Sengupta, M. and Dalwani, R. (Editors).

2008
Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference: 1004-1009

Constructed Wetland System (CWS) for Wastewater Treatment

I.H. Farooqi, Farrukh Basheer and Rahat Jahan Chaudhari
Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, UP, India 104-20
Paisley Blvd. W, Mississauga, ON, L5B1C8, Canada.
Email: rahziul@yahoo.com, farrukhbasher@rediffmail.com, rahat_c2000@yahoo.com

ABSTARCT

Natural wetlands (e.g. swamps, bogs, marshes, fens, sloughs. etc) are being considered beneficial for food
and habitat for wildlife, water quality improvement, flood protection and shoreline erosion control. However
during past few decades it has been observed that the planned use of wetlands for meeting wastewater
treatment and water quality objectives has been seriously studied and implemented in a controlled manner.
Constructed wetland systems (CWS) for wastewater treatment have been proven to be effective, low cost and
sustainable alternative for conventional wastewater treatment technologies. The removal of pollutants in
these systems relies on a combination of physical, chemical and biological processes that naturally occur in
wetlands and are associated with vegetation, sediment and their microbial communities. Numerous studies on
the performances of the wetlands treating wastewater carried out during the last few decades have provided
quantitative information which has been used to improve the treatment efficiency through design and
operation measures. The CWS generally falls under two categories: Subsurface Flow System and Free Water
Systems. Subsurface flow system are designed to create subsurface flow through a permeable medium,
keeping the water being treated below the surface, such system have also been referred as “root zone
system”, “ rock reed filters”, and “ vegetated submerged bed system”. Free water surface systems on the
other hand are designed to simulate natural wetlands, with the water flowing over the soil surface at the
shallow depth. Both types of wetlands treatment systems typically constructed in basins or channels with a
natural or constructed subsurface barrier to limit seepage. The paper reviews the different types of
constructed wetlands employed for the treatment of wastewater including its use as polishing unit. The design
aspects of CWS are also discussed and suggestions have been recommended for the optimum design and
operation and maintenance of CWS

.INTRODUCTION wastewater. In early 1960s the scientist carried out

The constructed wetland systems (CWS) for
wastewater treatment facility involve the use of
engineered systems that are designed and constructed
to utilize natural processes. These systems are designed
to mimic natural wetland systems, utilizing wetland
plants, soils and associated microorganisms to remove
contaminants from wastewater effluents (EPA, 1993).
CWS pretreats wastewater by filtration, settling and
bacterial decomposition in a natural looking lined
marsh. Constructed wetland systems have been used
internationally with good results. A properly operating
constructed wetland system should produce an effluent
with less than 30 mg/L BOD, less than 25 mg/L total
suspended solids and less than 10,000 cfu/100 mL,
fecal coliform bacteria (David et al 2002)
The first experiments aimed at the possibility of
wastewater treatment by wetland vegetation were
conducted by K. Siedel in Germany in early 1950s at
the max Planck Institute in Plon (Vymazal, 2005 ) She
carried out numerous experiments on the use of
wetland vegetation for treatment of various types of
wastewater, like, dairy wastewater and livestock
different trials to grow macrophytes in wastewater and
sludge of different origin and tried to improve the
performance of rural and decentralized wastewater
treatment which was either septic tanks or ponds
systems with inefficient treatment. Siedel named this
early system as hydrobotanical method (Vymazal
2005). In 1970s and 1980s, constructed wetlands were
nearly exclusively built to treat domestic or municipal
sewage. Since 1990s, the constructed wetlands have
been used for all kinds of wastewater including landfill
leachate, runoff (e.g. urban, highway, airport and
agricultural), food processing (e.g. winery, cheese and
milk production), industrial (e.g. chemicals, paper mill
and oil refineries), agriculture farms, mine drainage or
sludge dewatering.
Types of Constructed Wetlands
Constructed Wetland Systems generally fall into two
general categories: Subsurface Flow System and Free
Water Surface Systems. Both types utilize emergent
aquatic vegetation and are similar in appearance to a
marsh. The subsurface flow (SF) wetland (EPA, 1993)
consists of a basin or channel with a barrier to prevent
seepage, but the bed contains a suitable depth of porous
media. Rock or gravel are the most commonly used
media types in the U.S. The media also support the root
structure of the emergent vegetation. The design of
these systems assumes that the water level in the bed
will remain below the top of the rock or gravel media.
These systems are also referred to as “root zone
systems”, “rockreed filters” and “vegetated submerged
systems”. Figure 1 shows such a system

Figure 2(a). Open water wetland FWS

Figure 1. Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetland

System

The free water surface (FWS) wetland typically

consists of a basin or channels with some type of
barrier to prevent seepage, soil to support the roots of
the emergent vegetation, and water at a relatively
shallow depth flowing through the system. The water
surface is exposed to the atmosphere, and the intended
flow path through the system is horizontal
Free water systems are designed to simulate
natural wetlands with water flow over the soil surface
at shallow depth. Fig 2(a) and (b) shows the two types
of FWS. The open water wetland has a small layer of
sand to root the plants while sand layer is absent in the
hydroponic wetland. FWS are better suited for large
community systems an mild climates (David et. al.)
The SF type of wetland is thought to have several
advantages over the FWS type. If the water surface is
maintained below the media surface there is little risk
of odors, odors, exposure, or insect vectors. In addition,
it is believed that the media provides greater available
surface area for treatment than the FWS concept so the
treatment responses may be faster for the SF type,
which therefore can be smaller in area than a FWS
system designed for the same wastewater conditions.
The subsurface position of the water and the
accumulated plant debris on the surface of the SF bed
offer greater thermal protection in cold climates than
the FWS type.
Figure 2(b). Hydroponic FWS Systems
Parts of Constructed wetland systems
Constructed wetland systems have generally four parts
(i) Liner
(ii) Distribution Media
(iii) Vegetation
(iv) Underdrain System
The liner helps in preventing the percolation of
wastewater into the ground water. Although the liner
can be made from a number of materials,
Polyvinylchloride (PVC) is the most common and
reliable material for liner (figure 3). Clay liners are not
recommended as they are liable to crack that may allow
wastewater to seep through it thereby contaminating
the ground water. The distribution medium at the inlet
in usually coarse drainfeild rock that ¾ to 21/2 inches
in diameter. The first part of the distribution can be
used to spread the wastewater evenly across the width
of the wetland. Both gravity as well as pressure

1005
distribution can be used to spread the wastewater
evenly over the system (David et al, 2002).
Figure 3. Wetland Controls and Liner
CWs with free floating macrophytes may contain large
plants with well developed submerged roots such as
water hyacinths cattails, bulrushes (Fig. 4) or a small
surface floating plants with little or no roots such as
duckweeds (Greenway, 1997). The capacity of water
hyacinths to purify wastewater is well documented
(Reddy and Sultan, 1984; Reddy and de Busk 1985).
The extensive root system of the weed provides large
surface area for microorganisms thus increasing the
potential for decomposition of organic matter. Plant
uptake is the predominant process for nutrient removal
from wastewater treatment systems containing water
hyacinth plants (Reddy and Sultan, 1984).
Figure 4. Floating Aquatic Plant System
The underdrain system at the end of the wetland
is a slotted pipe covered with drainfield rock. The
underdrain moves the treated effluent out of the
wetland and keeps the effluent level below the surface
of the gravel. This prevents the effluent from coming
into contact with people and also keeps the water level
high enough to sustain growth.
1006
Design Criteria
There are several design models based on first order
plug flow kinetic models. One of the method is Reed
method to calculate the area of free water surface
constructed wetland considering the BOD removal, as
described by the “Guide lines for using free water
surface constructed wetland to treat municipal sewage”
(Knight Mertz, 2000). In his model Reed incorporated
flowrate, wetland depth, wetland porosity, a
temperature-based rate constant, and inflow and
outflow concentrations. The rate constant is a function
of depth and porosity of the wetland. Reed equation is
the following:
A =Q ln(Ci/Co)/KTdnv and KT = K20Ө (Tw−20)
where A is the wetland treatment area (m2), Q the
influent wastewater flow (m3/d), Ci the influent
pollutant concentration at wetland inlet (mg/l), Co the
effluent pollutant concentration at wetland outlet
(mg/l), d the water depth in wetland (m), nv the void
ratio or porosity corresponding to proportion of typical
wetland cross section not occupied by vegetation, KT
the rate constant corresponding to water temperature in
wetland (d−1), K20 the rate constant at 20 ◦C reference
temperature (d−1), Tw the wetland temperature (◦C) and
Ө is the temperature coefficient for rate constant. The
first-order kinetic constant values at 20 ◦C (K20) and the
temperature coefficient (Ө) depends on the pollutant
removal. For BOD removal K20 = 0.678 d−1 and Ө=
1.06 while for NH4+ removal K20 = 0.218 d−1 and Ө=
1.048. Wetland temperature Tw is a fundamental
parameter for the designer because the removal of
BOD and the various nitrogen forms are temperature
dependent (Siracusa and Rosa, 2006). Winter
temperatures correspond to lower reaction rates and
should be used in the design calculations. Water depths
are typically deeper ranging from 0.6 – 1.00 m.
Supplementary aeration has been used with floating
plant system to increase the treatment capacity and to
maintain aerobic conditions.
For subsurface flow constructed wetland Kikuth
(1977) proposed the following equation which is
widely used for sizing of systems for domestic sewage
treatment
Ah = Qd (ln Cin – ln Cout)
KBOD
Where Ah is the surface flow of bed (m2), Qd is
the average flow rate (m3/d), Cin is the influent BOD5
(mg/L), Cout is the effluent BOD5 and KBOD is the rate
constant (d-1). A typical SSF constructed wetland has a
depth of filtration bed usually 0.6 – 0.8 m in order to
allow the roots of wetland plants to penetrate the whole
bed and to ensure the oxygen generation of the whole
bed through oxygen released from roots.
Vertical Flow Constructed Wetlands (Brix., et. al.,
2005)
Investigators are doing extensive researches to develop
a constructed wetland system that will meet the most
stringent treatment class, i.e. 95% removal of BOD5,
90% removal of total-P and 90% nitrification (Brix et
al., 2003; Arias et al., 2003a,b). These studies, as well
as investigations performed in other countries, clearly
demonstrated that vertical flow constructed wetland
systems would be able to fulfill these treatment
demands (Platzer, 1996; Laber et al., 1997; Cooper,
1999; Brix et al., 2002; Weedon, 2003). An
experimental vertical flow constructed wetland system
was established (Fig. 5&6) at a traditional municipal
wastewater treatment plant so that the loading rate
could be manipulated as desired, and a number of tests
were conducted in order to establish the treatment
capacity of vertical flow beds (Johansen et al., 2002).
The studies documented that the capacity of vertical
flow constructed wetlands to remove BOD5 and to
nitrify is very high and determined the area-demand of
the system. It was documented that vertical flow beds
are extremely effective in removing suspended solids
and BOD5, and they do also nitrify at high loading rates
even during cold winters (Brix et al., 2002).The studies
also evaluated the effects of recirculation of nitrified
effluent back to the sedimentation tank in order to
enhance denitrification in the sedimentation tank (Brix
etal., 2002, 2003; Marti et al., 2003; Arias et al., 2005).
A recycling rate of one to one, i.e. 100% recycling,
resulted in about 50% denitrification. Recycling also
improved and stabilized the overall treatment
performance of the system. The removal of indicator
bacteria in the system was about 2 log-units (Arias et
al., 2003b). Phosphorus removal in vertical flow
constructed wetlands is very limited, and it is not
possible to obtain a sand bed medium that has a
sufficient high capacity to bind phosphorus for a
Figure 5. General layout of a single household vertical flow constructed wetland system. (Brix. Et. al.,2005)
prolonged period (Arias et al., 2001; Del Bubba et al.,
2003; Arias and Brix, 2005). Therefore, the phosphorus
binding capacities of various artificial media have been
assessed in the laboratory in an attempt to find a
medium that could be used to bind phosphorus. The
idea was to establish a separate exchangeable filter unit
after the constructed wetland system to remove
phosphorus from the effluent (Brix et al., 2001; Arias
et al., 2003a). A suitable calcite material was
identified, but the full-scale tests showed that removal
initially was good, but after a few months, the H. Brix,
C.A. Arias / Ecological Engineering 25 (2005) 491–
500 493 filters were saturated with phosphorus and
there were problems with clogging. It has not
subsequently been possible to solve the inherent
problems with this material. Instead phosphorus
removal can be obtained by simple precipitation with
an aluminum compound in the sedimentation tank prior
to the wetland.
Based on the initial experiences from the
experimental systems, a full-scale system was
constructed treating the sewage from a single
household with four persons. The system consists of a
2-m3 three-chamber sedimentation tank, a level-
controlled pump and a 15- m2 vertical flow constructed
wetland. Effluent from the system can be recirculated
to the sedimentation tank to enhance removal of total-
nitrogen by denitrification (Brix, 2003a). Phosphorus
was initially removed by a separate exchangeable
filter-unit containing calcite. However, because of the
problems mentioned above, this system was
abandoned, and phosphorus is now removed by
chemical precipitation in the sedimentation tank. The
performance of the single household system has been
monitored under conditions with recirculation as well
as without recirculation, and has documented the
importance of recirculation for the treatment
performance
1007
Figure 6. Layout of a vertical flow constructed wetland system for a single household. (Brix. Et. al., 2005)
REFERENCES
Arias, C.A., Brix, H., Johansen, N.H., (2003a). Phosphorus
removal from municipal wastewater in an experimental
two-stage vertical flow constructed wetland system
equipped with a calcite filter. Water Sci. Technol. 48
(5), 51–58.
Arias, C.A., Cabello, A., Brix, H., Johansen, N.H., (2003b).
Removal of indicator bacteria from
municipalwastewater in an experimental two-stage
vertical flowconstructed wetland system.Water Sci.
Technol. 48 (5), 35–41.
Arias, C.A., Brix, H., (2005). Phosphorus removal in
constructed wetlands Can suitable alternative media be
identified? Water Sci.Technol. 51 (9), 267–273.
Brix, H., Arias, C.A., Del Bubba, M., (2001). Media selection
for sustainable phosphorus removal in subsurface flow
constructed wetlands. Water Sci. Technol. 44, (11–12),
47–54.
Brix, H., Arias, C.A., Johansen, N.H., (2002). BOD and
nitrogen removal from municipal wastewater in an
experimental twostage vertical flowconstructed wetland
system with recycling. In: Proceedings of the Eighth
International Conference on Wetland Systems for
Water Pollution Control, Arusha, Tanzania, 16–19
September, 400–410.
Brix, H., Arias, C.A., Johansen, N.H., (2003). Experiments in
a two-stage constructed wetland system: nitrification
capacity and effects of recycling on nitrogen removal.
In: Vymazal, J. (Ed.), Wetlands—Nutrients, Metals and
Mass Cycling. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The
Netherlands, 237–258
Brix, H. and Arias, C.A., (2005), “The use of vertical flow
constructed wetlands for on-site treatment of domestic
wastewater: New Danish guidelines”, Ecological
Engineering. 25, 491–500.
1008
Cooper, P., (1999). Areviewof the design and performance of
vertical flow and hybrid reed bed treatment systems.
Water Sci. Technol. 40 (3), 1–9.
David M.G., James, L.A. and Christopherson, S.H. Axler
Ruch., (2002), A Report of Constructed Wetlands,
University of Minnesta EPA, 1993, “Constructed
Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment and Wild Life
Habitat” : 17 case studies, EPA 832 – R – 005
Del Bubba, M., Arias, C.A., Brix, H., (2003). Phosphorus
absorption maximum of sands for use as media in
subsurface flow constructed reed beds as measured by
the Langmuir isotherm.Water Res. 37, 3390–3400.
Greenway M., (1997), “Nutrient Content of Wetland Plants in
Constructed Wetland Receiving Municipal Effluent in
Tropical Australia”, Water Sci. Technol 35, 135-142
Johansen, N.H., Brix, H., Arias, C.A., (2002). Design and
characterization of a compact constructed wetland
system removing BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus from
single household sewage In: Proceedings of the Eighth
International Conference on Wetland
Systems for Water Pollution Control, Arusha, Tanzania, 16–
19 September, pp. 47–61.
Kickuth, R., (1977), “Degradation and Incorporation of
Nutrients from Rural Wastewaters by Plant
Rhizosphere under Limnic Conditions”. In: Utilization
of Manure by Land Spreading. Comm. Europ.
Commun., EUR 5672e, London, UK, pp. 335–343.
Laber, J., Perfler, R., Haberl, R., (1997), Two strategies for
advanced nitrogen elimination in vertical flow
constructed wetlands.Water Sci. Technol. 35 (5), 71–
77.
Marti, E., Arias, C.A., Brix, H., Johansen, N.H., (2003),
Recycling of treated effluents enhances reduction of
total nitrogen in vertical flow constructed wetlands,
vol. 94. Publicationes Instituti Geographici
Universitatis Tartuensis, pp. 150–15
Platzer, C., (1996), Enhanced nitrogen elimination in
subsurface flow artificial wetlands—a multi stage
concept. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International
Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution
Control, Universit¨at f¨ur Bodenkultur Wien, Vienna,
Austria.
Reddy, K.R. and Sultan, D.L., (1984), “Water Hyacinths for
Water Quality Improvement and Biomass Production”,
J. Environ. Qual. 13, 1-8
Reddy, K.R. and De Busk, W.X., (1985), “Nutrient Removal
Potential of Selected Aquatix Macrophytes”, J.
Environ. Qual. 14, 459-462
Sinclair Knight Mertz, (2000), “Guidelines fro using Free
Water System Constructed Wetland to Treat Municipal
Sewage”: Queensland Department of natural
Resources, Brisbane, Australia
Siracusa Gand and Rosa, A.D., (2006), “Design of a
Constructed Wetland Trreatment in a Sicilian Town
and Environment Evaluation using Energy Analysis”,
Ecological Modelling, 137L, 490-497
Vymazal J., (1998), “Types of Constructed Wetlands for
Wastewater Treatment”, In: A paper presented at the
Sixth International Conference on Wetland System for
Water Pollution Control, Brazil
Vymazal, J., (2005), “Horizontal Subsurface Flow and
Hybrid Constructed wetland System for Wastewater
Treatment”, Ecological Engineering, 24, 478-490
Weedon, C.M., (2003), Compact vertical flow constructed
wetland systems—first two years’ performance. Water
Sci. Technol. 48 (5), 15–23.

1009