<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">DWES</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Drinking Water Engineering and Science</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">DWES</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Drink. Water Eng. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1996-9465</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/dwes-12-39-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Numerical analysis of the circular settling tank</article-title><alt-title>Circular settling tank</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Circular settling tank}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{E. Chero et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Chero</surname><given-names>Elahe</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Torabi</surname><given-names>Mohammadamin</given-names></name>
          <email>toramoha@isu.edu</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Zahabi</surname><given-names>Hamidreza</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Ghafoorisadatieh</surname><given-names>Anahita</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Bina</surname><given-names>Keivan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Civil Engineering, Khavaran Institute of Higher
Education, Mashhad, Iran</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Idaho State
University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Department of Civil Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico,
1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Higher Education Khazar,
Mahmudabad, Iran</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Department of Civil
Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Khayyam University, Mashhad,
Iran</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Mohammadamin Torabi (toramoha@isu.edu)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>20</day><month>August</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>12</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>39</fpage><lpage>44</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>14</day><month>March</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>17</day><month>April</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>5</day><month>July</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>23</day><month>July</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2019 Elahe Chero et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2019</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019.html">This article is available from https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e144">Nowadays, a settling tank's removal efficiency is one of
the most crucial matters for all water or wastewater treatment plants (WTPs
or WWTPs). The unit can affect WWTP performance and improve the provided
effluent quality. In this paper, the geometrical aspects of a settling tank
were numerically analyzed via tracer curves, the finite-volume method, and
ANSYS CFX software in which the baffle depth and diameter of a settling
tank were assessed. Firstly, a previous study was similarly remodeled to
verify simulation results. The impact of tank depth variation was
numerically assessed where the outcomes showed that a deeper tank could
raise discharge time or the hydraulic retention time (HRT). Thus, extensive
discharge time may result in less polluted effluent, degrading more solids.
However, the tank should not be too deeply based on costs. Moreover, the
differential effect of baffle height was analyzed and indicated that lower
height is more useful for boosting the HRT. An investigation of tank diameter
changes also revealed that wider diameters bring about a broader HRT.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e156">Over the past decades, water and wastewater treatment plants (WTPs and WWTPs) have
drawn government attention to water, especially environmental hazards
originating from grey and sewage runoff throughout urban areas. In this
regard, treatment processes can be optimally designed and operated.
Therefore, one of the most critical stages in WWTPs is sedimentation in
settling tanks to degrade and remove organic matters and solids. Looking at
research shows that several models have simulated and analyzed the
sedimentation process numerically. To simplify methods, some assumptions
were effectively used to evaluate flow pattern movement as well as solids
and particles in settling tanks.</p>
      <p id="d1e159">According to previous studies, mathematical models are often applied instead
of analytical solutions to reach precise flow characteristics (Imam et al.,
1983). Moreover, three methods are suggested to have an appropriate
description of flow pattern movement and characteristics (Kynch, 1952).
Firstly, the one-dimensional model is introduced in which solid vertical
movement is considered (Kynch, 1952). Secondly, the two-dimensional model is
presented for vertical and horizontal solid movement, which was the method
once used to simplify the three-dimensional model (Imam et al., 1983).
Ultimately, the three-dimensional model has more benefits thanks to
orienting the flow pattern. Liu and Garcia developed a three-dimensional
(3-D) numerical model to simulate large primary settling tanks in which a
tracer study was used to investigate the tank's residence time (Liu and
Garcia, 2010). The model was implemented on a settling tank in Chicago in
the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRDGC).
Throughout the case study, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model simulated
solid-removal efficiencies. The results of the research model were used to
establish the design basis for tank-side water depth, inlet feed-well
dimensions, etc.; Liu and Garcia model<?pagebreak page40?> outcomes can be capitalized on to
decrease the cost of construction via the optimized settling tank.</p>
      <p id="d1e162">Vahidfar et al. (2018) investigated and modeled a rectangular settling tank
in full scale by using the CFD method to increase efficiency (Vahidfar et al., 2018).
In 2018, Zahabi et al. also numerically investigated the geometry of
rectangular reservoir to entrap sediments, and they found the optimum
geometry (Zahabi et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e165">There are a wide range of parameters which can affect settling tank
performance. To illustrate this, the Reynolds number, flow viscosity, the
type of hydraulic flow movement, and tank dimension and design are the most
significant factors in the settling unit. Schamber and Larock once used the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> turbulence model to simulate the settling stage applying for a high
Reynolds number and turbulent flow (Schamber and Larock, 1983). According
to the study, coarse solids with a high specific weight increase the
Reynolds number; therefore, this type of model is typically conducted for a
settling unit. Furthermore, a study showed that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
turbulence model agreed well with some experiments in a simple geometric
tank (Adams and Rodi, 1990). The quality of the computations, however,
deteriorates with increasing flow complexity. In fact, the effects of flow
curvature are mainly applied to clarify the differences between computation
and experiment, which are not a part of the standard <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> model.
Also, a mathematical model was used to predict the velocity and particle
transport pattern in secondary rectangular tanks. The particle impacts
in terms of bottom current, surface return flow, and the solid
concentration distribution of density stratification on the hydrodynamics
were analyzed by Zhou and McCorquodale (1992). Consequently, the model was
used to simulate the so-called density waterfall phenomenon in the front end
of a settling tank.</p>
      <p id="d1e205">It is suggested that effluent concentration changes through velocities in the
withdrawal zone (McCorquodale and Zhou, 1993). It is also shown that there
is more upward velocity in the withdrawal zone by decreasing the densimetric
Froude number for a constant discharge, showing the relationship between the
densimetric Froude number and hydraulic and solid loads. The density of the
waterfall can capture large volumes of the ambient fluid in the physical and
numerical models (Zhou and McCorquodale, 1992). Also, the entrainment-compensating flow rate is indirectly related to the densimetric Froude
number. Furthermore, the bottom strength of the current density, the upward
flow in the withdrawal zone, and the recirculation all increase as the
densimetric Froude number decreases due to entrainment into the density
waterfall.</p>
      <p id="d1e208">Some research also addressed an array of CFD
modeling in the wastewater treatment (WWT) field (Dutta et al., 2014;
Daneshfaraz et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2016). For instance, Wicklein et
al. proposed a good modeling practice (GMP) for wastewater application,
and it is based on general CFD procedures (Wicklein et al., 2016;
Daneshfaraz et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e211">Settling basins can be divided into two categories in terms of geometry,
which are cubic and cylindrical in shape. In this regard, circular basins
are better than rectangular ones, since they need less area for
construction. This might increase rectangular basin hydraulic efficiency
(Stamou et al., 1989). In this study, some circular basins are considered to be
a three-dimensional model to simulate tank geometry and stream direction.
Meanwhile, continuity and momentum equations will be analyzed via the finite-volume method, and the density change of the particles is ignored.
Eventually, the tracer curve will be used to evaluate hydraulic efficiency
in terms of basin depth, and also the tank diameter variation will be
studied to assess repercussions.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e217">Properties of settling tank.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Parameters</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Unit</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Dimension</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Tank diameter</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">47.24</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Baffle diameter</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Tank depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.66</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Baffle height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.52</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Inlet pipe diameter</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.37</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bottom slope</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e335">Tracer curve outcome for the two aforementioned studies.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Time of discharge</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Time of discharge</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Baffle</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Tank</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(h)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(h)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">depth</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Liu and Garcia, 2010)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(current study)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(m)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.66</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.66</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Material and methods</title>
      <p id="d1e441">An increase in settling time results in tank sedimentation efficiency; considering the appropriate size for a tank's baffle and the weir
structure are two ways to improve tank efficiency. In this light, baffles
may cause returning flow when flow reaches the baffle and weir structure,
extending the distance that flow travels to discharge from the basin
tank. In this paper, the aim is to study and evaluate the Chicago basin tank
which was evaluated in 2011 to analyze the basin's depth and diameter
changes and its effects on effluent quality (Liu and García, 2010). In this respect,
tank properties are presented in Table 1.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e446">Schematic view of Chicago tank – adapted from Liu and Garcia (2010).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e457">Flow lines and directions in the settling tank.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e469">Modeled settling tank.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e478">The Chicago tank is capable of maintaining flow being treated into the basin
by increasing retention time, which happens while a weir is considered with a
shorter height, causing a longer distance for the flow to exist. Therefore,
the mechanism triggers to provide more time for settling. On the other hand,
the flow turns when it reaches the baffle wall. In this regard, the
process is evaluated via the ICEM CFD model. The mesh in the
model is 12 million rectangular meshes (Tetra Unstructured Tetrahedral Grid), where the
larger and shorter bases are 10 and 2 cm, respectively. The<?pagebreak page41?> tank which was
studied by Garcia and flow lines along with the tank mesh system are shown
in Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4. It should be added that geometrical modeling was
done by ANSYS CFX software in the current study. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> turbulent model was also
used for simulation.</p>
      <p id="d1e493">To simplify the model and obtain an accurate result, some assumptions are
considered, including that of the flow pattern being steady. Temperature variation
is ignored, and flow temperature, density, and velocity are assumed to be
constant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C; flow density <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">998</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). In addition,
boundary conditions are conducted in three main steps in which the tank's
surface is taken to be a slippery surface except for the bottom of the tank.
The free surface is rigid, and the flow pressure is calculated
hydrostatically. Relative pressure at the end is zero, and the inlet is
velocity radial control.</p>
      <p id="d1e539">One way to calculate the settling tank's efficiency is to draw a tracer
curve. The method is defined as a way in which the pigment flow is carried
out to the influent, and then, when the pigment reaches the effluent, the
pigment concentration is measured. Following this, three steps are taken to
draw the racer curve comprised of solving the flow equation steadily in
ANSYS solver, defining the pigment in the pre-CFX ANSYS, and then checking
pigment concentrations in the influent and effluent after 3 h. It should
be added that hydrodynamic conditions are expressed in terms of three laws
in which the conservation of mass, the conservation of momentum (Newton's
second law), and the conservation of energy (the first law of thermodynamics)
are considered.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Tracer curve method evaluation</title>
      <p id="d1e550">The maximum time of the flow discharge in the current study will be compared
with Garcia outcomes in a similar way in order to make an evaluation (Garcia,
2011). Figure 4 shows the comparison between these two studies in the sense
of tracer curves. Table 1 also shows the maximum time of the tracer curves
when tank depths are taken at a 12 ft depth and at two different baffle
heights of 2.13 and 1.52 m to compare with Garcia's results.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e555">Data dispersion in current and Garcia studies (2011).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f04.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e564">As observed, data dispersion (the current study) is in good agreement with
the Garcia study in which trend lines are going up by a 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> slope.
Beside this, the standard deviations of graphs in both Fig. 4a and b are close to 1.
Therefore, modeling of the Chicago tank by a tracer curve is effective and
accurate enough to predict other basin tank depths and baffle heights.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page42?><sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Result and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>The effect of tank depth variation</title>
      <p id="d1e592">The tracer curves evaluate the tank performance where the tank depth
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the baffle height (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) change with a 5 s pigment
injection. Then, the pigment concentrations will be measured in the inlet
and outlet (effluent) over 3 h to find the difference. Figures 5 and 6 display the tracer curve results for a tank depth variation and baffle
height of 1.52 and 2.13 m, in which the tank diameter is equal to 47.24 m.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e619">Effluent concentration with a baffle height of 1.52 m in tank
depth variations.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e630">Effluent concentration with a baffle height of 2.13 m in tank
depth variations.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e640">According to Fig. 5, as tank depth increases, it takes more time (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
to discharge effluent. Therefore, the hydraulic retention time (HRT) will
rise slightly, which is more evident in peak point locations. It is clear
from the data given that a 0.34 h time elapse is observed from the 3.66 (1.19 h) to 1.52 m (1.53 h) depth peak point distance. Moreover, the greater
the tank depth, the thinner the gaps between peak points become.
Particularly, the gap between 4.57 and 1.22 m tank depths is narrower
compared with the gap between 3.66 and 3.96 m or even the gap between tank
depths of 3.96 and 4.27 m. If the tank depth is more than 4.57 m, the gap
will not be noticed. Thus, tank depths which are more than 4.57 m are not
economically beneficial because there would not be excessive time discharge
for the tank. This means that building larger tanks is not cost-efficient
because it does not have a positive impact on effluent concentration.</p>
      <?pagebreak page43?><p id="d1e654">Furthermore, the points (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) where the lines start to have more
effluent concentration and the tank is being filled with pollution are
different. To illustrate that, the starting points are 0.64 and 0.91 h,
respectively, for tank depths of 3.66 and 4.57 m. Therefore, deeper tanks become
polluted later. Comparing the maximum points' effluent concentration
indicates that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">out</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">o</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio falls markedly from 3.66 to 4.57 m
tank depths given that the optimum tank depth is 4.57 m; however, there is
not a significant gap between 4.27 and 4.57 m depths.</p>
      <p id="d1e686">Figure 6 (baffle height of 2.13 m) also shows a similar behavior to that seen in
Fig. 5. However, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is slightly less than that in Fig. 5. Plus,
the effluent concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">out</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">o</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio) are almost equal for
all tank depths, with a small drop from tank depths of 3.66 to 4.57 m. Also,
the same behavior holds for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as discussed previously.</p>
      <p id="d1e729">Overall, there is no significant difference between a tank baffle of 1.52
and 2.13 m. However, a tank baffle of 5 m can provide more HRT or discharge
time by tracer curve calculations with the same properties.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>The effect of tank diameter variation</title>
      <p id="d1e740">Tank diameter can change <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and following that, effluent concentration
may vary. The effect of diameter variation on these parameters is analyzed
in this part. A tank baffle of 1.52 m generates less effluent concentration.
It is selected for the following comparison. Figures 7 and 8 display tank
performances for tanks that are 42.67 and 51.8 m in diameter and for which
tank depths are 3.66, 3.96, 4.27, and 4.57 m, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e756">Effluent concentration and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in tank depth variations and
42.67 m diameter.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e778">Effluent concentration and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in tank depth variations and
51.82 m diameter.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://dwes.copernicus.org/articles/12/39/2019/dwes-12-39-2019-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e799">Figures 7 and 8 show that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> changes considerably when the diameter
increases from 42.67 to 51.82 m. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rises noticeably. This is even
more evident for a tank depth of 4.57 m in two figures in which <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
1.41 and 1.63 h for 42.67 and 51.82 m diameters, respectively. In addition, there
are still gaps among lines which become narrower as tank depth increases.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e845">In this study, a tracer curve is used to analyze settling tank performance
in which the given tank is firstly evaluated with the previous study. The
results of the evaluation were homogenized with the study, and similar
outcomes were generated. Then, the effects of tank depth variation, baffle
height, and tank diameter were investigated. It was determined that a
greater tank depth increases the discharge time. Also, when the tank depth
is higher, the effluent concentration is lower. Comparing baffle heights of
1.52 and 2.13 m showed that the discharge time is wider with a baffle height
of 1.52 m. Therefore, smaller baffle heights are effective in delaying<?pagebreak page44?> the
effluent discharge time. Tank diameter variation analysis indicated that a
larger tank diameter results in a greater discharge time, which is evident
for a tank depth of 51.82 m compared with 45.72 m. The time in which a tank
gets polluted and the effluent becomes concentrated also depends on tank
depth and diameter. For larger tanks the time increases when the tank depth and diameter are
considered for larger sizes.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e852">The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the authors upon reasonable request.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e858">EC did the numerical work and was the principal investigator. MT supervised the whole work and numerical modeling. HZ and AG contributed to writing the paper. KB was the investigator and contributed to writing the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e864">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e870">We thank the ASCE permission office and (Liu and Garcia, 2010) for their interesting paper. Figure 1 is redrawn but adapted from Liu and Garcia (2010).</p></ack><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e875">This paper was edited by Mirjam Blokker and reviewed by five anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Adams, E. W. and Rodi, W.: Modeling flow and mixing in sedimentation
tanks, J. Hydraul. Eng., 116, 895–913,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1990)116:7(895)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1990)116:7(895)</ext-link>, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Daneshfaraz, R. and Ghaderi, A.: Numerical investigation of inverse
curvature ogee spillway, Civ. Eng. J., 3, 1146–1156,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-030944" ext-link-type="DOI">10.28991/cej-030944</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Daneshfaraz, R., Joudi, A. R., Ghahramanzadeh, A., and Ghaderi, A.:
Investigation of flow pressure distribution over a stepped
spillway, Advances and Applications in Fluid Mechanics, 19, 805–822,
2016.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dutta, S., Tokyay, T. E., Cataño-Lopera, Y. A., Serafino, S., and
Garcia, M. H.: Application of computational fluid dynamic modelling to
improve flow and grit transport in Terrence J. O'Brien Water Reclamation
Plant, Chicago, Illinois, J. Hydraul. Res., 52, 759–774,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2014.949883" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/00221686.2014.949883</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Imam, E., McCorquodale, J. A., and Bewtra, J. K.: Numerical modeling of
sedimentation tanks, J. Hydraul. Eng., 109, 1740–1754,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1983)109:12(1740)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1983)109:12(1740)</ext-link>,
1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kynch, G. J.: A theory of sedimentation, T. Faraday
Soc., 48, 166–176, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9524800166" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1039/TF9524800166</ext-link>, 1952.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, X. and García, M. H.: Computational fluid dynamics modeling for
the design of large primary settling tanks, J. Hydraul.
Eng., 137, 343–355,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000313" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000313</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McCorquodale, J. A. and Zhou, S.: Effects of hydraulic and solids loading
on clarifier performance, J. Hydraul. Res., 31, 461–478,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221689309498870" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/00221689309498870</ext-link>, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schamber, D. R. and Larock, B. E.: Particle concentration predictions in
settling basins, J. Environ. Eng., 109, 753–764,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1983)109:3(753)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1983)109:3(753)</ext-link>, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stamou, A. I., Adams, E. W., and Rodi, W.: Numerical modeling of flow and
settling in primary rectangular clarifiers, J. Hydraul. Res.,
27, 665–682,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221688909499117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/00221688909499117</ext-link>,
1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Vahidifar, S., Saffarian, M. R., and Hajidavalloo, E.: Introducing the
theory of successful settling in order to evaluate and optimize the
sedimentation tanks, Meccanica, 53, 3477–3493,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-018-0907-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11012-018-0907-2</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wicklein, E., Batstone, D. J., Ducoste, J., Laurent, J., Griborio, A.,
Wicks, J., and Nopens, I.: Good modelling practice in applying
computational fluid dynamics for WWTP modelling, Water Sci.
Technol., 73, 969–982, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.565" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2166/wst.2015.565</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zahabi, H., Torabi, M., Alamatian, E., Bahiraei, M., and Goodarzi, M.:
Effects of Geometry and Hydraulic Characteristics of Shallow Reservoirs on
Sediment Entrapment, Water, 10, 1725,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121725" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/w10121725</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, J., Liu, X. I., Tejada-Matinez, A., and Zhang, Q. I.: Computational Fluid Dynamics: A promising Tool for Analysis and Design of Water and Waste-water treatment, Hydrolink, Hidraulics of Wastewater Treatment, 2, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhou, S. and McCorquodale, J. A.: Modeling of rectangular settling tanks,
J. Hydraul. Eng., 118, 1391–1405,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1992)118:10(1391)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1992)118:10(1391)</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Numerical analysis of the circular settling tank</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Nowadays, a settling tank's removal efficiency is one of
the most crucial matters for all water or wastewater treatment plants (WTPs
or WWTPs). The unit can affect WWTP performance and improve the provided
effluent quality. In this paper, the geometrical aspects of a settling tank
were numerically analyzed via tracer curves, the finite-volume method, and
ANSYS CFX software in which the baffle depth and diameter of a settling
tank were assessed. Firstly, a previous study was similarly remodeled to
verify simulation results. The impact of tank depth variation was
numerically assessed where the outcomes showed that a deeper tank could
raise discharge time or the hydraulic retention time (HRT). Thus, extensive
discharge time may result in less polluted effluent, degrading more solids.
However, the tank should not be too deeply based on costs. Moreover, the
differential effect of baffle height was analyzed and indicated that lower
height is more useful for boosting the HRT. An investigation of tank diameter
changes also revealed that wider diameters bring about a broader HRT.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Adams, E. W. and Rodi, W.: Modeling flow and mixing in sedimentation
tanks, J. Hydraul. Eng., 116, 895–913,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1990)116:7(895)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1990)116:7(895)</a>, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Daneshfaraz, R. and Ghaderi, A.: Numerical investigation of inverse
curvature ogee spillway, Civ. Eng. J., 3, 1146–1156,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-030944" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-030944</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Daneshfaraz, R., Joudi, A. R., Ghahramanzadeh, A., and Ghaderi, A.:
Investigation of flow pressure distribution over a stepped
spillway, Advances and Applications in Fluid Mechanics, 19, 805–822,
2016.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Dutta, S., Tokyay, T. E., Cataño-Lopera, Y. A., Serafino, S., and
Garcia, M. H.: Application of computational fluid dynamic modelling to
improve flow and grit transport in Terrence J. O'Brien Water Reclamation
Plant, Chicago, Illinois, J. Hydraul. Res., 52, 759–774,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2014.949883" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2014.949883</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Imam, E., McCorquodale, J. A., and Bewtra, J. K.: Numerical modeling of
sedimentation tanks, J. Hydraul. Eng., 109, 1740–1754,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1983)109:12(1740)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1983)109:12(1740)</a>,
1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Kynch, G. J.: A theory of sedimentation, T. Faraday
Soc., 48, 166–176, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9524800166" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9524800166</a>, 1952.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, X. and García, M. H.: Computational fluid dynamics modeling for
the design of large primary settling tanks, J. Hydraul.
Eng., 137, 343–355,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000313" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000313</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
McCorquodale, J. A. and Zhou, S.: Effects of hydraulic and solids loading
on clarifier performance, J. Hydraul. Res., 31, 461–478,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221689309498870" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/00221689309498870</a>, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Schamber, D. R. and Larock, B. E.: Particle concentration predictions in
settling basins, J. Environ. Eng., 109, 753–764,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1983)109:3(753)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1983)109:3(753)</a>, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Stamou, A. I., Adams, E. W., and Rodi, W.: Numerical modeling of flow and
settling in primary rectangular clarifiers, J. Hydraul. Res.,
27, 665–682,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221688909499117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/00221688909499117</a>,
1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Vahidifar, S., Saffarian, M. R., and Hajidavalloo, E.: Introducing the
theory of successful settling in order to evaluate and optimize the
sedimentation tanks, Meccanica, 53, 3477–3493,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-018-0907-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-018-0907-2</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Wicklein, E., Batstone, D. J., Ducoste, J., Laurent, J., Griborio, A.,
Wicks, J., and Nopens, I.: Good modelling practice in applying
computational fluid dynamics for WWTP modelling, Water Sci.
Technol., 73, 969–982, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.565" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.565</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Zahabi, H., Torabi, M., Alamatian, E., Bahiraei, M., and Goodarzi, M.:
Effects of Geometry and Hydraulic Characteristics of Shallow Reservoirs on
Sediment Entrapment, Water, 10, 1725,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121725" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121725</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, J., Liu, X. I., Tejada-Matinez, A., and Zhang, Q. I.: Computational Fluid Dynamics: A promising Tool for Analysis and Design of Water and Waste-water treatment, Hydrolink, Hidraulics of Wastewater Treatment, 2, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Zhou, S. and McCorquodale, J. A.: Modeling of rectangular settling tanks,
J. Hydraul. Eng., 118, 1391–1405,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1992)118:10(1391)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1992)118:10(1391)</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
