 50000

mg
=
=150
of CaCO3
Volume of Sample Tested
100
L

Titre Value 500

3.8 500
mg
Chloride=
=
=76
of Cl
Volume of Sample Tested
25
L

Graph 3. Showing Turbidity (NTU) vs. Alum Dose (mg/L)

Discussion:
(A) Bacteriological Analysis
7

The water samples used originated from three (3) sources:

Sample A - from the laboratory tap
Sample B - river water treated with household bleach
Sample C - untreated river water
According to the Microbiological and Biological Quality Standards [see Appendix (A)], as set
forth by the World Health Organization (WHO), for piped water supplies there should be no
number of fecal or total coliforms present and for unpiped water supplies a total of 10 coliform
organisms should be present.
Given these standards it is thus safe to say that the water from laboratory tap (Sample A) is
suitable for use and even consumption on the basis of the absence of fecal and other coliform
bacteria. This shows that the efforts made by the Water and Sewage Authority (WASA) of
Trinidad and Tobago were successful in eliminating potentially harmful disease carrying
bacteria.
The river water treated with household bleach (Sample B) was also void of any fecal or other
coliform bacteria, however, due to the use of bleach for sterilization purposes, this water may not
be suitable for consumption. This gives credence to the fact that several parameters must be
satisfied in order to make water both potable and palatable. The other aspects that must thus be
analyzed are the turbidity [as seen in Experiment (B) the Jar Test] and the various water quality
parameters such as pH and Hardness [as seen in Experiment (C) the Source Determination].
The untreated river water (Sample C), unlike the first two samples, can be said to be teeming
with coliform bacteria in the more concentrated dilutions of the sample. Coliform populations in
excess of tens of thousands can be found in the samples. This may be indicative of the effects of
human beings on the surface water source, where undertreated and untreated waste may be
discharged directly into the river or some groundwater intrusion via direct contact with some
septic system may have occurred and subsequently found its way into the river. In the subsequent
dilutions of the sample, however, the coliform populations dwindled, eventually becoming zero
(0).
Limitations/ Sources of Error:
As can be expected with any laboratory experiment which requires measurement, parallax errors,
may have been induced into the sample due to human error. This would subsequently affect the
accuracy of the readings obtained particularly when pipetting during the sample dilution.
8

Additional errors may be induced when handling the membrane filters, as well as, the petri
dishes. It is thus important to wear gloves and use properly sterilized tools so as to avoid
bringing contaminated objects into contact with the membrane.
(B) Jar Test
The Jar Test is essentially a simulation of the flocculation and sedimentation portion of the water
treatment process. In this aspect of the process, a coagulant is added to the water destined for
treatment and is agitated. This coagulant is used to destabilize the particles which are suspended
in the water. Next, the rate of agitation is decreased in order to facilitate the interaction between
the newly coagulated particles (floc) to allow further interaction, leading to enlargement of
smaller particles and subsequently sedimentation.
This test is important as it allows the operators of a water treatment plant to determine a safe
volume of coagulant to add to water from a particular source in order to maximize the amount of
colloidal particles that are removed from suspension. Removing these particles is important as
their presence may affect the aesthetics of the water, bringing about doubts in the mind of the
persons who would use it, given the fact that it is unclear. They may also impede the disinfection
process by shielding harmful micro-organisms from the chemical added for said process.
Any particles which have not settled after this process, can subsequently be removed via the
filtration system used in that particular water treatment plant.
In terms of the results of the jar test performed, after the coagulant (alum) was added, flocs could
be seen forming in all samples. When the speed of the paddles was reduced, an increase in the
number of flocs present could be seen, with the sample in which 2mg/L of alum was placed
having the least and the sample in which 10mg/L of alum was placed having the most.
The effectiveness of alum as a coagulant can be observed as the samples with the greater dosage
having a smaller value of turbidity. However, in can also be seen that with a greater dosage of
alum, the pH of the samples decreased thus showing a direct relationship. Therefore, it is
important to compromise between the dosage of coagulant added so as to minimize costs,
turbidity and subsequent changes to the pH and possibly other aspects of the water quality.
It can therefore be said, that a reasonable estimate for an alum dosage would be 7mg/L. This
value was obtained using the graph (Figure) by locating the minimum point on the curve of
9

turbidity versus alum dosage. This value can also be assumed to have a pH value between 7.2
and 7.0 which places it well within the acceptable range for water to be distributed. Additionally,
the Turbidity value would lie below the acceptable value of 5 NTU, i.e. at 2.2 NTU. [See
Appendix (B)]
Limitations/ Sources of Error:
The sources of error of this experiment are similar to that of the previous experiment, being
associated mainly with human error through parallax when taking measurements as it relates to
the alum doses to be added to the water samples.
(C) Source Identification
The water treatment process is constituted of several other processes which are each important in
their own different way. A concise version of the water treatment process, after extraction of raw
water, is:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Coagulation
Sedimentation
Filtration
Disinfection
Storage/ Distribution

A schematic of this can be found in the Appendix (C) of this laboratory report.
Depending on the source from which it comes or the desired usage, the water treatment process
will have variations. This simply means, that water from a fresh water source such as a river, lake
or aquifer will be processed differently to water from a saltwater source. The variation in the
process will occur in stage three (3) or the filtration process. For a freshwater source, the
filtration would be done using either sand, gravel or charcoal filters. For a saltwater source, the
process of reverse osmosis (desalination) will be employed in order to remove dissolved
molecules and ions, particularly salts. The coagulation and flocculation processes are classified
as a pretreatment processes in this case, used to remove algae, mineral particles and dissolved
organic matter. It is important to note that desalination can be used for freshwater as well but due
to its operational cost, other methods are preferred.
Given knowledge of the properties of the water samples provided, i.e. X, Y and Z, it is now
possible to make a determination as to where each may have come from. It is difficult to glean
10

any insight into the source of the samples from their respective pH values, as they all lie within
the normal acceptable range for treated water. It is then best to use the hardness, alkalinity,
chloride and chlorine residual values to make a determination. Alkalinity and Hardness are two
related properties and given the relationships between the former and latter values, i.e. X=150 &
240 mg/L, Y=20 & 36mg/L and Z= 62 &100mg/L respectively, it can be said that sample Y is
from a freshwater source. This leaves samples X and Z yet to be determined. In terms of chloride
content samples Y and Z have relatively close values, however, it is possible for river water to
contain dissolved salts similar to saltwater.
It can then be said that sample X is from a seawater source. In Trinidad and Tobago, any water
obtained from the desalination process is primarily used for the manufacturing and petroleum
industry. As a result of this usage the requirements for the level of hardness, alkalinity and
chlorides are set at a much higher threshold than that of water for regular consumption and
public use, which typically comes from a surface source. Therefore sample Y was obtained from
a saltwater aquifer.
Limitations/ Sources of Error:
Similar to the previous two experiments, parallax errors were possible when carrying out
titrations. Also errors can occur when testing the pH of successive samples. Therefore due care
and attention must be paid when carrying out said titrations. Additionally, it is of particular
importance to rinse off the pH meter thoroughly in order to safe guard against said contamination
of successive samples.

Conclusion:
It can be concluded that all of the objectives set forth for these laboratory experiments were
successfully completed. For the bacteriological analysis, a full understanding of the various
pieces of apparatus necessary for the developing of cultures for the growth and quantification of
fecal and total coliform populations was achieved. For the jar test, a greater appreciation for the
coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation portions of the water treatment process was gained.
The importance of finding a mutual ground between alum dosage and pH in order to reduce the

11

turbidity of a water sample. Finally, the various properties of water from differing sources were
measured and analyzed in order to make comparisons and thus deduce their places of origin.

Appendix (A):
Table (A) Microbiological Quality Standards based on WHO Recommendations.

12

Source: Salvato, J.A., Nemerow, N.L. and Agardy F.J., 2003, Environmental Engineering, 5th Ed. Wiley

Appendix (B):

13

Table (B) Aesthetic Quality Standards based on WHO Recommendations.

Source: Salvato, J.A., Nemerow, N.L. and Agardy F.J., 2003, Environmental Engineering, 5th Ed. Wiley

Appendix (C):
Table (C) Schematic of a Water Treatment Plant according to the US Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA).

14

Source: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/sdwa/upload/2009_08_28_sdwa_fs_30ann_treatment_web.pdf

Questions:
1. The samples tested contained no P Alkalinity and thus only T Alkalinity. Therefore for the
samples the following was found:
15

Alkalinity
P (mg/L)
T (mg/L)
OH- (mg/L)
CO32 (mg/L)
HCO3- (mg/L)

X
0
150
0
0
150

Y
0
20
0
0
20

Z
0
62
0
0
62

2. (a) Water supplies have to be tested for coliform bacteria for the main reason that these
bacteria are diseases causing bacteria that may lead to severe illness in human beings.
These bacteria are also common in many water sources due to the interaction of ground
water with septic systems or untreated disposal of waste into surface sources. The
presence of coliform bacteria also indicates the presence of other disease causing
organisms as they live in the same conditions and environment; thus giving credence to
the quality of a water supply and requisite treatment that must be undertaken to make it
potable.
(b) To make a 0.001 mL sample, start with a 100mL volume of a sample. Next, remove
1mL from that sample and place into a subsequent 100mL volume. Then, remove 10mL
from this sample and place into another 100mL volume.
1
0.01 10
=0.01=
=0.001 mL
That is:
100
100
3. The following are the Water Quality Index (WQI) ratings for the fecal coliform
populations:
Sample
A
B
C1
C2
C3

Volume
100
50
25
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.0001
0.00001

Fecal Coliform
0
0
0
16000
60000
0
0
0

WQI
95
95
95
8
3
95
95
95

4. It is important to note turbidity levels in water courses in order to ascertain the dosage of
coagulant required to remove a sufficient amount of suspended particles. These particles
as mentioned before affect the aesthetic quality of the water and also act as a buffer for
potentially harmful bacteria. High turbidity is present in ground water due to the presence
16

of various minerals within the soil that may become dissolved water as it permeates
through the soil, thus leaching said minerals to the underlying aquifers. Also organic
matter which may also be water soluble is present in soils and can also be dissolved and
become part of the water. This turbidity can be removed by the process of coagulation
and flocculation which is carried out by adding a coagulant, allowing these particles to
grow/ flocculate and settle. Subsequently, more flocculated particles can be removed by
filtration.

5. (a) The similarities between Graph 1 and the Graph 3 attained for the jar test performed
in this laboratory experiment is that they both are in the same units on either axis, i.e.
turbidity on the y-axis versus alum dose (mg/L) on the x-axis. The overall shapes of the
graphs are different in that, for our experiment, there was an initial increase in turbidity
with alum dose then it decreased. However, in graph 1 there was exponential decay in
turbidity with increased alum dosage.
(b) The similarities between Graph 2 and the Graph 3 obtained from the jar test is also
that their units are the same except that on the x-axis, alum dosage was given in another
form i.e. ppm/v instead of mg/L. Another similarity was that, after the optimum alum
dosage was reached, the turbidity increased with additional alum doses. The overall shape
differed from our graph, since for low alum doses it cannot be said for sure, if turbidity
increased initially then decreased.
(c) For Graph 1 the optimal alum dose was 8mg/L. For Graph 2 the optimum alum
dosage was 45ppm/v. For Graph 3, 7mg/L was determined to be the optimum dosage of
alum.

References:
Books:

17

Davis, M.L. and Cornwell, D.A., 2008. Introduction to Environmental Engineering. 4th Ed.
McGraw Hill.
Masters, G.M., 1998, Introduction to Environmental Engineering and Science, Prentice Hall
Salvato, J.A., Nemerow, N.L. and Agardy F.J., 2003, Environmental Engineering, 5th Ed. Wiley
Websites:
http://water.epa.gov/
Notes:
Rao, S.P.V., 2005. Water Supply Engineering (For the Course of Water Supply and Sanitary
Engineering), State Institute of Vocational Education Andhra Pradesh. Hyderabad.

18