Table of Contents

1.0 Objective............................................................................................................. 2
2.0 Methodology......................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Equipment and Materials....................................................................................... 2
2.2 Reagents........................................................................................................... 2
2.3 Method of Transport............................................................................................ 2
2.4 Procedure.......................................................................................................... 2
2.5 Jar Tests............................................................................................................ 3
2.5.1 Jar Test 1: Determination of the Optimum pH........................................................3
2.5.2 Jar Test 2: Determination of the optimum coagulant dose.........................................4
3.0 Result and Analysis................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Collection and On-site Measurement of Water Sample..................................................5
3.1.1 Calculation.................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Jar Tests............................................................................................................ 7
3.2.1 Jar Test 1: Determination of the optimum pH........................................................7
3.2.2 Jar Test 2: Determination of the Optimum Coagulant Dose.......................................7
3.3 Analysis of Result............................................................................................... 8
3.3.1 Jar Test 1: Determination of the Optimum pH........................................................8
3.3.2 Jar Test 2: Determination of the Optimum Coagulant Dose.......................................9
4.0 Analysis and discussion.......................................................................................... 10
5.0 Conclusion......................................................................................................... 12
6.0 Bibliography and Referencing..................................................................................13
7.0 Appendix........................................................................................................... 14
7.1 Evidence of Field Work...................................................................................... 14
7.2 External Sources............................................................................................... 20

List of Figur
Figure 1 Graph of turbidity against pH in jar test 1...............................................................9
Figure 2: Graph of total suspended solids against pH in jar test 1.............................................9
Figure 3: Graph of turbidity against coagulant dose............................................................10
Figure 4: Graph of total suspended solids against coagulant dose...........................................10
Figure 5: Location of water sampling site........................................................................15
Figure 6: Raw water collection at Petanak Market..............................................................16
Figure 7: Filtering out the impurities of the river water........................................................16
Figure 8: Reading of portable meter for pH......................................................................17
Figure 9: Reading of portable meter for Conductivity..........................................................17
Figure 10: Reading of portable meter for Total Dissolved Solids............................................18
Figure 11: Reading of potable meter for Salinity................................................................18
Figure 12: Reading of portable meter for Resistivity...........................................................19

1
Figure 13: Reading of portable meter for Dissolved Oxygen.................................................19
Figure 14: Reading of colorimeter for Turbidity................................................................20
Figure 15: Group photo of the team (from left to right: Chung Wei Li, Mavis Ong, Esther Chung,
Leong Chea and Low Kien Pin).................................................................................... 20
Figure 16: Important data from National water quality standards for Malaysia...........................21

List of TablesY
Table 1 Parameters measured using Portable Meter..............................................................6
Table 2 Parameters measured using Colorimeter..................................................................6
Table 3: Jar Test 1: Determination of the optimum pH...........................................................8
Table 4: Jar Test 2: Determination of the optimum coagulant dose............................................8

2
1.0 Objective
Determine the optimum coagulant dosage and pH for water sample from a jar
test experiment.
Provide analysis and information about the water from Sarawak River to apply
on the water treatment plant.

2.0 Methodology
The experiment consists of two segments. The first segment is a field work which
involved collecting water sample of Sarawak River and on-site measurement;
Laboratory work for the second segment. Two jar tests were conducted in the
laboratory to determine the optimum pH and coagulant dose.

2.1 Equipment and Materials

Portable Meter, colorimeter, bucket with long rope attached, filter funnel, 15 water
bottles with a volume of 1 litre, beakers, six rotating paddles, pH meter, measuring
cylinder, pipette, stopwatch

2.2 Reagents
Sample of water from Sarawak River, coagulant (alum) Al2(SO4)3. 14H2O, pH adjuster
(Ca(OH)2 and H2SO4)

2.3 Method of Transport

A car was used to transport 5 members of the group to the location.

2.4 Procedure
Collection and On-Site Measurement of Water Sample

1. Water sample from the Sarawak River, Petanak was collected by using a bucket
with a long rope attached.
2. Total Suspended Solids and Turbidity of the water sample was immediately
measured and recorded by using a calibrated colorimeter.
3. The pH, Ion, Conductivity, Total Dissolved Solids, Salinity, Resistivity, Dissolved
Oxygen and Temperature of the water sample were all determined and recorded
by using a portable meter.
4. Another collection of water sample was carried out and was filled to 15 water
bottles. The water was filtered before fill into the water bottle. The water bottles
were kept into a darker area to avoid direct exposure to sunlight.

3
5. The water bottles were kept into a 4C refrigerator overnight before the jar tests
experiment.
6. The water bottles were left to cool to room temperature before conducting the jar
test experiment.
7. Interim National Water Quality Standards for Malaysia (INWQSM) and Malaysia
Drinking Water Quality Standards (MDWQS) were used as a guideline while
performing the measurement on the water sample.

2.5 Jar Tests

2.5.1 Jar Test 1: Determination of the Optimum pH

1. 6 beakers were equally filled with 1L of collected water sample and labelled
numerically.
2. pH of water from Beaker 1 was determined by using a pH meter and adjusted to
pH 5.5 by using Ca(OH)2 and H2SO4 .
3. Step 2 was repeated for the 5 beakers with different pH adjusted respectively with
increment of 0.5 pH for every subsequent beaker. (pH 6, pH 6.5, pH 7, pH 7.5)
4. 10mg/L of Alum, Al2(SO4)3 were prepared to 6 set of measuring cylinder.
5. 6 beakers were placed to the stirrer and the blades were set to immerse into the
water.
6. The speed of the stirrer was set to 100rpm and at the same time, all prepared alum
solution was poured into each beaker. The beakers were left to stir for 1 minute.
7. The speed of the stirrer was then reduced to 30 rpm and the samples were left to
mix for 3 minutes. The changes in the suspended matter, formation of floc, clarity
of water in the sample were observed and recorded.
8. The stirrer was turned off after 3 minutes and the flocs were left to settle for 10
minutes.
9. The clear liquid that settled 5cm from the surface of the water were sucked out by
using a pipette and placed to another beaker.
10. The turbidity, total suspended solids and pH of each of the water samples were
determined and recorded.
11. A graph of turbidity versus was plotted to get the optimum pH.

2.5.2 Jar Test 2: Determination of the optimum coagulant dose

1. 1 litre of water sample was added to 6 beakers and labelled numerically.

2. The pH of the water sample for six beakers was measured by using a pH meter
and all of the pH of the water sample was adjusted to pH6.

4
3. Alum Al2(SO4)3 with the concentration of 5mg/L were prepared and was repeated
with 7mg/L, 10mg/L, 12mg/L, 15mg/L, and 20mg/L respectively into a measuring
cylinder.

Beaker Coagulant (mL) Concentration in Sample (Alum Dose)

1 5 1 mg
5 mL coagulant x 1000 mL
mL x =5
1L
1000 mL

mg/L
2 7 1 mg
7 mL coagulant x 1000 mL
mL x =7
1L
1000 mL

mg/L
3 10 1 mg
10 mL coagulant x 1000 mL
mL x =
1L
1000 mL

10 mg/L
4 12 1 mg
12 mL coagulant x 1000 mL
mL x =
1L
1000 mL

12 mg/L
5 15 1 mg
15 mL coagulant x 1000 mL
mL x =
1L
1000 mL

15 mg/L
6 20 1 mg
20 mL coagulant x 1000 mL
mL x =
1L
1000 mL

20 mg/L

4. Step 5 to 10 from the Jar Test 1 was repeated.

5. A graph of turbidity versus coagulant dose (mg/L) was plotted. The optimum
coagulant dose was determined from the graph plotted.

5
3.0 Result and Analysis

3.1 Collection and On-site Measurement of Water Sample

Water Source: Sarawak River, Petanak Class: III [INWQSM]

(i) Portable Meter

Table 1 Parameters measured using Portable Meter

Parameters Unit Measured Measured Class Acceptable

Value for the INWQSM Standard for the
MDWQS
pH - 7.87 III Yes
Oxidation mV -47.9 - -
Reduction
Potential
Ion ppm 0 - -
Conductivity s 137.9 - -

Total Dissolved mg/L 68.79 I No

Solids
Salinity % 0.006696% I -
Resistivity k 7.214 - -

Dissolved mg/L 4.17 III -

Oxygen
Temperature C 30 - -

(ii) Colorimeter
Table 2 Parameters measured using Colorimeter

Parameters Unit Measured Measured Acceptable

Value Class for Standard for
INWQSM the MDWQS
Total mg/L 19 I No
Suspended
Solids
Turbidity NTU 41 IIB No

6
3.1.1 Calculation

Conversion of unit:
(i) Salinity
Value measured from the Portable meter: 69.96ppm NaCl
Convert ppm to %
1 mgNaCl 66.96 mgNaCl
1 ppm = 1 Lwater ; 66.96ppm = 1 L water

66.96 mgNaCl 1 gNaC l 1 Lwater

1 L water x 1000 mgNaCl x 1000 gwater x 100% = 0.006966%

(ii) Total Dissolved Solids

Value measured from the Portable Meter: 69.07ppm
Convert ppm to mg/L
1 mgTDS
1ppm = 1 kgwater

At T= 30 C, =0.996 /3
69.07 mgTDS 0.996 k g water 1m
3
68.79 mg TDS
69.07 ppm= 1 L water x 1m 3 x 1000 L = 1L

(iii) Turbidity
Value obtained from the Colorimeter: 41 FAU
Convert FAU to NTU
1 FAU = 1 NTU
1 NTU
41 FAU x 1 FAU = 41 NTU

7
3.2 Jar Tests
3.2.1 Jar Test 1: Determination of the optimum pH

Table 3: Jar Test 1: Determination of the optimum pH

Beaker 1 2 3 4 5 6
Initial pH 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0
Alum Dose 10
(mg/L)
Settled 31.5 24.4 22.3 31 30 29
Turbidity
(NTU)
Total 14 13 12 15 15 15
Suspended
Solid (mg/L)
Final pH 5.67 5.93 6.39 6.34 6.64 6.75

3.2.2 Jar Test 2: Determination of the Optimum Coagulant Dose

Table 4: Jar Test 2: Determination of the optimum coagulant dose

Beaker 1 2 3 4 5 6
Initial pH 6.5
Alum Dose 5 7 10 12 15 20
(mg/L)
Settled 18 18.9 17.9 17.7 17.7 18
Turbidity
(FAU)
Total 13 14 12 13 6 5
Suspended
Solid (mg/L)
Final pH 6.03 6.03 6.02 5.71 4.9 4.71

8
3.3 Analysis of Result
3.3.1 Jar Test 1: Determination of the Optimum pH

graph of turbidity against ph

35
30
25
20
Turbidity (NTU)
15
10
5
0
5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8

pH

Figure 1 Graph of turbidity against pH in jar test 1

Graph of total suspended solids against ph

16
14
12
10

Total dissolved solids 8

6
4
2
0
5.5 6 6. 5 7 7.5 8

PH

Figure 2: Graph of total suspended solids against pH in jar test 1

9
When the graphs were plotted, a pH 6.5 was obtained and was used as a starting pH for Jar
Test 2. The behaviour of the graphs was explained in the Discussion section.

3.3.2 Jar Test 2: Determination of the Optimum Coagulant Dose

Graph of turbidity against coagulant dosage

19

18.5

18

Turbidity (NTU) 17.5

17

16.5

16
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

COagulant dosage (mg/L)

Figure 3: Graph of turbidity against coagulant dose

Graph of Total Suspended Solids against Coagulant Dosage

15
14.5
14
13.5
13
12.5
Total suspended solids
12
11.5
11
10.5
10
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Coagulant dose (mg/L)

Figure 4: Graph of total suspended solids against coagulant dose

10
4.0 Analysis and discussion

For the test of water quality, the measurement for turbidity is important because it represented
the cloudiness of water due to the present of significant amount of suspended particle, organic
material and other particulate material (Masters & Ela 2008). Low level of turbidity indicated
higher cleanness in the raw water and was more desirable. The turbidity measured for water
sample taken from Sarawak River, Petanak is 41 NTU, which considered low when compared
with the recommended raw water quality.

Suspended solids consisted of solid particles with size larger than 2 microns. For solid
particle with size smaller than 2 microns, It was classified as dissolved solid (Fundamental of
environmental measurements 2016). Most inorganic particles such as the clay or silt and
organic particle as well as microorganism were total suspended solid. Measurement for total
suspended solid was carried out to determine the amount of solid particle present in raw
water. It was also one of the parameter that needed to be satisfied according to Interim
National Water Quality Standards for Malaysia. The total suspended solid was measured to be
19 mg/l which lower than the standard, thus it was classified as Class I. Microorganisms and
other contaminants with size smaller than 2 microns was not considered in testing due to the
limitation of colorimeter.

Several measurements for parameters were conducted and observed during collection of
water sample. The pH value measured for water sample was 7.87, which belongs in Class I
standard. For the measurement of total dissolved solids, the value taken was 68.79 mg/l,
which still acceptable in Class I standard. Meanwhile, the value of dissolved oxygen obtained
for the water sample was 4.17 mg/l, which classified within Class III standard.

Based on the overall statement mentioned, it was found that the proposed surface water
source still fell within of the range for Class III standard, thus, those parameters can be taken
into account for the design of water treatment plant. For the parameter of turbidity, total
suspended solid, total dissolved solid and dissolved oxygen, the value was indeed suitable as
sources for Water Treatment Plant.

11
Jar test 1 was performed to determine the optimum pH of the water sample by fixing the alum
dose at an approximation value of 10 mg/l while the pH for the six water samples was varied.
The optimum pH value was found to be 6.5. The final pH value was concluded based on the
fact that the minimum value of turbidity was identified at this particular pH value. Depending
on the pH of water, the amount of coagulant dose that required for the formation of
precipitate might vary. In addition, the formation of precipitate was also governed by the
temperature of water sample, that is, the lower water temperature, the lower the optimum pH
(Camejo 2014).

Jar test 2 was carried out to determine the optimum coagulant dose required for water sample
by fixing the pH value at an approximation of 6.5 while varying the coagulant dose. It was
found that the optimum value for coagulant dose was 12 mg/l based on the identification of
minimum turbidity value at that particular dose. The determination of optimal coagulant dose
for coagulation process was important, that is, excess coagulant dose added into water body
would lead to several effects such as the production of excessive sludge and metal coagulant
precipitate that were having larger and heavier particle size. Meanwhile insufficient coagulant
dose could not destabilise the particle effectively, hence, the movement of suspended
particles will be kept by Brownian motion (Conventional treatment n.d.).

The formations of flocs within six beakers were not coarse based on the observation during
laboratory test. It was believed that the settling time was not enough and led to insufficient
quiescent settling of particle.

Two graphs were generated based on the result of optimum coagulant dosage and pH value
for coagulant process. Both graphs showed the characteristic of parabolic curve opened
upwards, but was not standardised perfectly. It was due to some fluctuations that caused by
the occurrence of errors during lab test.

Several precautions had been taken into account during laboratory test on water sample.
These included the pH meters bulb was wiped properly before the measurement, the sample
cell was wiped to prevent dirt or fingerprint and all the apparatus were rinsed thoroughly with
distilled water before used.

However, possible error can still occur during on-site measurement as well as during
laboratory test. Systematic error can occur possibly due to drift error for electronic
instrument. Although the consideration for this type of error was generally not important, the
consequence can be significant. For instance, colorimeter might have its measurement drifted

12
over time. Besides, the adjustment of water samples pH value to the required pH value was
done by using the pH metre provided. The electronic pH meter would only show the readings
once it reached stable state. However, the pH value for stable state varying every time at each
measurement taken from the same sample.

For random error, the water sample collected from river was stored in ten different 1.5 L
plastic bottles and was placed inside a lightproof box. As each member was assigned to keep
two bottles of raw water sample inside different household fridge at 4C, the water
temperature could be varied depending on the temperature of each fridge. Also, those water
samples were required to be warmed up to room temperature before the lab test in the
following day and this could only be done if the water samples were taken out of fridge and
left overnight before the lab test day. From the statement mentioned above, it was believed
that insufficient cooling might cause minor microbiological activity which can change the
composition inside water sample (Water sampling and analysis 2011).

5.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, the proposed surface water source, Sungai Sarawak, Petanak is not suitable as
raw water for design of water treatment plant. The water source was classified as Class III.
The range of pH dose used for the test is from 5.5 to 8.0 in Jar test 1. Meanwhile, the range
from 5 to 20 mg/l of coagulant dose is developed for Jar test 2. The optimum pH is
determined to be 6.5 while the optimum coagulant dose is 12 mg/l. Both values were
obtained based on the lowest turbidity point plotted in graph.

13
6.0 Bibliography and Referencing

Camejo, P 2014, Alum Coagulation, Physical/Chemical Treatment Process, Madison.

Conventional treatment n.d., United States Environmental Protection Agency, viewed 3

April 2017, <https://iaspub.epa.gov/tdb/pages/treatment/treatmentOverview.do?
treatmentProcessId=1934681921>.

Fundamental of environmental measurements 2016, Fondriest Environment, viewed 2 April

2017, <http://www.fondriest.com/environmental-measurements/parameters/>.

Masters, GM & Ela, WP 2008, Introduction to Environmental Engineering and Science, 3rd
edn, Pearson International edn.

The Engineering Toolbox n.d, viewed 30 March 2017,

<http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-density-specific-weight-
d_595.html>.

Water sampling and analysis 2011, Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, viewed 2 April
2017, <http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/2edvol3d.pdf>.

14
7.0 Appendix
7.1 Evidence of Field Work

Figure 5: Location of water sampling site

Location Sarawak River, Petanak Market

Date 22 March 2017
Time 10.30am to 11.30am
Weather Condition Sunny Day and Humid

The team departed from university and arrived at Petanak market around 10am. The team set
up the scene and prepared all the necessary equipment before doing the water collection
process. The water was collected from the river by using a bucket with a long rope attached
to it. All fifteen 1L bottle were filled with the river water and was kept into a box to avoid

15
direct sunlight exposure. Afterward, one representative from the team took all the 15 bottle of
water back and put them in refrigerator.

Figure 6: Raw water collection at Petanak Market

Figure 7: Filtering out the impurities of the river water

16
 Figure 8: Reading of portable meter for pH

Figure 9: Reading of portable meter for Conductivity

17
Figure 10: Reading of portable meter for Total Dissolved Solids

Figure 11: Reading of potable meter for Salinity

18
 Figure 12: Reading of portable meter for Resistivity

Figure 13: Reading of portable meter for Dissolved Oxygen

19
 Figure 14: Reading of colorimeter for Turbidity

Figure 15: Group photo of the team (from left to right: Chung Wei Li, Mavis Ong, Esther
Chung, Leong Chea and Low Kien Pin)

20
7.2 External Sources
National Water Quality Standards for Malaysia

21
Figure 16: Important data from National water quality standards for Malaysia

22