Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

During Experiment 2, the following velocities were used: 5 m/day, 10 m/day, 15 m/day and 20 m/day. This experiment was set on high floc blanket formation.

Figure 12: Average Effluent Turbidity vs. Capture Velocity

...

Similar to the data collected for the saturated water experiment on low floc blanket formation, the effluent turbidity for the experiment on high floc blanket formation is generally higher than that of the control experiment. In order to quantitatively examine the performance of the experiment with saturated water, data from the control ramp experiment was referenced. The average difference in error between the results was found to be .173 (Again, we need to also quantify the standard deviation in the data points to see if this is significant. Perhaps adding error bars would be helpful on the graph.), with the effluent turbidity of the saturated water experiment generally higher than that of the control experiment. . The difference isn't as great as that found in the experiment with the low floc blanket formation due to the intitially low effluent turbidity for this particular experiment. High floc blanket formation already results in an increase in effluent turbidity.

(I disagree with your conclusion here. I do not see a large statistical difference for influent water here. Can you speculate as to why there was less change here? Is it because the tube settler is already in the floc blanket and this experiment did not reflect acutal conditions because some air bubbles would go through the system but not perturb performance locally in the tube settler? It is possible that saturated air had little effect and there was a problem with another problem in the experiment causing the worsened performance at the beginning?)