Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of microbial removal between slow dead-end versus tangential sand filtration.

Both River-Bank Filtration and dead-end sand-filtration are becoming increasingly applied in rural areas to improve quality of fecally contaminated water. To evaluate the capacity of both treatments to remove E. coli, fecal streptococci, somatic and K13 phages, we have studied their concentrations in diluted wastewater after short-distance tangential sand-filtration and after dead-end sand-filtration.Bacteria were almost undetectable in both systems after sixty cm depth and at a pore water velocity of 1 m/d. Both phages underwent removal of 2.5 logs by tangential filtration, whereas dead-end filtration removed 5.1 logs and 3.9 logs of K13 and somatic phages, respectively. After discounting removal by the schmutzdecke, observed only in the dead-end filtration, both systems removed phages similarly.We conclude that short-distance river bank filtration alone does not meet WHO requirements for drinking water. However, the reduction of suspended solids renders the filtered water amenable to further treatment steps.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app