PROPOSED DESIGN OF

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT IN

DON HONORIO VENTURA
TECHNOLOGICAL STATE UNIVERSITY
BACOLOR, PAMPANGA
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
 Earth's Water
3 1.2 3.8
0.26
0.49
2.6
2.5
0.9
30.1 20.9

96.5
69
68.7

To t a l g l o b a l w a t e r Fre s h w at e r S u rf ac e w at e r an d ot h e r f re s h w ate r
DHVTSU Student Population

Academic 1ST SEM 2ND SEM SUMMER

Year
2016- 2017 18432 18067 3590
2017- 2018 17681 16429 4171
2018- 2019 23561 22984
Maximum number of employees as of 2018:
832 Employees

Annual Water Consumption as of 2018:

110817 cum/ year
“Mass is neither created not destroyed”
 Sewage Treatment Plants

Sewage treatment is the process of removing

contaminants from wastewater, primarily from
household sewage. It includes physical, chemical, and
biological processes to remove these contaminants and
produce environmentally safe treated wastewater (or
treated effluent).
5%- Connected to
sewer network
10%- Treated
Wastewater
58%- Contaminated
Groundwater
Manila Water holds 37 Sewage Treatment Plants
• Magallanes Wastewater Treatment Plant
• UP Wastewater Treatment Plant in Quezon
City

Manila Central Sewerage System holds 11 Sewage

Treatment Plant
• Dagat- Dagatan, Alabang,
• Makati Isolated System QC Communal Systems
• San Juan catchment STPs
 Design Advantages Disadvantages
 Common and proven  Susceptible to
process filamentous sludge
Adaptable to many bulking
Conventional Activated  types of wastewater  Foaming can be a
Sludge Process (CASP)
 Uncomplicated design concern
 May need additional
facilities for BNR
 Need for return sludge
 Simplified process  Process control are
 Final clarifiers and RAS more complicated
pumping are not  High peak flows can
required disrupt operation
Sequencing Batch Compact design unless accounted for

Reactor (SBR) Operation is flexible, in design

nutrient removal can
be accomplished by
operational changes
  There is no return activated
sludge (RAS) and sludge
production is minimized
 Compatible with a small
footprint
 Comes with a budget-
friendly operating and
maintenance expenses
 Flexible design that allows
for increased capacity
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
(MBBR)
 Higher volumetric loading
rates, thus shorter HRT
 Longer SRT resulting in lesser
sludge production
Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)  Produces high quality
effluent
 Compact design
 Can have problems with
media carryover on system
start-up, with reports of
intermittent bed motility and
system crashes
 Media density changes over
time with biofilm
accumulation, necessitating
a bed growth management
strategy
 Can require relatively
expensive plumbing to
ensure that media is not
back-siphoned on pump
shut-down or power failure
 High capital cost
 Limited data on membrane
life
 Potential high cost of
periodic membrane
replacement
 Higher energy cost
 Need to control membrane
fouling
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
 OBJECTIVES

MAIN OBJECTIVE:
The main objective of the study is to design the
sewage treatment plant of Don Honorio Ventura
Technological State University (Main Campus).
 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES:
- To determine the wastewater characterization of the
effluent released by the school if it complies with
the parameters of DENR DAO 2016-08.

- To design the tanks that will contain and treat the

domestic sewage of the university.

- To design the main sewer network that will transfer

the raw sewage to the proposed treatment plant.
 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

• The study is significant for the improvement of

sewage disposal of the university for it will help the
school to treat its own wastewater before discharging
it to a body of water.

• The study will allow the university to treat its own

sewage by having a sewage treatment facility inside
the campus. As well as allowing the school to re-use
the treated wastewater for watering plants.
 SCOPE
The researchers conducted their wastewater sampling on the drainage
outfalls of the university before it reaches the receiving body of water.
The researchers also looked for an expert in the field of sewage treatment
plants that could evaluate the different technologies to know the best option
to use for the design.

The researchers also looked for a location where they could construct the
proposed treatment plant.

The proponents considered three options in estimating the sewage

generation that will be used by the researchers for the design criteria.

The researchers designed the tanks that will be used in the treatment of
sewage.
The researchers also included the pumps needed by the
tanks for the supply of oxygen in the treatment.

The study also considered the design of the main sewer

network where the laterals will be connected.

The study also used lift station for the pumping of

sewage to the sewage treatment plant.
 DELIMITATION
The study does not include the wastewater sampling from the second chamber of the
septic tanks because the researchers focused on the quality of wastewater discharged
before it is mixed on the streams.

The researchers used the typical domestic wastewater values for the design of sewage
treatment plant. It requires series of wastewater sampling and the university does not have
laboratories that could facilitate the test. Furthermore, financial budget is the major
constraint because wastewater testing is costly.

.
 The researchers delimits the kinetic modelling process
of the Sewage Treatment Plant as it is beyond the
knowledge of the researchers.

The detailed design of electrical and mechanical

works of the plant was also delimited.

The detailed design of the laterals of the sewer

network was not included in the study
CONCEPTUAL
FRAMEWORK
CHAPTER 2
METHODS
2.2 Wastewater Characterization
Factors considered by the researchers in conducting
wastewater sampling:
Determine the objectives of the monitoring.
Determine the number and location of
the discharge point.
Determine the sampling containers.
Determine the number of samples to be collected
and the parameters to be analyzed.

Education

85 Public and private BOD, Fecal Coliform,

education Ammonia, Nitrate,
(including support Phosphate, Oil and
activities) Grease, and all
significant parameters
depending on the nature
of their activity

Source: DAO 2016- 08

Multi Criteria Decision Analysis

Design Criteria Weight Factor Types of Sewage Treatment Plant

SBR MBBR MLE-CAS MBR

Cost

FootPrint/Area

BNR

OPEX

Quality

Total
 Design of Sewage Treatment Plant

Location of the Proposed Project

Sewage Generation Volume

Area Method
Population Projection
Arithmetic mean method
= 20 year projection.
Formula for population projection:

Where:
Pf= Future Population
Po= Present Population
K= Constant rate
T= Time

Sewage Generation = Population x Sewage Flow x Return Factor

Water Consumption

Sewage Generation
= Water Consumption x Return Factor
 Typical Domestic Wastewater
Characteristics vs. Effluent target
for the Design

Typical Domestic
Parameter Effluent Target
Wastewater
BOD5 300 mg/L 50 mg/L
COD 600 mg/L 100mg/L
TSS 400 mg/L 100 mg/L
Oil & Grease 50 mg/L 5 mg/L
Sequencing Batch Reactor
 Procedure in designing
Sequencing Batch Reactor

Preliminary Treatment
Design of Receiving Chamber

Volume of receiving chamber (V)

= flow x detention time
 Design of Bar Screen Chanel

Determine the vertical projected area of screen:

Aproj =

Determine the vertical projected gross area of screen:

Where :
S= spacing
t= Thickness
Determine the horizontal gross sectional area of the screen:

Horizontal gross sectional area of screen

=

Determine the width of the screen

= (no. of bars x thickness) + (no. of opening x spacing)
 Primary Treatment

Equalization Tank
 Secondary Treatment

Design process of the biological treatment units of

Sequencing Batch Reactor:

1. Develop wastewater characteristics needed for process design.

2. Determine SBR operating cycle

tC = tF + tA + tS + tD
3. Determine fill fraction per cycle (Vf/VT)

4. Determine the overall hydraulic retention time

Hydraulic Retention Time

Overall HRT =
5. Determine the Sludge Retention Time

6. Determine F/M and BOD volumetric loading

7. Determine the Oxygen Requirement for each SBR Tank

 Tertiary Treatment

Chlorine Contact
Tank

Sludge Digester Tank

 Design of Sewer Network
Determination in Elevations by Surveying
(Differential Leveling)

Formulas

For computing Height of Instrument (HI) and Elevation:

In differential leveling, the following two equations are repeatedly

used:

1. HI=ELEV+BS
2. ELEV= HI − FS
Where:

= height of instrument above a reference datum

= back sight reading on the rod (or plus sights)

= foresight reading on the rod (or minus sights)

= elevation above a reference datum of a point

sight
 Design of Pipe Sewer

After the researchers get the elevation from point to

point. They locate the lowest elevation and they place there
the lift station. After that, they designed the main gravity
sewer with a slope of 1%. After the lift station collected all
the wastewater. The lift station will pump the wastewater to
the Proposed STP.
 Design of capacity of the Pipes

The researchers used the area method in getting the population per
building. First, The researchers get all the total are of each
building, then multiply it by 1.8 to get the population per building.
The population per building is multiplied by the standard
wastewater per individual 20L/day to get the actual discharge per
building.

Compare the actual discharge to the maximum capacity

discharge of the pipe to know if the section of the pipe is adequate.

To get the invert elevation of the pipe, The researchers used

the formula:

ELEV1-(0.01xDistance)=Invert Elevation
 CHAPTER 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Wastewater Characterization

Parameter Result Unit Limit

Fecal Coliform 9.2x10 MPN/100 mL 400
Ammonia as NH₃-N 14 mg/L 0.5
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD₅) 8 mg/L 50
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 20 mg/L 100
Nitrate as NO₃-N 0.12 mg/L 14
Oil and Grease 1 mg/L 5
Phosphate 2.1 mg/L 1
Total Suspended Solids (TTS) 5 mg/L 100
Design Criteria Weight Factor Types of Sewage Treatment Plant

SBR MBBR MLE-CAS MBR

Cost 3 1 0 2 -1

Footprint/Are 2 0 1 -1 2

BNR 1 0 0 0 1

OPEX 2 1 0 0 -2

Quality 2 0 1 0 2

Total 5 4 4 2
Estimation of Sewage Generation By Area Method:
a. Population Estimates (See Appendix)

= 6401.11 students 6402‫ ﱠ‬students

b. Sewage Generated, SG CLASSROOM (See Appendix)

= 49935.6 gal/day
Convert, gal/day to cu m/d
=188.76 cum/day
Estimation of Sewage Generation By
Area Method:
Population Estimates: =
=
= 6401.11 students 6402 ‫ﱠ‬students

Sewage Generated, SGCLASSROOM

= 6402 students x x 0.65
= 49935.6 gal/day

=188.76 cum/day
Population Estimates:
=
=
= 2504.78 students = 2505 students

Sewage Generated, SGLR

= x Return Factor
Use: 12gal/cap/day
= x Peak Factor
= 2505 students x x 0.65
= 19539 gal/ day
Population Estimates: =
=
= 1200.21 Employees 1201 ‫ﱠ‬Employees

Sewage Generated, SGO = x Return Factor

Use: 15gal/cap/day (See Appendix)
= x Return Factor
 Sewage Generated, SGCANTEENS

= x Return Factor
Use: 10 cum/month (See Appendix)

= x 0.65
= 247 cum/ month

Total Sewage Generated by considering the Area Method:

TSG = SGCLASS + SGLR + SGO + SGCANTEENS

= 188.76 cu. m/day + 73.86 cu. m/day + 44.26 cu. m/day +

8.23 cu. m/day

TSG = 315.11 cu. m/day

Sewage Generation based on Population
Projection:
Sewage Generation in the current year (2018):

Sewage Generated = No. of Students x x Return Factor

= x Return Factor

Sewage Generation after 20 years (2039) :

Sewage Generated = 49787x x 0.65

=
Sewage Generation By Water Consumption:
Maximum Water Consumption as of 2018:
Since the school population is constantly
increasing, the proponents assume that the maximum
water consumption will double after the design period.
Sewage Generation
= 2 x Water Consumption x Return Factor
= 2 ( 14512 cu. m/ month ) x 0.65
= 18865.6 cu. m/month
= 630 cu.m/ day
SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR

Design Criteria:
Design Flowrates
Qave : 630 cum/ day
Qave : 630 cum/day ÷ Operation Hours
: 630 cum/day ÷
:42 cum/ hr

Qmax = Qave x Peak Factor

= 42 cum/hr x 2
= 84 cum/ hr
Qmin = Qave x
= 42 cum/hr x
= 21 cum/hr
Total BOD Loading

Total TSS Loading

Preliminary Treatment:
Design of receiving chamber:
Volume of receiving chamber (V) = Qave x detention
time

Assume the detention time = 180sec

Qave= 42 mᶟ/hr x

= 0.012 mᶟ/s (180s)

= 2.16 mᶟ
Area of receiving chamber (A)

Assume depth d = 1.5m

A=

A = 1.44m²
Let: L= 2B
A= L x B
A= 2B X B
1.44m2= 2B2
B= 0.85 m 0.9‫ ﱠ‬m
L= 1.7m 1.8‫ ﱠ‬m

Tank Dimensions: 1.8 m x 0.9 m x

1.5 m
Design of Coarse Screen
Use Manual Coarse Screen
Qave= 0.012
Qmax= 0.024 m3
Velocity through rack = 0.9 m/s
Ѳ= 60° from horizontal
Thickness= 10 mm
Width= 25 mm
Bar Spacing 25 mm

The velocity at average flow is not allowed

to exceed 0.9 m/s
The screen is inclined @ 60°
Horizontal gross sectional area of screen
=

= 0.0436 m²
If 20 no of bars are provided, then no of openings
= 21.

Width of screen = (no. of bars x

thickness) + (no. of opening x spacing)
= (20 x 0.01) + (21 x 0.025)
= 0.725 m

Assuming depth as 0.9m including free board

Coarse screen channel is designed for the size of

0.725m x 0.9m
The removal rate of the screen basket will be the basis for the
calculation of BOD and TSS entering the equalization tank.
During screening, about 15% and 25% of BOD and TSS is
removed respectively.
BOD Removal:

TSS Removal:
Equalization Tank:
Qave= 42m3/hr
Detention time= 3 hours
Volume = Average Flow rate (m3/h) × detention time (h)
= 42 m3/hr × 3 hours
= 126m3
Total volume = volume of tank + 15 % volume of tank
= 126m3 + (0.15 × 126m3)
= 144.9 m3
Assume depth = 4.7 meters + 0.3 m freeboard

Surface area/ tank =

= 28.98 m²
 Assuming Length to Breadth ratio is 2:1
Let: L= 2B
A= L x B
A= 2B X B
28.98 m2 = 2B2
B= 3.81 m say 3.9 m
L= 7.62 m say 7.8 m
Tank Dimension = 7.8 m x 3.9 m x 5 m
The equalization tank requires mixing and air. To maintain
an aerobic condition for the Equalization Tank the air supplied
should be 0.01 to 0.015 m³/m³·min (Metcalfp. 344).
According to the Water and Wastewater Calculations
Manual, 30% of BOD and 55% of the COD entering the
equalization tank is retained. The other percentage of
these values passes through and enters the next
process.

BOD Removal
TSS Removal
 Secondary Treatment:
Develop wastewater characteristics needed for
process design.

Determine iTSS.
iTSS = TSS₀ - VSS₀
= (400 – 220) g/m3
= 180 g/m3
Determine SBR operating cycle
Select period times:
Assume: tF = 1.0 hr
tA = 3.0 hr
tS = 0.50 hr
tD = 1.0 hr
tI = as needed
Total cycle time, Tc = tF + tA + tS + tD
Tc = 1.0 + 3.0 + 0.5 + 1.0
= 5.5 hr
Number of cycles/tank*d = cycles/ tank * d

Total number of cycle/d = # tanks x number of cycles

=(2 tanks) (4.36 cycles/ tank *
day)
= 8.72 cycles/d
Fill volume/cycle =

=
=
72.25 m3/ fill
Determine fill fraction per cycle (Vf/VT)
Develop a mass balance based on solids in
the reactor.
Mass of solids at full volume = Mass of
settled solids
Vt X = VsXs

X = 3500 g / m
SVI = 150 ml / g
a. Solve mass balance and determine the fill
fraction/cycle.
i. Estimate X, based on an assumed SVI value of 150 mL/g.

Xs =
=
= 6, 666 g/m³

XMLSS = 3500 g/m

i. Determine the settled fraction

Provide 20 percent liquid above the

sludge blanket so that solids are not
removed by the decanting
mechanism.
i. Determine the fill fraction.

Vf + Vs = Vt

Where Vf = fill volume, m³

Selected is acceptable
Determine the overall hydraulic
retention time HRT.
Full liquid depth = 6.0 m
Decant depth = 0.3 (Full Depth)
= 0.3 (6 m)
= 1.80 m
Area of SBR =
Use: 6m

Area of SBR
= 40.14m2
Overall HRT =
Determine the Sludge Retention Time
Typical Kinetic Coefficients for Activated Sludge Process

Substrate utilization rate, k k = 5 gCOD/gVSS·day

Half velocity constant, KS KS = 60 mg/L BOD
Yield coefficient, Y Y = 0.6 mg VSS/mg BOD
Decay coefficient, kd kd = 0.1 g VSS/g VSS·day
Mixed Liquor Suspended Solid, MLSS MLSS = 3,500 mg/L = 3,500 g/m³

Mixed Liquor Volatile Suspended Solid, MLVSS MLVSS = 0.8MLSS = 2,830 g/m³
= 842, 905 g
a. Develop input data to solve the above relationship for SRT:
Q =
=
=
Y =
So = (At Equalization Tank)
Qin =

The specific gravity of sludge is 1.05 and percentage for

solid content is 1.2 % based on Metcalf and Eddy 3rd edition.
S
S

= (0.80)(35 g TKN/m3)
= 28 g/m3
iTSS= TSSo-VSS0
=400 g/m3 – 220 g/m3
=180 g/m3
S = 30 g/m3
nbVSS = 68 g/m3
Yn = 0.18 g/g
fd = 0.15 g/g
kd= 0.1 g/g
Substituting values and calculations for
above equation yields

SRT = 12. 7 days

F/M and BOD volumetric loading

= 0.0676 g/g/d
Oxygen Requirement for each SBR Tank

For every kg of BOD of wastewater, 1.2 kg. of

oxygen is required and for kilogram of total Kjedahl
Nitrogen in the wastewater, 4.6 kg. of oxygen is
needed to attain a complete reaction.
Oxygen Requirement, OR
Standard Oxygen Requirement, SOR
Theoretical Oxygen Requirement, TOR
Kamair FBD (ø = 25 cm) = 0.085 m³/min
1. Sludge Digester Tank

Aerobic Sludge Digester Tank is used as storage for excess

sludge. The aerobic digester tank keeps the excess sludge alive
so that when activated sludge is needed in the main reactor, it
is readily available. The tank should be able to hold enough
sludge so as hauling will not be so frequent
Volume of Sludge Digester Tank
Assume Depth= 6m

To maintain an aerobic condition for the SDT, the air

supplied should be 0.01 to 0.015 m³/m³·min (Metcalfp.
344).
Summary Details of SBR
Design Details:
TANK SIZES Volume of Tanks Area of Tanks in
in m³ m²
EQT 144.9 28.98
SBR1 240.83 40.14
SBR2 240.83 40.14
CCT 72.25 12.04
SDT 17.3 2.88
AIR REQUIREMENT in m³/min
EQT 2.17
SBR1 3.1
SBR2 3.1
SDT 0.26
SBR DETAILS unit Value
Number of SBR number 2
Tanks
Fill hr 1
React hr 3.00
Settle hr 0.50
Decant hr 1
Idle hr as needed
Cycle Time hr 4.36
Fill m³ 72.25
Volume/Cycle
MLSS g/m³ 3500
MLVSS g/m³ 2830
F/M g/g·day 0.0676
Decant L/min
Pumping Rate
Sludge kg/day 66.37
Production (2
SBRs)
Profile Sewer System from MH-1 to Lift Station
Profile Sewer System from MH-3 to Lift Station
 BUILDING L W AREA QUANTITY TOTAL Population Consumed Actual Q
m m m^2 unit m^2 unit liters/day m^3/s
CLASSROOM BLDG 0 0

LAB ROOMS 0 112 201.6 4032 4.66667E-05

SHOPROOM BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0

LAB ROOMS 0 275 495 9900 0.000114583

ACCREDITATION ROOM 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 7 8 56 1 56 100.8 2016 2.33333E-05
LABROOMS 7 8 56 1 56 100.8 2016 2.33333E-05
ADMINISTRATION BLDG 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 9 7 63 12 756 1360.8 27216 0.000315
ARTS AND SCIENCES BLDG 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 9 10 90 15 1350 2430 48600 0.0005625

LAB ROOMS 5.5 10 55 3 165 297 5940 0.00006875

OFFICE 8 9 72 2 144 259.2 5184 0.00006
CE AND ME LAB BLDG 0 0 0 0 0

LAB ROOMS 8 10 80 2 160 288 5760 6.66667E-05

OFFICE 6.5 4 26 2 52 93.6 1872 2.16667E-05
CEA BLDG 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 8 8 64 9 576 1036.8 20736 0.00024
LAB ROOMS 8 8 64 9 576 1036.8 20736 0.00024
OFFICE 6 8 48 6 288 518.4 10368 0.00012
CEA EXTENSION BLDG 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 8 7 56 4 224 403.2 8064 9.33333E-05
COLLEGE BUILDING 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 9 6 54 12 648 1166.4 23328 0.00027
OFFICE 9 6 54 3 162 291.6 5832 0.0000675
COLLEGE BUILDING EXT 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 10.5 7.5 78.75 12 945 1701 34020 0.00039375
COLLEGE BUILDING EXT (OLD) 0 0 0 0 0

CLASSROOMS 0 466 838.8 16776 0.000194167

OFFICES 0 0 0 0 0
CBS BLDG. 1 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 7 9 63 8 504 907.2 18144 0.00021
OFFICE 3.5 4.5 15.75 1 15.75 28.35 567 6.5625E-06
CBS BLDG. 2 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 7 9 63 8 504 907.2 18144 0.00021
OFFICE 3.5 4.5 15.75 1 15.75 28.35 567 6.5625E-06
COMPUTER STUDIES BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 7 9 63 8 504 907.2 18144 0.00021
LAB ROOMS 7 9 63 2 126 226.8 4536 0.0000525
OFFICE 8 3.5 28 1 28 50.4 1008 1.16667E-05
ECE BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0

CLASSROOMS 7 8 56 7 392 705.6 14112 0.000163333

LAB ROOMS 7 9 63 1 63 113.4 2268 0.00002625

OFFICE 3 4.5 13.5 1 13.5 24.3 486 0.000005625

ELECTRICAL BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 7 9 63 7 441 793.8 15876 0.00018375
OFFICE 7 11.5 80.5 1 80.5 144.9 2898 3.35417E-05
ENGINEERING BUILDING 2 0 0 0 0 0

CLASSROOMS 7 10.5 73.5 7 514.5 926.1 18522 0.000214375

LAB ROOMS 7 10.5 73.5 1 73.5 132.3 2646 0.000030625

OFFICE 3.5 5 17.5 1 17.5 31.5 630 7.29167E-06
ENGG LAB AND DEAN'S OFFICE 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 10 8 80 1 80 144 2880 3.33333E-05
LAB ROOMS 10 8 80 1 80 144 2880 3.33333E-05
OFFICE 10 8 80 2 160 288 5760 6.66667E-05
EXECUTIVE LOUNGE 0 0 0 0 0

OFFICE 0 1504.31 2707.758 54155.16 0.000626796

FOOD TECH BUILDING 0 0 0 0 0
 LABORATORY HIGH SCHOOL
BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOM 9 7 63 7 441 793.8 15876 0.00018375
LAB ROOM 9 7 63 2 126 226.8 4536 0.0000525
OFFICE 9 8 72 3 216 388.8 7776 0.00009
LEARNING RESOURCE CENTER
(LIBRARY) 0 1900 (total area) #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE!
OFFICE 8 6 48 5 240 432 8640 0.0001
CBS BLDG 3 0 600 (RENOVATE) #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE!
MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINIC 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 5 6 30 2 60 108 2160 0.000025
MOTORPOOL (EXTENSION LOT) 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 12 10 120 1 120 216 4320 0.00005
MOTORPOOL (MAIN CAMPUS) 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 16 9 144 1 144 259.2 5184 0.00006
LAB ROOM 12 8 96 1 96 172.8 3456 0.00004
0.00220833
MULTI- PURPOSE COVERED COURT 0 5300 9540 190800 3

OFFICE 8 10 80 4 320 576 11520 0.000133333

MULTI- PURPOSE HALL 0 0 0 0 0

OFFICE 0 313 563.4 11268 0.000130417

MDRTC BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0
LABROOMS 7 9 63 1 63 113.4 2268 0.00002625
OFFICE 6 8 48 6 288 518.4 10368 0.00012
PRINCE TWO STOREY BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOMS 7 8 56 4 224 403.2 8064 9.33333E-05
LAB ROOM 7 8 56 2 112 201.6 4032 4.66667E-05
OFFICE 3.5 8 28 2 56 100.8 2016 2.33333E-05
ROTC AND NSTP 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 5.5 5.5 30.25 3 90.75 163.35 3267 3.78125E-05
SEC. AND GEN. SERVICES OFFICE 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 7 5 35 3 105 189 3780 0.00004375
STUDENT CENTER (SHOPROOM) 0 0 0 0 0
 4.66667E-
LAB ROOMS 7 8 56 2 112 201.6 4032 05
STUDENTS SERVICES BLDG 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 9 10 90 15 1350 2430 48600 0.0005625

SUPPLY AND PROCUREMENT

OFFICE 0 0 0 0 0
OFFICE 0 180 324 6480 0.000075
THREE STOREY IT BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0

0.0002245
CLASSROOM 7 7 49 11 539 970.2 19404 83

0.0000612
OFFICE 7 7 49 3 147 264.6 5292 5

THREE STOREY TECH- VOC

BLDG. 0 0 0 0 0

0.0001066
CLASSROOM 8 8 64 4 256 460.8 9216 67

5.33333E-
LAB ROOMS 8 8 64 2 128 230.4 4608 05
OFFICE 4.5 8 36 1 36 64.8 1296 0.000015
UNIVERSITY AUDITORIUM 0 0 0 0 0
CLASSROOM 7 9 63 2 126 226.8 4536 0.0000525

0.0000262
LABROOMS 7 9 63 1 63 113.4 2268 5
OFFICE 6 8 48 2 96 172.8 3456 0.00004
UNIVERSITY HOSTEL 0 1212 2181.6 43632 0.000505

0.0000787
OFFICE 7 9 63 3 189 340.2 6804 5
 CHAPTER 4
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
 SUMMARY
Based on wastewater characterization. BOD, COD, NITRATE, TSS, was passed on that category.
On the contrary, it was failed in the category of fecal coliform, oil and grease, and phosphate. In
summary the wastewater which came from the school is in compliant with DAO 2016-08.

In multi criteria decision analysis. The researcher saw what kind of technology we can use for the
betterment of the school. And we conclude that this is the SBR.

The researchers based the designed of the tanks that they will propose on the Sewage treatment
plant on the water comsumption from our school which is the DHVTSU. The researchers get the
actual discharge from the year 2040.

While on designing the main sewer the researchers considered the elevation of every point of
DHVTSU. They knew that the lowest elevation comes from the middle point of DHVTSU that is
why we decide to make a lift station from the lowest elevation then the lift station will pump the
wastewater to our proposed Sewage Treatment Plant.
In designing the pipes. The researchers used the population method to get the actual discharge of
each building so that the researchers can compare it if it will passed on the cross section of the
pipe that they will use
 CONCLUSION
With the growing population of the university, the generation of the sewage or
wastewater increases. The school is currently using the conventional septic tanks and
they cannot settle with these given that the it is expecting an expansion and a bit huge
population increase than the usual because of the future courses that they will offer.
Upgrading this systems individually will cost a lot and it will still depend on the design
of the new septic systems if they will comply to the codes and guidelines regarding
wastewater and its treatment and disposal. So we conclude that since they will surely
allot a budget for this, why not construct a sewage treatment plant to make sure that the
university will be in compliance with DAO 2016-08, Clean Water Act of 2004 and
other laws and provisions about sanitation. It will also cost a lot but it may have a return
of investment sooner than they think. With the STP, the school may reuse the treated
water from it so it can lessen the water consumption bill. Since the researchers decided
to bypass the septic tanks, it will also eliminate the cost that the university uses for
siphoning which is really expensive too.
 RECOMMENDATION
• The future researchers must consider to conduct series water
quality sampling on septic tanks and on different outfalls of the
university such as the canteens on the evacuation road. So an
actual for the design will be used.

• Future researchers must also consider to design different

technologies to further improve the quality of wastewater to be
treated.

• The future researchers must also consider to consult for other

experts in the field of sewage treatment plant.