SIZING OF WASTEWATER SLUDGE ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS*

R. V. ARSOV
University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy
1 Chr.Smirnensky blvd., 1046 Sofia, Bulgaria
1. Introduction
Wastewater sludge treatment and disposal have always created more problems than
wastewater treatment itself. This is rooted in the fact that in contrast to wastewater,
which continuously passing the wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) inflows
unaffectedly (in quantitative sense) the natural hydrological cycle, sludge entirely
accumulates there. Due to its specific properties, the accumulated sludge inclusion in
the natural cycles of mass transfer in an economically and environmentally acceptable
manner [14] is more difficult. This is because sludge management is associated with
overcoming of serious technological and economical problems, some of which have not
received satisfactory solution yet. Biological stabilisation of municipal wastewater
sludge is one of them, irrespectively of the availability of significant experience and the
long historical development of this issue.
Classical technologies for municipal wastewater sludge anaerobic stabisisation
proved to be reliable, adequate to the contemporary technological and ecological
requirements and are still intensively used in the current sanitary engineering practice.
They are applied both for separate or for mixed primary and waste activated sludge
stabilisation and usually include the following units: high-rate (heated) anaerobic
digesters (methane-tanks), low-rate (conventional, open-air, unheated) anaerobic
digesters and Imhoff-tanks (Emscher-wells, two-stage settlers). Despite the biological,
chemical and physical processes taking place in these units are now well known and are
subject of intensive modelling, adequate generic design procedures for more of them are
still missing.
Irrespectively of the remarkable scientific and applied research achievements in this
field, out-of-date design methods and parameters, some of which have been established
empirically more than 60 years [10, 11] are still intensively use in the current practice
for technological design of sludge anaerobic digestion units. Lack of knowledge about
the kinetics and mutual impact of relevant biological, chemical and physical processes
undoubtedly is not among the reasons for this somewhat strange situation. The
problem is more complex but its discussion is out of the scope of this paper.
It is than not surprising that in response to the questionnaire, prepared and
distributed by IAWQ TG on Anaerobic Digestion Modelling and concerning
establishing of new generic model for anaerobic processes in sanitary engineering [13],
68 % of respondents require the future model to be applicable mainly for sludge
digestion and 80 % of them want it to perform design procedures.
*Submited to Water Research, IWA in 2000

Therefore creation of a generic design model for wastewater sludge biological

stabilisation is very actual task. The general requirements for such a model in our view
could be summarised as follows:
Reasonable simplicity and adequacy, achievable by respecting only the most
important processes taken in lump which would allow limited number of input
parameters to be employed. This is important since the vast part of the model
potential users are able to define only the basic sludge quality input parameters,
such as suspended solids (SS), volatile suspended solids (VSS), activated sludge
age and temperature [13];
Possibility for positioning of the designed digestion system at arbitrary (given)
design study-states in order sludge stabilisation to be achieved in an economically
and environmentally acceptable manner [14]. This would allow conformity of the
specified system state to the optimal point of the specific relation between
efficiency (respectively necessary degree of stabilisation at definite unit) and
costs, associated with local environmental (hygienic), technical and economical
conditions. For this the model have to be based on general kinetic parameters of the
relevant biological (anaerobic, aerobic) and physical (thickening) processes, taking
into account only limited number of sludge parameters as well as the specific
differences between PS and WAS in this respect;
Establishment of relatively simple but adequate kinetic relationships between
hydraulic retention time (HRT) and specified degree of sludge stabilisation for the
relevant anaerobic, aerobic and physical processes, associated with PS, WAS and
mixed primary and waste activated sludge (mixed sludge - MS), respectively. This
would allow the necessary volume determination of the relevant bioreactor of
definite hydrodynamic type.
Description of the basic relationships in a design (bioreactors volumes sizing)
procedure, developed in a compliance with the above requirements and the relevant
parameters for municipal sludge aerobic and anaerobic digesters are subjects of this
paper.
2. Methods
Volumes V of the bioreactors are usually calculated on the base of the continuity
equation, which in the context of the reported research could be represented by the
following general formulae:

V t.(Q X QSX ) .

(1)

Different design models distinguish each to the other by the way they define
X
the values of t and Q S , with later in the case if sludge thickening and supernatant
X

withdrawal take place. The supernatant flow rate QS depends on the BVSS degree of
destruction and sludge thickening kinetics (respectively on HRT at some anaerobic
digesters with cyclic feeding/withdrawing). In turn the hydraulic retention time t

depends on hydrodynamic conditions, BVSS destruction kinetics and degree of

destruction. In this respect the design model discussed hereinafter considers the
following processes and parameters: kinetics of anaerobic processes (taken in lump),
associated with PS, WAS and MS; HRT for relevant hydrodynamic type of bioreactors,
associated with given degree of sludge stabilisation; kinetics of the processes of
digesting sludge thickening, associated with some anaerobic digesters where thickening
and supernatant withdrawal take place; volumes of digesters; input SS and VSS
concentrations in PS and MS, as well as SS and sludge age of WAS and temperature in
the digesters.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. DETERMINATION OF SLUDGE DIGESTERS HRT
Since the HRT depends on the relevant biological process kinetics, degree of sludge
stabilisation and on the hydrodynamic type of the bioreactor, these parameters have to
be defined accordingly.
By tradition the degree of sludge stabilisation is controlled by the relevant
reduction of its VSS content. The later can be easily defined by a routine analytical
procedure at the WWTP laboratory, but it is not reliable base for description of sludge
stabilisation kinetics, since the VSS besides biodegradable organic substance include
organic part, which is practically resistant to biological destruction. It is more correct
the biological processes lump kinetics to be based solely on the biodegradable fraction
of the sludge volatile suspended solids (BVSS), which is different from the traditional
approach but is more adequate one. The problem is that no any direct method for BVSS
determination exists, which imposes an indirect approach to be applied.
The design hydraulic retention time t can be determined by the well known
relationship (2), valid for completely stirred reactor, which here is presented in a
compliance with the assumed approach for raw sludge actual BVSS content
determination (Arsov, 1999c):

1
1 .
X
.

(2)

k dPS 0,272.1,048( 33) ;

(3a)

1
k dX

Determination of the first order reaction rate coefficients of sludge BVSS

X
destruction k d is described in details elsewhere [1, 3].
It is based on plant-scale data gathered in a period of 5 years at the Moscow
WWTP high-rate digesters and published by Karpinski [12]. The values of the kinetic
X
parameter k d , associated with the relevant kinds of biological processes and
wastewater sludge can be calculated by the expressions (3a), (3b), (3c[1, 3],
respectively:

k dWAS 0,082.1,048( 33) ;

(3b)

k dMS (0,272 0,082).1,048( 33) /(1 ) .

(3c)

The value of residual fraction of BVSS reflects the degree of sludge

stabilisation and is subject of evaluation by the designer. High value of is associated
with high odour emission potential of digested sludge [19], while adoption of low value
of leads to high digester volume and therefore high costs. Therefore the choice of
the value of has to be based on carefully assessed balance between local ecological
(hygienic) requirements and costs. Contribution of the active biomass, incorporated in
the digested sludge has to be considered as well, since it increases the actual value of
residual BVSS fraction in digested sludge. The relevant analyses and recommendations
for resuming of the value of are given elsewhere [2, 3]. In this respect a reasonable
choice of the value of is 0,15 for PS and MS and 0,20 for WAS. Corresponding
values of the actual degree of VSS reduction - RX (with considering the contribution
of the active biomass incorporated in digested sludge) could be calculated by formulas
(4a), (4b) and (4c) for PS, WAS and MS, respectively (Arsov, 1999b,c):

RPS (1 . PS )[ 2' 0,875.Y (1 . PS ) / 1' . 3 (1 k b .t )] ;

(4a)

RWAS (1 . WAS )[ 4' 1,42.Y (1 . WAS ) / 3 (1 k b .t )] ;

(4b)

RMS [(1 )(1. 2 . 3. 4 ) 3. 4 (1 WAS ) (1 1' ) ] /[1' . 3 3. 4 (1 WAS

{1 [ .1. 2 /(1 )(1' 1 1. 2 ) 1 /(1 ) WAS ].Y .[ (1' 1 1. 2 ) 3. 4 .

.[0,875 /(1' 1 1. 2 ) 1,42( 4 . WAS 4 1)]

/{3 (1 kb .t )(1 )[ .1' 3 ( 4 . WAS 4 1)]},

(4c)
where the constant values of the ideal sludge quality parameters can be chosen, based
on averages of the huge amount of published data [3], in the ranges of 1 = 0,70
0,75, 2 0,65 0,75, 3 0,70 0,90, 4 0,70 0,80 . The value of the
actual VSS content in the PS -

1' is

an input parameter, which usually vary in the

range 0,5 0,7. The values of the kinetic parameters Y and kb are usually fixed around
0,06 and 0,03 d-1, respectively.
Following relationships are valid in respect of the correction factors for actual
raw sludge BVSS content X , associated with the relevant kinds of wastewater sludge
[1, 3]):

PS 1 . 2 /[1' 1 (1 2 )] ;

WAS

1 0,48

0 , 415

(5a)

.( 1) ;

(5b)

MS .1 . 2 /(1' 1 1 . 2 )(1 ) 1 /(1 ). WAS .

(5c)

3.2. THICKENING OF ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTING SLUDGE

Sludge thickening in parallel with anaerobic digestion processes takes place in low-rate
digesters and Imhoff-tanks. Because of complexity of the overall process and lack of
reliable information about the relevant parameters values, the popular Solids Flux
Theory [8] is not applicable in this case. The only available data for the subject are
those of Blunk [5] and Pruss [18], concerning primary sludge. They found out
exponential relationships between sludge water content and time of thickening,
associated with digestion at different temperatures, but nobody of them have specified
the value of the relevant coefficient of thickening rate. The graphical relationships of
Pruss (1928) however, clearly show acceleration of the sludge thickening with
increasing of digestion temperature. This demonstrates that the temperature impact on
water viscosity dominates over the one, associated with the sludge reology changes
during digestion, which in this respect seems to be negligible. Based on these finding
the following relationship has been suggested [1, 3] for general description of the
digesting sludge thickening kinetics:

Wt X (W0X W1X ). exp( kWX .t ) W1X .

(6)

Relevant values of the thickening rate coefficients kW could be obtained by

X
X
formula (6), provided the values of Wo , W1X , as well as Wt ,associated with

definite period t and temperature , are known. Taking into account the data,
published by Pruss [18], Fair et al. [10], Dimovski [7], Imhoff and Imhoff [11] and
PS
Tourovski [20], the following values could be accepted: W0 95%;

W1PS 75%; Wt PS 83% at = 15o C and t =

t = 60 d;

(optimum value for WAS thickened before digestion, [3]);

W0WAS 98%

W1WAS 87% ;

WtWAS 94% at = 15o C and t = t = 60 d. The values of W0MS and W1MS for
mixed sludge, generated in Imhoff-tanks with simultaneous precipitation of PS and
MS
WAS are 95,5% and 79 %, respectively [7, 11, 20]. The values of W0
and W1MS
for low-rate anaerobic digesters, where PS and WAS inflow as a separately generated

suspensions, could be obtained by formulas (7) and (8) respectively, based on the SSmass balance:

W0MS [100 100 (100 W0WAS ) /(100 W0PS ) (100 W0WAS )( 1)] /
/[1 (100 W0WAS ) /(100 W0PS )];
(7)

W1MS [100 100 (100 W1WAS ) /(100 W1PS ) (100 W1WAS )( 1)] /
/[1 (100 W1WAS ) /(100 W1PS )].

(8)
Taking into account the above quoted parameters, the following values of the
sludge thickening rate coefficients have been obtained:

kWPS 0,0153.1,027 ( 15) ;

(9a)

kWWAS 0,00753.1,027 ( 15) ;

MS
W

(0,0153 0,00753).1,027

( 15 )

(9b)

/(1 ) .

(9c)

3.3. DETERMINATION OF THE SLUDGE DIGESTERS VOLUMES

The volume occupied by digesting sludge depends on availability, duration and intensity
X
of the sludge thickening process and therefore the value of QS in the general design
formula (1) varies for the different kinds of sludge, hydrodynamic type of digesters and
mode of their operation. For continuous-flow completely stirred bioreactors, such as
single-stage high-rate anaerobic digesters (methane-tanks) and all kinds of aerobic
digesters where sludge thickening doesnt occur, the following assumption is valid:

Q SX 0 .

(10)

Intermittent withdrawing of the supernatant along with the digested sludge

from low-rate anaerobic digesters, where simultaneous sludge thickening takes place
gives opportunity for decreasing of the relevant bioreactors volumes. This mode of
operation allows periodically mixing of digester just after the supernatant and digested
sludge have been replaced by raw sludge. This from the other hand gives a reason the
bioreactor to be considered as completely stirred one in respect of the HRT and space
necessary to be provided for the relatively slow anaerobic processes.
In the period between mixing the sludge thickening process develops in
batch hydrodynamic conditions. This in turn gives a reason for assumption of
conformity between the sludge thickening process development in the time (equation 6)
and the one developing in the space between digester surface and bottom (solids SS
concentration depth profile). This conformity becomes obvious when compare for
instance the standard sludge SS depth profile, recommended in the German

regulation ATV [4] or the ones published by Ekama et al. [8], with the graphical
appearance of the exponential relationship (6), taking into account the sludge SS and
X
water content Wt relation. Based on the above assumption, the mean sludge water
X
content - Wm along SS depth profile could be defined as follows:

X
m

W0X W1X
1 m X
Wt dt
[1 exp( kWX .t m ] W1X
X
tm 0
kW .t m

(11)

where tm = t for Imhoff-tanks and low-rate anaerobic digesters without intermittent

mechanical mixing.
Then based on the sludge SS mass balance and after some simple
rearrangements [3], the net volumes V X of low-rate anaerobic digesters and Imhofftanks can be calculated by equations (12), (13) and (14), valid for PS, WAS and MS,
respectively:

V PS Q PS .C PS .t.(1 1' . RPS ) / s .(1 WmPS / 100) ;

(12)

V WAS Q WAS .C WAS .t.[1 3 ( 4 . WAS 4 1). RWAS / s .(1 WmWAS / 100)
;

(13)

V MS Q WAS .C WAS .t.{ 1 [ .1' 3 ( 4 . WAS 4 1)]RMS } / s .(1 WmMS / 100)

.(14)
3.4. THE DESIGN MODEL VALIDATION AND COMPARISON
A package of design software named STAB has been created, based on the design
(sizing) model discussed in general above. The STAB package includes the following
modules: AERSTAB for aerobic digesters design; ANASTAB for anaerobic
digesters design; SEPSTAB for design of bioreactors for separate sludge digestion;
STAB main menu. Besides its practical value for design, this software facilitated
checking of the proposed design model adequacy through validation with available
empirical data (Fig 1 and Fig. 2), as well as comparison of its performance with ones of
other (classical) design methods (Fig. 3 and Fig.4).

V S S d e s tru c tio n d e g re e R

PS

0 ,8

0 ,6

1 = 0 ,7 0
1 = 0 ,6 0
1 = 0 ,5 0

0 ,4
D e s ig n m e th o d o f U S
( 1 9 7 8 ) w i t h = 0 . 2 0
E x p e rim e n ta l d a ta o f
M c K in e y (1 9 6 3 )

0 ,2

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Figure 1. Proposed design model graphical comparison with pilot-plant data of McKiney [17] and design

0 ,6

t= 2 d
t = 5 d
t= 10 d

0 ,4
d

V S S d e s t r u c t u in d e g r e e , R

0 ,8

0 ,2

D e s ig n m e th o d o f
U S E P A ( 1 9 7 8 ) a t = 0 . 2 0
E x p e r im e n t a l d a t a o f
M a lin a (1 9 6 2 )

0
0

400

200

600

1000

800

1400

1200

1600

1800

2000

2200

T e m p e r a tu r e , x T im e , d

method, recommended by US EPA [9] for primary sludge anaerobic digestion at 1 = 0,75 and 2 = 0,65

Figure 2. Proposed design model graphical comparison with pilot-scale data of Malina [15] and the design

method, recommended by US EPA [9] for waste activated sludge anaerobic digestion. at 3 = 0,9, 4 =
0,8

Despite the available data (Malina [9, 15], McKiney [17] and EPA [9])
represented by dots in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 dont fully characterise the sludge quality to
allow precise calibration of the proposed model, they could be fitted quite well by the
later (with continuous black lines), if it is run with proper combination of available and
default data.
0 ,7
= 0 ,7

= 0 ,6 5 0

0 ,6
P S

= 0 ,7 5

= 0 ,6 2 1

V S S d e s t r u c t io n d e g r e e , R

0 ,5

= 0 ,7

= 0 ,6

= 0 ,4 3 8

= 0 ,4 9 1

= 0 ,6
1

0 ,4
0 ,3

D a ta fro m
S o f ia W W T P
1

= 0 ,6
1

10

12

14

16

D im o v sk i (1 9 7 8 )
C E R (1 9 8 5 )
U S E PA (1 9 7 8 )
Im h o ff (1 9 7 9 )
K a r p in s k i (1 9 5 9 )

= 0 ,5

= 0 ,4

A c c o r d in g t o t h e
d e s ig n m e t h o d s o f :

= 0 ,4

0 ,1

0 ,2

= 0 ,5

= 0 ,5

,1 0
= 0

= 0 ,4 9 4

18

20

22

24

26

28

T im e , d

Figure 3. Graphical comparison of the proposed design model for primary sludge anaerobic digestion with
other design methods and data from Sofia WWTP. At

1 =0,75 and 2 = 0,65

0 ,7

V S S d e s tru c tio n d e g re e , R

M S

= 0 ,7

0 ,6

1 = 0 ,5 1 0

1= 0 ,5 8 4
1 = 0 ,4 9 0

0 ,5

1 = 0 ,6 0 1

1 = 0 ,5 5 9
1 = 0 , 4 9 2

0 ,4

1 = 0 , 4 9 3

1 = 0 ,4 9 2

1 = 0 ,5 8 5

D a ta fr o m th e
S o fia W W T P :

D a ta a c c o rd in g to
th e d e s ig n m e th o d s o f :
D im o v s k i (1 9 7 8 )
C E R (1 9 8 5 )
= 0 , 5 ; = 1 5 d
U S E P A (1 9 7 8 )
= 0 , 1 ; = 1 5 d
Im h o ff (1 9 7 9 )
= 0 , 3 ; = 1 5 d
K a rp in s k i (1 9 5 9 )

0 ,2
d 1

0 ,1

d 1

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

d 1
d 1
d 1 d
1
d 1

d

= 0 ,5

= 0 ,6

0 ,3

= 0 ,6

d 1

= 0 ,4

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

T im e , t

40

42

Figure 4. Graphical comparison of the proposed design model for mixed sludge anaerobic digestion
with other design methods and data from Sofia WWTP.

1 = 0,75; 2 = 0,65; 3 = 0,9; 4 =0,8

Data presented in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show that most of the illustrated design
methods (Karpinski [12], Dimovski [7], EPA 625/4-78-012 [9], CER 2.04.03-85
[6], Imhoff and Imhof [11]) applying classical (or similar) approaches, as well as the
field data from the Sofia WWTP [1, 3] reflect only one study-state (one point) of the
relevant systems, excluding the method of Karpinski, which cover some range of the
t RX domain, but with fixed default sludge quality. Most of the data points are

located on the left side of the lines with = 0,1 which shows that the relevant systems
do not perform digestion processes up to the classical technical degree of digestion
(90% reduction of BVSS) and that this is the more usual practice [2, 3]. Since the
proposed design method is based on biological processes lump kinetics and consider the
main sludge quality parameters, it allows positioning of the designed system in an
arbitrary study-state point of the t RX domain, chosen by proper analysis and
considerations. The relevant analysis performed by the STAB package are discussed
elsewhere [2, 3].
4. Conclusions
The necessity of a new approach in design (bioreactors volumes sizing) of the
municipal wastewater sludge digesters motivates the research reported in this paper and
the main reasons for this is discussed.

10

The proposed model is founded on the kinetics of the relevant physical and
biological processes (the later taken in lump) and needs only few basic sludge quality
parameters as input. It allows positioning of the designed digesting system in arbitrary
study-state, motivated according to the local environment (hygienic) and economical
requirements and conditions. Considering of the different rates of aerobic and anaerobic
digestion of primary, waste activated and mixed sludge, along with the relevant
hydrodynamic conditions and processes of thickening taking place in some anaerobic
digesters are among the unique features and main advantages of the model.
The software package STAB based on the proposed model proved to be useful
tool not only for design but also for various technical and economical investigations,
concerning determination of the optimal technological scheme and degree of municipal
wastewater sludge stabilisation, and costs minimisation.
5. Nomenclature
5.1. ABBREVIATIONS
BVSS
CSTR
HRT
MS
PS
SS
VSS
WAS
WWTP
X

biodegradable volatile suspended solids

completely stirred reactor
hydraulic residence time
mixed (primary and waste activated) sludge
primary sludge
suspended solids
volatile suspended solids
waste activated sludge
wastewater treatment plant
general case abbreviation (as a superscript) for PS or WAS or MS

5.2. SIMBOLS

C PS , C WAS and C MS suspended solids concentrations in PS, WAS and MS, respectively
kb
decay coefficient of the active anaerobic biomass, incorporated in the digested sludge, d-1

k dX

rate coefficient of sludge BVSS anaerobic destruction (with the superscript meanings
X PS or X WAS or X MS)

X
W

digesting sludge thickening rate coefficient, depending on the temperature, d-1 (with the superscript
meanings X PS or X WAS or X MS)

QS

supernatant volumetric flow rate, m3/d (at anaerobic digesters where sludge thickening and

QX

supernatant withdrawal take place)

volumetric flow rate of the raw sludge, inflowing the digester, m3/d (with the superscript meanings
X PS or X WAS or X MS)

RX

actual degree of VSS reduction, % (with the superscript meanings X PS or X WAS or X MS)

general time variable, T

hydraulic residence time (HRT), d
period between two consequent sludge mixing when batch thickening takes place (in low-rate
anaerobic digesters), d

t
tm

digester volume, relevant to PS, WAS or MS stabilisation, respectively, m3 (with the superscript

11

meanings X PS or X WAS or X MS)

Wt

sludge water content at the moment t of thickening processes, associated with definite temperature,
% (with the superscript meanings X PS or X WAS or X MS)

X
0

initial sludge water content at t = 0, % (with the superscript meanings X PS or X WAS

or X MS)

W1X

first critical sludge water content, defined as a break-point between the content of free water

(removable by gravity thickening) and physically immobilised water (removable by mechanical

dewatering or drying), % (with the superscript meanings X PS or X WAS or X MS)
yield coefficient of the active anaerobic biomass, incorporated in the digested sludge

VSS fraction in an ideal raw primary sludge (unaffected by digestion processes usually taking
place in the primary settlers and/or in the sludge accumulation chambers); In the model

1 is

assumed as a constant parameter with a value in the range 0,7 0,75

1'
2

actual VSS fraction in the primary sludge at the digester inlet; In the model it is involved as an
input parameter
BVSS fraction in an ideal raw primary sludge (unaffected by digestion processes usually taking
place in the primary settlers and/or in the sludge accumulation chambers); In the model

assumed as a constant parameter with a value in the range 0,65 0,75

VSS fraction in waste activated sludge with age
BVSS in waste activated sludge with age

volumetric density of the sludge suspension, kg/m3

3 is assumed as a

4 is assumed as a constant

residual fraction of the BVSS, remaining at the end (or at a definite moment) of stabilisation
process
temperature in the digester, grad C
correction factor for the actual raw sludge BVSS content (with the superscript meanings X PS or
X WAS or X MS) ;

1 d ; In the model

1 d; In the model

parameter with a value in the range 0,7 0,8

ratio between SS mass of PS and WAS in the MS

constant parameter with a value in the range 0,7 0,9

2 is

considers BVSS reduction in PS, WAS and MS, respectively, taking

place in the primary settlers and/or in the sludge accumulation chambers; It is defined analytically
by equations (5a), (5b) and (5c), respectively
age of the waste activated sludge, d

6. References
1.
2.
3.

Arsov R. (1999a) On the kinetics of the biological processes in design of municipal wastewater sludge
anaerobic digestion units. Annuals of UACEG 40 (6), Sofia.
Arsov R. (1999b) On the reasonable degree of sludge stabilisation at the municipal wastewater
treatmentplants. Proceedings of the Specialised Conference on Disposal and Utilisation of Sewage
Sludge: Treatment Methods and Application Modalities, Oct. 13 15, Athens, Greece.
Arsov R. (1999c) Investigations on Rational Technological Flow Sheets and Design Methods for
Biological Stabilisation of Municipal Sludge. D.Sc. Thesis, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering
and Geodesy (UACEG), Sofia (in Bulgarian)

12

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

ATV Abwassertechnische Vereinigung (1991) Dimensioning of single stage activated sludge plants
upwards from 5000 total inhabitants and population equivalents - A 131. ATV rules and Standards.
Wastewater-waste, UDC 628.356:628.32-001.2(083).
Blunk H. (1925) Contribution to the calculation of digesting wastes removal. Gesundheits Ingeieur 4 (in
German).
CER 2.04.03-85 (1986) - Civil Engineering Regulations. Sewerage and Wastewater Treatment. Russian
State Committee on Civil Engineering, Moscow (in Russian).
Dimovski C. (1978) Treatment and utilisation of wastewater sludge. Technika, Sofia, 327 pp (in
Bulgarian).
Ekama G., J. Barnard, F. Gunthert, P. Krebs, J. McCorquodale, D. Parker and E. Wahlberg (1997)
Secondary settling tanks: theory modelling design and operation. Scientific and technical report 6.
IAWQ, London, 216 pp.
EPA 625/4-78-012 (1978) Sludge treatment and disposal I. US EPA Technology Transfer, Washington
DC.
Fair G., J. Geyer and D. Ocun (1968) Water and wastewater engineering 2. J. Wiley & Sons Inc., N.Y.
Imhoff K. and K. Imhoff (1979) Manual of Urban Sewarage 25. R. Oldendurg Verlag, Munich Vienna
(inGerman).
Karpinski A. (1959) New achievements in wastewater sludge digestion. Academy of Public Works
atRussian Federation, Moscow (in Russian).
Keller J. (1999) Report from Anaerobic Digestion Task Group. Newsletter 5. IAWQ Specialist group on
Anaerobic Digestion, London.
Lue-Hing C., P. Matthews, J. Namer, N. Okuno and L. Spinosa (1996) Sludge management in highly
urbanised areas. IAWQ Scientific and Technical Report 4. IAWQ, London, 7 12.
Malina J. (1962) The effect of temperature on high rate digestion of activated sludge. Proceedings of 16
thPardue Industrial Wastes Conference, p. 232.
Malina J. (1964) Thermal effect on completely mixed anaerobic digestion. Water and Sewage Works 1,
p.52.
McKiney R. (1963) Advances in biological waste treatment. Pergamon Press, N.Y.
Pruss M. (1928) Progress in the wastewater sludge thickening. R. Oldenbourg Verlag, Munchen (in
German).
Rudolph K. (1999) A low-cost approach to tackling odours. Water Quality International 1/2. IAWQ,
London, 28 31.
Tourovski I. (1982) Treatment of wastewater sludge. Stroyizdat, Moscow (in Russian).

13