Clarifier Redundancy

[BradyD]

All -

Probably a stupid question regarding clarifier redundancy. A plant has a flow of 9 MGD with 3 clarifiers. Ignore redundancy. I take this to mean if one clarifier goes down, the others DO NOT need to pick up the additional 3 MGD. Therefore, solving a problem with this statement I would say they each run in parallel and take 3MGD. Is this a correct assumption?

Thanks!

 

[ashtree]

Yes. Based on your assumptions regarding the wording this is correct.

In reality the plant could be designed this way but it would be more normal to design the plant to be able to operate with one clarifier off line and to maintain the 9MGD but perhaps with some limits.

Regards
Ashtree
"Any water can be made potable if you filter it through enough money"

 

[bimr]

Not sure where you are going with this, but the following sentence is a general requirement.

It is recommended that plants have a minimum of two units each. Design of the clarification process shall be constructed "to permit units to be taken out of service without disrupting operation".

The remaining in-service units are typically designed to operate at the higher flow rate for a temporary period of time.

 

[mk3223]

I think it is the project consideration for the number of the equipment to handle the process design requirements. It isn't just a simple mathematics to be 1+1+1=3. It isn't a complete design any more without the required redundancy factor.