3–1

3 Wastewater Flowrates and

Constituent Loadings

WASTEWATER SOURCES AND FLOWRATES 185

Municipal Uses of Water 185
Domestic Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 186
Strategies for Reducing Interior Water Use and Wastewater Flowrates 189
Water Use in Other Parts of the World 194
Sources and Rates of Industrial (Nondomestic) Wastewater Flows 194
Variations in Wastewater Flowrates 195
Long-Term Multiyear Variations Due to Conservation 198
Impact of Water Conservation on Future Planning 200
3–2 IMPACT OF COLLECTION SYSTEM ON WASTEWATER FLOWRATES 200
Infiltration/Inflow 200
Inflow into Collection Systems 202
Exfiltration from Collection Systems 204
Combined Collection System Flowrates 205
Direct Measurement of Combined Sewer Flowrates and Wastewater Characteristics 207
Calculation of Combined Sewer Flowrates 207
3–3 ANALYSIS OF WASTEWATER FLOWRATE DATA 208
Statistical Analysis of Flowrate Data 208
Developing Design Parameters from Flowrate Data 211
Observed Variability in Influent Flowrates 212
3–4 ANALYSIS OF WASTEWATER CONSTITUENTS 214
Wastewater Constituents Discharged By Individuals 214
Constituent Concentrations Based on Individual Mass Discharges 218
Mineral Increase Resulting from Water Use 218
Composition of Wastewater in Collection Systems 219
Variations in Constituent Concentrations 219
Statistical Analysis of Constituent Concentrations 225
Observed Variability in Influent Constituent Concentrations 225
3–5 ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUENT MASS LOADING DATA 226
Simple Average 226
Flow-Weighted Average 226
Mass Loadings Rates 229
Effect of Mass Loading Variability on Treatment Plant Performance 231
3–6 SELECTION OF DESIGN FLOWRATES AND MASS LOADINGS 232
Design Flowrates 234
Design Mass Loadings Rates 240

183
184 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

3–7 FLOW AND CONSTITUENT LOAD EQUALIZATION 241

Description/Application of Flow Equalization 242
The Benefits of Flow Equalization 243
Design Considerations 243
Equalization of Constituent Mass Loading Rates 253
Equalization of Sludge and Biosolids Processing Return Flows 253
PROBLEMS AND DISCUSSION TOPICS 254
REFERENCES 260

WORKING TERMINOLOGY
Term Definition
Combined sewer overflow A hydraulic relief structure within a combined collection system to allow excess wet-weather flow
(CSO) to be discharged ahead of the interceptor, pumping station or wastewater treatment plant.
Combined sewer system A collection system which conveys both sanitary wastewater at all times and stormwater runoff
during wet weather, as well as snowmelt.
Delayed inflow Stormwater that may require several hours or days or more to drain through the collection system.
Direct inflow Those types of inflow that have a direct stormwater runoff connection to the sanitary collection
system and cause an almost immediate increase in wastewater flowrates.
Domestic wastewater Wastewater discharged from residences and from commercial, institutional, and similar facilities
including infiltration.
Exfiltration Flow out of a collection system through breaks in the pipe wall, defective pipe joints or
connections, or breaks in access port (manhole) walls.
Flow equalization The dampening of flowrate variations to obtain a constant or nearly constant flowrate, usually by
means of a storage (equalization) basin.
Industrial wastewater Wastewater from nondomestic sources in which industrial wastes predominate.
Infiltration Water entering a collection system from a variety of entry points including service connections
and from the ground through defective pipe joints, connections, or breaks in access port
(manhole) walls.
Inflow Extraneous water that is discharged to the collection system such as from roof leaders, area drains,
access port covers, cross connections from storm drains and catch basins, and combined systems.
Instantaneous peak flowrate Highest recorded flowrate occurring for a period consistent with the recording equipment. In
many situations the recorded peak flow may be considerably below the actual peak flow
because of metering and recording equipment limitations.
Mass loading rate The product of flowrate times constituent concentration.
Peaking factor The ratio of the peak flowrate to the average flowrate.
Sanitary sewer overflow The release of wastewater from the sanitary sewer system caused by backups, clogging or
(SSO) hydraulic overloading.
Sanitary sewer system A collection system in which primarily domestic wastewater is conveyed.
Steady inflow Water discharged from cellar and foundation drains, cooling water discharges, and drains from
springs and swampy areas.
Stormwater Runoff resulting from rainfall and snowmelt.
Sustained flowrates Flowrates that are equalled or exceeded for a specified number of consecutive days based on
annual operating data.
Sustained mass loadings The mass loading rate value sustained or exceeded for a given period of time (e.g., 1 h, 1 d, or 1 mo).
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 185

Determining wastewater flowrates and constituent mass loadings is a fundamental step in

initiating the conceptual process design for upgrading existing and developing new waste-
water treatment facilities. Reliable data for existing and projected flowrates are essential
for determining the hydraulic characteristics, sizing, and operational considerations of the
treatment system components. Constituent mass loading rate, the product of constituent
concentration and flowrate, is necessary to determine the capacity and operational charac-
teristics of the treatment facilities and ancillary equipment to ensure that treatment objec-
tives are met.
Important factors and issues, typical to most planning and design projects, addressed
in this chapter include (1) wastewater sources and flowrates, (2) impact of the collection
system on wastewater flowrates, (3) analysis of wastewater flowrate data, (4) analysis of
wastewater constituents, (5) analysis of constituent concentrations and mass loading rate
data, (6) selection of design flowrates and mass loading rates, and (7) flow equalization.

3–1 WASTEWATER SOURCES AND FLOWRATES

The components that make up the wastewater flow from a community, identified previ-
ously in Chap. 1, and repeated here for convenience, are

Domestic (also called sanitary) wastewater. Wastewater discharged from residences and
from commercial, institutional, and public facilities.
Industrial wastewater. Wastewater in which industrial process wastes predominate.
Infiltration/inflow (I/I). Water that enters the collection system through indirect and
direct means. Infiltration is extraneous water that enters the collection system
through leaking joints, cracks and breaks, or porous walls. Inflow is stormwater
that enters the collection system from storm drain connections (catch basins),
roof leaders, foundation and basement drains, or through access port (manhole)
covers or breaks in the access port the walls.
Stormwater. Runoff resulting from rainfall and snowmelt.

Data that can be used to estimate average wastewater flowrates from various domestic,
commercial, institutional, and industrial sources are presented in this section. The contri-
butions associated with the collection system are considered in the following section.

Municipal Uses of Water

To understand the sources of wastewater it is helpful to review briefly the municipal use
of water. Municipal uses of water may be divided into various categories as reported in
Table 3–1. Domestic use includes water used indoors in private residences, apartment
houses, etc., for drinking, cooking, hand washing, bathing, laundry, toilet flushing, and
other uses, and outdoors for landscape irrigation, car washing, and other outdoor purposes.
Commercial and industrial use includes water used by commercial establishments and
industries. In small residential communities the commercial and industrial use may be as
low as 40 L/capita?d (10 gal/capita?d), but in industrial cities it may as high as
400 L/capita?d (100 gal/capita?d). Public use includes the water required for use in parks,
civic buildings, schools, hospitals, churches, street washing, etc. Water that leaks from the
system, meter slippage, unauthorized connections, and all other unaccounted-for water is
classified as loss and waste. The loss and waste category is often estimated at about
75 L/capita?d (20 gal/capita?d), but with proper construction and careful maintenance it
can be reduced to less than 20 L/capita?d (5 gal/capita?d).
186 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

Table 3–1 Flowrate, gal/capita?d Flowrate, L/capita?d

Municipal uses of Use Range Typical Range Typical
water and typical Domestic
quantities in the Indoor use 40–80 65b 150–300 250
United Statesa
Outdoor use 16–90 35c 60–340 132
Commercial 10–75 40 40–300 150
Public 15–25 20 60–100 75
Loss and waste 15–25 20 60–100 75
Total 96–255 170 370–990 682

a
Data developed from numerous sources and the authors experience.
b
Based on current (mid-2013) level of water conservation.
c
In some parts of the country, outdoor water use is significantly higher than indoor use, depending on
the season of the year.

Domestic Wastewater Sources and Flowrates

The principal sources of domestic wastewater in a community are the residential areas and
commercial districts. Other important sources include public and private institutional
facilities and public recreational facilities. Knowledge of the wastewater flowrates is of
fundamental importance in the design and operation of wastewater treatment systems.
Flowrates are measured both within the collection system and wastewater treatment plants.

Flowrate Measurements in the Collection System. For areas served with collec-
tion systems, wastewater flowrates are determined commonly from existing records or by direct
field measurements. Flowrate measurements can be made within gravity sewers by installing
flow meters in access ports. In the past, measuring flumes (e.g., Palmer Bowlus) or weirs were
installed with level measuring equipment calibrated to output direct flowrate readings. Although
flumes and weirs are still used occasionally, most collection system flowrate measurements are
now made using area-velocity meters. Area-velocity devices are used to measure simultane-
ously the depth of flow and the velocity in the collection system without restricting the flow path.
Both ultrasonic and radar based devices are used [see Figs. 3–1(a) and (b)]. Unmetered pump
stations in the collection system can also be used for gathering flowrate information by measur-
ing the wet well volume and determining the time between pump starting and stopping.

Flowrate Measurements at Treatment Plants. Flowrate measurements at

wastewater treatment plants are made with a variety of flowmeters. In the past, influent
flowrate measurements were made with Venturi meters for measurements in force mains
and Parshall flumes for open channel measurements. Today, the preference is for mag-
netic meters for force mains because they have a shorter laying length, no flow constric-
tions, and minimal headloss [see Figs. 3–1(c), (d) and (e)]. Ultrasonic meters are also used.
Parshall flumes are the least complicated and flow can be measured manually in case the
metering equipment is out of calibration or inoperative [see Figs. 3–1(f) and (g)]. The only
problem with the Parshall flume is that to operate properly it requires a free discharge, and
thus, the headloss is higher than other measuring devices.

Flowrate Estimates from Available Data. For new developments or newly

sewered areas, wastewater flowrates are derived from an analysis of population data and
estimates of per capita wastewater flowrates from similar communities. These records are
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 187

Figure 3–1 Ultrasonic

Signal for depth of
Doppler radar Area / velocity radar flowmeter
sensor signal for flowrate suspended above flow in
Examples of devices used for flow measurement measurement collection system access port
Signal for flowrate
measurement of wastewater measurement Ultrasonic pulse
flowrates: (a) schematic of echo signal for
area/velocity ultrasonic flowrate Access depth of flow
port
meter sensor, (b) schematic of measurement
area/velocity radar flow meter
sensor. Velocity is measured
using Doppler Radar and (a) (b)
ultrasonic echo plus is used to
sense depth of flow, (c) view Induced voltage
proportional to
of magnetic flow meter and Magnetic flowrate in pipe
(d) schematic of magnetic flow field
meter. When a conductive fluid
moves through a magnetic field
a voltage is generated; the
magnitude of the voltage is
Magnetic
proportional to the flowrate, Flow into field coils
(e) view of multiple magnetic flow flowmeter
meters used to monitor flowrates Electrodes
in pipe walls
to advanced oxidation facilities, Non-magnetic
and (f) Parshall flume equipped conduit
with a sonic water level indicator (c) (d)
to determine the depth of flow
that is correlated to the flowrate
and (g) Parshall flume equipped
with a float can also be used to
determine depth. (Note: Parshall
flumes are used commonly at
smaller wastewater treatment
plants.)

(e) (f) (g)

especially useful in other parts of the world where water use for landscape irrigation is lim-
ited and 90 percent or more of the water used becomes wastewater. In the United States, on
average about 50 to as high as 90 percent (e.g., from high-rise apartments) of the per capita
water consumption becomes wastewater. The higher percentages apply to the northern states
during cold weather; the lower percentages are applicable to the semi-arid region of south-
western United States where landscape irrigation is used extensively. When water consump-
tion records are used for estimating wastewater flowrates, the amount of water consumed for
purposes such as landscape irrigation (that is not discharged to the collection system), leak-
age from water mains and service pipes, or product water that is used by manufacturing
establishments must be evaluated carefully.

Residential Areas. For many residential areas, wastewater flowrates are commonly deter-
mined based on population and the average per capita contribution of wastewater. For resi-
dential areas where large residential development is planned, it is often advisable to develop
flowrates on the basis of land-use areas and anticipated population densities. Where possible,
these rates should be based on actual flow data from selected similar communities, prefera-
bly in the same locale. In the past, the preparation of population projections for use in
188 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

estimating wastewater flowrates was often the responsibility of the engineer, but today popu-
lation projection data are usually available from local, regional, and state planning agencies.
Wastewater flowrates can vary depending on the quantity and quality of the water supply,
the potable water billing rate structure, the extent of conservation measures, geographic
location, rates of infiltration/inflow, and other economic and social characteristics of the
community. In a report published by the U.S. Geological Survey (Kenny et al., 2009), the
average domestic water use per capita by state varied from a high of 715 L/capita?d (189 gal/
capita?d) to a low of 193 L/capita?d (51 gal/capita?d). The average for the country was 375 L/
capita?d (99 gal/capita?d), which is consistent with the data reported in Table 3–1. If it is
assumed that 50 to 90 percent of the water supply becomes wastewater, the average wastewa-
ter flowrates would vary from 188 to 338 L/capita?d (50 to 89 gal/capita?d). The reason that
an average range is given is that no one has an accurate estimate of the extent of water con-
servation measures that have been implemented, which varies from community to commu-
nity. The typical average range reflects an estimate of the current (2013) extent to which
conservation measures have been implemented in different parts of the country.
Data on the typical flowrate values for residential sources in the United States as a func-
tion of the number of residents with the current (2013) level of conservation and with sig-
nificant water conservation are given in Table 3–2. The data from Table 3–2 are plotted on
Fig. 3–2. As shown on Fig. 3–2, as the number of persons per residence increases, the
average wastewater flowrate per capita decreases. In the case with significant conservation
measures, the per capita value approaches a value of about 150 L/capita?d (39.6 gal/capita?d).
At the present time this asymptotic value represents a reasonable estimate of what can be
achieved with extensive water conservation measures and fixtures and appliances. Assuming
an occupancy rate of 3.3 persons per residence, the range of anticipated wastewater flowrates
will vary from about 250 to 175 L/capita?d (66 to 46 gal/capita?d). The value of 250 L/capita?d
(66 gal/capita?d) is within the range of typical per capita values reported above. With the
passage of time, it is anticipated that the right-hand curve on Fig. 3–2 will move to the
left. It is estimated that reaching significant conservation may take more than 20 y. Reduced
household water use not only changes the quantity of wastewater generated, but, as discussed
later in this chapter, the characteristics of wastewater as well.

Commercial Districts. Depending on the function and activity, unit flowrates for com-
mercial facilities can vary widely. Because of the wide variations that have been observed,

Table 3–2 Flowrate, gal/capita?d Flowrate, L/capita?d

Typical wastewater Household With current With With current With
flowrates from urban size, no. level of extensive level of extensive
of persons conservation conservation conservation conservation
residential sources in
the United States 1 103 74 390 280
2 77 54 290 205
3 68 48 257 180
4 63 44 240 168
5 61 42 230 160
6 59 41 223 155
7 58 40 218 151
8 57 39 215 149
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 189

Figure 3–2 10

Number of occupants per residence,

Per capita flowrate from
individual residences as a 8 With standard
function of the number of water conservation
residents.

capita/home
6 With significant
water conservation

2
280 390

0
100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Per capita flowrate, L/capita • d

every effort should be made to obtain records from actual or similar facilities. If no other
records are available, estimates for selected commercial sources, based on function or
persons served, may be made using the data presented in Table 3–3. In the past, commer-
cial wastewater flowrates were often based on existing or anticipated future development
or comparative data. Flowrates were generally expressed in terms of quantity of flow per
unit area [i.e., m3/ha?d (gal/ac?d)]. Typical unit area flowrate allowances for commercial
developments normally range from 7.5 to 14 m3/ha?d (800 to 1500 gal/ac?d). The latter
approach can be used to check the values obtained from existing records or estimates made
using Table 3–3.

Institutional Facilities. Typical flowrates from some institutional facilities are shown in
Table 3–4. Again, it is stressed that flowrates vary with the region, climate, and type of facil-
ity. The actual records of institutions are the best sources of flow data for design purposes.

Recreational Facilities. Wastewater flowrates from many recreational facilities are sub-
ject to seasonal variations. Typical data on wastewater flowrates from recreational facilities
are presented in Table 3–5.

Strategies for Reducing Interior Water Use

and Wastewater Flowrates
Because of the importance of conserving both resources and energy, various means for
reducing wastewater flowrates are available. The reduction of wastewater flowrates from
domestic sources results directly from the reduction in interior water use. Therefore, the
terms interior water use and domestic wastewater flowrates are sometimes used inter-
changeably. Representative water use rates for various devices and appliances are reported
in Table 3–6. Information on the relative distribution of water use within a residence is
reported in Table 3–7. Devices and appliances that can be used to reduce interior domestic
water use and wastewater flows are described in Table 3–8.
Another method of achieving flow reduction that has been adopted by a number of
communities is to restrict the water usage of certain appliances, such as automatic dish-
washers and kitchen food-waste grinders (i.e., garbage disposal units), that tend to increase
water consumption. The use of one or more of the flow-reduction devices is specified for
all new residential dwellings in many communities; in others, the use of waste-food grind-
ers has been limited in new housing developments. Further, many individuals concerned
190 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

Table 3–3

Typical wastewater flowrates from commercial sources in the United Statesa

Flowrate, gal/unit?d Flowrate, L/unit?d
Source Unit Range Typical Range Typical

Airport Passenger 2.4–3.8 3 9–14 11

Apartment Person 32–45 38 120–170 145
Automobile service station Vehicle served 6–11 8 23–42 30
Employee 7–11 10 26–42 38
Bar/cocktail lounge Seat 8–15 11 30–57 43
Employee 8–12 10 30–45 37
Boarding house Person 20–45 30 76–170 115
Conference center Person 5–8 6 20–30 24
Department store Toilet room 280–450 300 1000–1700 1100
Employee 6–11 8 23–42 30
Hotel Guest 52–56 53 200–215 200
Employee 6–11 8 23–42 30
Industrial building Employee 12–26 15 45–98 60
(sanitary waste only)
Laundry (self-service) Machine 320–413 338 1210–1560 1280
Load 36–41 38 136–155 145
Mobile home park Unit 100–113 105 380–430 400
Motel (with kitchen) Guest 36–60 38 135–230 145
Motel (without kitchen) Guest 32–53 34 120–200 130
Office Employee 6–12 10 23–45 38
Public lavatory User 2.4–3.8 3 9–14 12
Restaurant:
Conventional Customer 6–8 6 23–30 24
With bar/cocktail lounge Customer 6–9 7 23–34 26
Shopping center Employee 6–10 8 23–38 30
Parking space 0.8–2.3 1.5 3–9 6
Theater (Indoor) Seat 1.6–3 2.3 6–11 9

a
Adapted in part from Tchobanoglous et al. (2003).

about conservation have installed such devices on their own as a means of reducing water
consumption. New designs in front-loading clothes washers also offer significant reduc-
tions in water use, on the order of 50 to 75 percent of older models. A comparison of
residential interior water use (and resulting per capita wastewater flows) is given in
Table 3–9 for homes with the current levels of conservation and with extensive water
conserving appliances and fixtures. The potential savings of employing selected water-
efficient devices is illustrated in Example 3–1.
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 191

Table 3–4

Typical wastewater flowrates from institutional sources in the United Statesa

Flowrate, gal/unit?d Flowrate, L/unit?d

Source Unit Range Typical Range Typical

Assembly hall Guest 1.6–3 2.3 6–11 9

Church Seat 1.6–3 2.3 6–11 9
Hospital Bed 128–240 150 480–900 570
Employee 4–11 7.5 15–42 30
Institutions other Bed 60–94 75 230–360 285
than hospitals Employee 4–11 7.5 15–42 28
Prison Inmate 60–110 90 240–430 340
Employee 4–11 7.5 15–42 28
School, day
With cafeteria, gym, Student 12–23 19 45–90 70
and showers
With cafeteria only Student 8–15 11 30–60 42
School, boarding Student 32–60 38 120–230 140

a
Adapted in part from Tchobanoglous et al. (2003).

Table 3–5

Typical wastewater flowrates from recreational facilities in the United Statesa

Flowrate, gal/unit?d Flowrate, L/unit?d
Facility Unit Range Typical Range Typical

Apartment, resort Person 40–53 45 150–200 170

Cabin, resort Person 6.4–38 30 24–145 115
Cafeteria Customer 1.6–3 2.3 6–11 9
Employee 6.4–9 7.5 24–34 28
Camp
With toilets only Person 12–23 18.8 45–87 70
With central toilet and Person 28–38 33.8 106–144 128
bath facilities
Day Person 12–15 11.3 45–57 43
Cottages, (seasonal with Person 32–45 37.5 120–170 142
private bath)
Country club Member present 16–30 18.8 60–115 70
Employee 8–11 9.8 30–42 37
Dining hall Meal served 3–7.5 5.3 11–28 20

(continued )
192 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

Table 3–5 (Continued )

Flowrate, gal/unit?d Flowrate, L/unit?d
Facility Unit Range Typical Range Typical

Dormitory, bunkhouse Person 16–38 30 120–200 115

Fairground Visitor 0.8–2.3 1.5 3–9 6
Picnic park with flush toilets Visitor 4–7.5 3.8 15–28 14
Recreational vehicle park
With individual connection Vehicle 60–113 75 230–430 284
With comfort station Vehicle 32–38 33.8 120–145 128
Roadside rest areas Person 2.4–4 2.5 9–15 11
Swimming pool Customer 4–9 6.8 15–34 26
Employee 6.4–9 7.5 24–34 28
Vacation home Person 20–45 37.5 76–170 142
Visitor center Visitor 2.4–4 2.5 9–15 11

a
Adapted in part from Tchobanoglous et al. (2003).

Table 3–6

Typical rates of water use for various devices and appliances in the United States
US Customary Units SI Units
Device or appliance Units Range Typical Units Range Typical

Bathtub gal/use 25–35 30 L/use 95–130 114

Dishwasher gal/load 5–15 10 L/load 19–57 38
Faucet, typical gal/min?use 0.5–4 2.5 L/min?use 1.9–15 9
Kitchen food waste grinder gal/d 1–2 1.5 L/d 4–8 6
Shower, standard gal/min?use 4–7 5 L/min?use 15–26 19
Shower, low-flow gal/min?use 2–2.5 2.5 L/min?use 8–9.5 9
Toilet, pre 1980s gal/use 4–7 6 L/use 15–26 23
Toilet, 1980-1992-3 gal/use 3–4 3.5 L/use 11–15 13
Toilet, tank, low-flow gal/use 0.9 –1.6
a b
1.6 L/use 3.4–6 6
Washbasin gal/min?use 1–3 2 L/min?use 8–11 8
Washing machine
Top loading, standard gal/load 40–50 45 L/load 150–190 170
Front loading, low-flow gal/load 12–25 20 L/load 45–95 76

a
Dual flush type.
b
Currently, some states have adopted regulations mandating the use of 1.28 gal/flush toilets. In the future, it is anticipated that the 1.28 gal/
flush toilet may become a national standard and that in the future the allowable water usage per flush may be reduced further to 1.0 gal/flush.
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 193

Table 3–7 Percent of total Typical water usageb

Typical distribution of Use Range Typical gal/capita?d L/capita?d
residential indoor Bath 1.5–2 1.8 1.2 4.4
water use in the Clothes washing (Laundry) 20–24 23 15.0 56.6
United Statesa
Dishwashing 1–1.5 1.4 0.9 3.4
Faucet 15–18 16 10.4 39.4
Shower 16–20 18 11.7 44.3
Toilet flushing 24–30 28 18.2 68.9
Other domestic c
2–3 2.2 1.4 5.4
Leakage 8–12 9.6 6.2 23.6
Total 100 65.0 246.0

a
Typical range of indoor water use in the United States ranges from 150 to 300 L/capita?d
(40 to 80 gal/capita?d).
b
Based on an indoor water usage rate of 246 L/capita?d (65 gal/capita?d).
c
Houseplant watering, water for pets, etc.

Table 3–8 Device/appliance Description and/or application

Flow reduction devices Faucet aerators Increases the rinsing power of water by adding air and
and appliances concentrating flow, thus reducing the amount of washwater
used
Flow-limiting shower heads Restricts and concentrates water passage by means of
orifices that limit and divert shower flow for optimum use
by the bather
Low-flush toilets Reduces the amount of water per flush
Pressure reducing valve Reduces home water pressure below that of the water
distribution system, decreases the probability of leaks and
dripping faucets
Pressurized shower Water and compressed air are mixed together. Impact
provides the sensation of conventional shower
Retrofit kits for bathroom Kits may consist of shower flow restrictors, toilet dams or
fixture displacement bags, and toilet leak detector tablets
Toilet dam A partition in the toilet tank that reduces the amount of
water per flush
Toilet leak detectors Tablets that dissolve in the toilet tank and release dye to
indicate leakage of the flush valve
Vacuum toilet A vacuum along with a small amount of water is used to
remove solids from toilet
Water efficient dishwasher Reduces the amount of water used to wash dishes
Water efficient clothes washer Reduces the amount of water used to wash clothes. New
front-loading machines have been developed that not only
use less water but are more energy efficient
194 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

EXAMPLE 3–1 Determine Water Savings by Employing Water Efficient Appliances A

new subdivision of 2000 homes is planned, and a condition of the building permit is to
determine the potential savings in water consumption (and wastewater flows) if the follow-
ing water-efficient appliances are used: front-loading washing machines, ultra-low flush
toilets, and ultra-low flow shower heads. Use 3.5 residents per home and values for
devices and appliances from Table 3–9 to determine the potential savings.
The estimated water use and percentage savings are illustrated in the following table.

Unit water use, L/capita?d Water Use, L/d

With current With With current With
No. of level of extensive level of extensive
Appliance/device Residents conservation conservation conservation conservation
Clothes washing 7000 56.6 36.0 396,200 252,000
Toilets 7000 68.9 31.0 482,300 217,000
Showers 7000 44.3 26.1 310,100 182,700
Total 1,188,600 651,700
Savings, % 45

Comment Three of the largest water using appliances and devices utilized in the home are those
described in this example. Interior water use and the generation of wastewater can be
reduced significantly with the community-wide installation of water-efficient appliances
and devices, thus reducing the flows that will have to be handled by the collection system
and treatment plant. Where high infiltration rates occur within the collection system, it is
difficult or impossible to assess the beneficial effects of using water conservation devices.

Water Use in Other Parts of the World

The typical flowrates and use patterns presented in Tables 3–1 through 3–7 and Table 3–9
are based on water use and wastewater flowrate data from communities and facilities in
the United States. Many developed countries (e.g., Canada) have flowrates in similar
ranges. Water use, and consequently the per capita wastewater generation rate in less
developed countries, is significantly lower. In some cases, the water supply is only avail-
able for limited periods of the day. Water use data from other parts of the world are given
in Table 3–10. The striking aspect of the data presented in Table 3–10 is the variability that
exists between countries. In general, information such as presented in Table 3–10 is not
very useful, other than for gross comparisons, as it is not presented in the context of the
country dynamics and the basis for the collection and reporting of data is not uniform.

Sources and Rates of Industrial (Nondomestic)

Wastewater Flows
Nondomestic wastewater flowrates from industrial sources vary with the type and size of
the facility, the degree of water recycling within the facility, and the presence of any onsite
wastewater pretreatment or final treatment methods. Extremely high peak flowrates
may be reduced by the use of onsite detention tanks and equalization basins. Typical
design values for estimating the flows from industrial areas that have no or little
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 195

Table 3–9

Typical comparisons of indoor water use with current level of conservation and with extensive
conservation practices and devices in the United States
Flow, gal/capita?d Flow, L/capita?d
With current With With current With
level of extensive level of extensive
Use conservationa,b,c conservationd conservation conservation

Bath 1.2 (30) 1.2 (30) 4.4 4.5

Clothes washing (Laundry) 15.0 (30) 9.5 (20) 56.6 36.0
Dishwashing 0.9 (10) 0.7 (8) 3.4 2.6
Faucet 10.4 (3) 6.9 (2) 39.4 26.1
Shower 11.7 (4) 6.9 (2.5) 44.3 26.1
e
Toilet flushing 18.2 (3.3) 8.2 (1.6) 68.9 31.0
Other domestic 1.4 (3) 1.4 (3) 5.4 5.3
Leakage 6.2 6.0 23.6 22.7
Total 65.0 40.8 246.0 154.4

a
Rates of indoor water use based on values given in Table 3–7.
b
Current level of conservation assumed to reflect mid-2013 values.
c
Number in parenthesis is the assumed current water usage rate per use for various uses and devices as given in Table 3–6. For example, the
number in parenthesis for the bath is 30 gal/use.
d
Number in parenthesis is assumed to correspond to the water usage rate with extensive conservation based on the values given in Table 3–6.
e
Estimated average of currently installed toilets.

wet-process type industries are 7.5 to 14 m3/ha?d (1000 to 1500 gal/ac?d) for light indus-
trial developments and 14 to 28 m3/ha?d (1500 to 3000 gal/ac?d) for medium industrial
developments. For industries without internal water recycling or reuse programs, it can be
assumed that about 85 to 95 percent of the water used in the various operations and pro-
cesses will become wastewater. For large industries with internal water-recycling pro-
grams, separate estimates based on actual water consumption records must be made.
Average domestic (sanitary) wastewater contributed from industrial facilities per employee
may vary from 30 to 95 L/capita?d (8 to 25 gal/capita?d).

Variations in Wastewater Flowrates

Wastewater flowrates vary during the time of day, day of the week, season of the year, and
year to year depending upon the nature of the discharges to the collection system and
sources and rates of infiltration/inflow. Short-term, seasonal, multiyear, and industrial
variations in wastewater flowrates are briefly discussed here.

Short-Term Variations. The typical current diurnal pattern of wastewater flows

observed at treatment plants, such as shown on Fig. 3–3(a) for an intermediate size com-
munity, began in the latter half of the 20th century. In the early part of the twentieth cen-
tury, the daily variation in wastewater flowrates was characterized by a single peak in the
morning as illustrated on Fig. 3–3(a). The shift from a single to a dual peak reflects
the changes that have occurred in the workplace, perhaps the most notable event being the
employment of women in factories during the early 1940s as part of the war effort.
196 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

Table 3–10 Per capita water consumption

Water consumption in Country gal/d L/d
various countries and Argentina 93 350
the United States in Austria 113 430
2000a
Canada 196 742
Chile 63 238
Germany 41 156
Greece 93 350
Hungary 139 526
India 34 129
Kuwait 53 200
Libya 74 279
Nepal 8 30
Mexico 92 348
Mozambique 3 11
Norway 29 110
Russian Federation 72 274
Saudi Arabia 50 189
South Africa 59 224
United States 100 380

a
Adapted from United Nations (2005).

Referring to Fig. 3–3(a), minimum flows occur during the early morning hours when water
consumption is lowest and when the base flow consists of infiltration and small quantities
of sanitary wastewater. The first flowrate peak generally occurs in the late morning when
wastewater from the peak morning water use reaches the treatment plant. A second flow-
rate peak generally occurs in the early evening between 7 and 9 p.m. In some bedroom
communities, the amplitude of the second peak will exceed the morning peak. It should
also be noted that a shift occurs on the weekends with respect to the morning peak [see
Fig. 3–3(a)] as people tend to get up a bit later.
The time of occurrence and the amplitude of the flowrate peaks vary with the size
of the community and the length and storage capacity of the collection system [see
Fig. 3–3(b)]. In the curves shown on Fig, 3–3(b), there is essentially no late afternoon
peak. The reason for this occurrence is that the collection system has excess storage
capacity and there is a significant travel time to reach the treatment plant. The same
phenomena will be observed where a centralized treatment plant for a larger commu-
nity also serves a number of smaller communities located some distance from the plant.
Because of the travel time, the flows from the outlying communities will arrive later
than the peak flow from the main community. Arriving later, these flows tend to damp-
en the second peak that would have been observed had the treatment plant only received
wastewater from the single community. Further, as a community increases in size, the
diurnal variations tend to be reduced as shown on Fig. 3–3(c). The masking effect
caused by high infiltration rates during a storm event is illustrated on Fig. 3–3(d), in
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 197

200 200

Percent of average flowrate

Percent of average flowrate

Weekday Weekend
150 Weekend 150

Weekday
100 100

Circa 1905-1910
50 50

0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Midnight Noon Midnight Midnight Noon Midnight
Time of day Time of day
(a) (b)

200 500
Percent of average flowrate
Percent of average flowrate

400
150 Diurnal variation
during storm event
300
Typical daily
100 Large diurnal variation
200

50
100
Small

0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Midnight Noon Midnight Midnight Noon Midnight
Time of day Time of day
(c) (d)

Figure 3–3
Typical variations in normalized influent flowrate data for domestic wastewater systems:
(a) generalized diurnal pattern for weekdays and weekends in the latter part of the 20th century for
an intermediate sized community (40,000–400,000 m3/d), and the corresponding curve observed in
the early part of the 20th century (ca. 1905–1910); (b) observed flowrate variations for the City of
Davis (population 65,000), based on half hour flowrate measurements (courtesy of West Yost and
Associates); (c) generalized flowrate variations for small (4000–40,000 m3/d) and large
(.400,000 m3/d) communities; and (d) masking effect of excess stormwater infiltration, based on
hourly flowrate measurements (note change in vertical scale).

which the late afternoon peak is masked by the continued flow resulting from the storm
event.
When extraneous flows are minimal, wastewater discharge curves resemble water
consumption curves, but with a lag of several hours. As the community size increases, the
variations between the high and low flows decrease due to (1) the increased storage in the
collection system of large communities that tends to equalize flowrates and (2) changes in
the economic and social makeup of the community.

Industrial Variations. Industrial wastewater discharges are difficult to predict.

Many manufacturing facilities generate relatively constant flowrates during production,
but the flowrates change markedly during cleanup and shutdown. While internal process
198 Chapter 3 Wastewater Flowrates and Constituent Loadings

changes may lead to reduced discharge rates, plant expansion and increased production
may lead to increased wastewater generation. Where joint treatment facilities are to be
constructed, special attention should be given to industrial flowrate projections, whether
they are prepared by the industry or jointly with the city’s staff or engineering consultant.
Industrial discharges are most troublesome in smaller wastewater treatment plants where
there is limited capacity to absorb shock loadings.

Seasonal Variations. Seasonal variations depend on location and the nature of the
community. In the eastern part of the United States, where it tends to rain throughout the
year, there is less seasonal variation in observed flowrates as compared to the western
United States where there are distinct wet (November through April) and dry (May
through October) periods. Snowmelt is a significant factor in the areas with high rates of
infiltration observed each spring, due to seasonably high groundwater levels in the North-
east and other snow-belt states. The difference in observed flowrates is illustrated on
Fig. 3–4. It is important to note that the general patterns and the magnitude of the flowrates
shown on Fig. 3–4 will vary considerably with increased or decreased rainfall patterns
resulting from global climate change.
Seasonal variations in domestic wastewater flows are commonly observed at resort
areas, in small communities with college campuses, and in communities that have sea-
sonal commercial and industrial activities. The magnitude of the variations to be expected
depends on both the size of the community and the seasonal activity.

Long-Term Multiyear Variations Due to Conservation

In addition to the daily and seasonal changes described above, some significant trends have
been observed in the long-term flowrates measured at wastewater treatment plants at many
large cities in the United States. In general, three major trends in flowrates are observed
based on cities with (1) increasing population, (2) relatively constant population, and
(3) decreasing population as illustrated on Fig. 3–5. In all cases, the recent and ongoing
implementation of low-flow appliances and fixtures and practices that result in water con-
servation will result in an increase in wastewater constituent concentrations.

Figure 3–4 50
Dry Wet Dry Wet Dry
Seasonal flowrate variations period period period period period
observed in the Western United
40
States in the dry period (May
through October) and wet period
Flowrate, m3/d x 10–3

(November through April). In

some locations, the distinction 30
between dry and wet periods is
becoming blurred due to global
climate change. 20

10

0
J J D J J D J J D

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Month
 3–1 Wastewater Sources and Flowrates 199

Figure 3–5
Increasing Constant Decreasing

Population
Flowrate variations observed in
cities in the United States with
(a) increasing population,
(b) constant population, and
(c) decreasing population. The
three time periods depicted in
Total Total Total
these plots are as follows: (i) time

capita flowrate
Total and per
flow flow flow
period up to about 1990 with
relatively limited implementation q1 q1 q1
qvar qvar qvar
of water conservation measures, q3 q3 q3
(ii) period following 1990 when (i) (ii) (iii) (i) (ii) (iii) (i) (ii) (iii)
the per capita flowrate is
decreasing as a result of greater (a) Time (b) Time (c) Time
implementation of conservation
devices and public awareness, q = per capita wastewater flowrate
and (iii) period after the time that (i) Pre-1992
maximum water conservation has (ii) Improved water conservation, period end point unknown
been implemented. The time (iii) Maximum water conservation
when maximum conservation has
been implemented will vary with
each community.

Increasing Population. In cities where the population is increasing, the per capita
wastewater flowrates were relatively constant up to the early nineties and the total waste-
water flowrate increased in proportion to the population [see Fig. 3–5(a), period (i)]. After
the early nineties, the per capita flowrate started to decrease reflecting changes in the
plumbing code and the installation of water conserving appliances (e.g., low flush toilets).
As more water conservation measures are adopted and water conservation devices and
appliances become the norm [Note: the per capita flowrate, qvar, is variable in period (ii)],
the total flowrate will continue to increase, but at a slower rate of increase [see Fig. 3–5(a),
period (ii)]. At some point in the future, water conservation practices and low-flow devic-
es and appliances will be installed in essentially all homes. At that point, the total flow will
continue to increase with population, but at a stable and reduced per capita flowrate [see
Fig. 3–5(a), period (iii)]. The result of these practices will be that while the constituent
mass loading to the wastewater treatment plant will be expected to increase in proportion
to the population increase, the concentration of the constituents will be higher than before.

Relatively Constant Population. In cities where the population has been rela-
tively constant, the per capita flowrate was also more or less constant up to the early nine-
ties [see Fig. 3–5(b), period (i)]. After the nineties, the total per capita flowrate started to
decrease reflecting the installation of water conserving appliances (e.g., low flush toilets)
[see Fig. 3–5(b), period (ii)]. The total flowrate will continue to decrease as more water
conservation measures are adopted and low-flow devices and appliances are installed. As
discussed above, at some point in the future water conservation devices and appliances
will be installed in essentially all of the homes. At that point, the total per capita flowrate
will again become more-or-less constant, but at a reduced per capita flowrate [see Fig.
3–5(b), period (iii)]. The constituent mass loading to the wastewater treatment plant is
expected to remain relatively constant, but, as above, the concentration of the constituents
will increase to reflect the reduced per capita flowrate.

Decreasing Population. In cities with a decreasing population, the per capita

wastewater flowrate was relatively constant up to the nineties and the total flowrate
decreased in proportion to the population [see Fig. 3–5(c), period (i)]. With the adoption