NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION Aqua-Swirl …njcat.org/uploads/newDocs/AquaSwirlNJCATReportFinal.pdf · NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System AquaShieldTM,

NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION

Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System

AquaShieldTM, Inc.

November, 2016

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Figures ii

List of Tables iii

1. Description of Technology 1

2. Laboratory Testing 1

2.1 Test Unit 1

2.2 Test Setup 3

2.3 Test Sediment 5

2.4 Removal Efficiency Testing Procedure 6

2.5 Scour Testing Procedure 7

3. Performance Claims 8

4. Supporting Documentation 9

4.1 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Removal Efficiency Testing 9

4.2 Removal Efficiency Testing 12

4.3 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Scour Testing 28

4.4 Scour Testing for Online Installation 29

5. Design Limitations 31

6. Maintenance Plan 32

7. Statements 33

8. References 40

Verification Appendix 41

iii

List of Figures

Page

Figure 1 Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 2

Figure 2 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, May 2016 4

Figure 3 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, September 2016 4

Figure 4 Average Removal Efficiency Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification

12

Figure 5 Scour Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification 29

iv

List of Tables

Page

Table 1-A PSD of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment, May 2016 Test Runs 10

Table 1-B PSD of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment, September 2016 Test Runs 11

Table 2 Summary of AS-3 25% MTFR Test 13

Table 3 AS-3 25% MTFR Sediment Feed Results 13

Table 4 AS-3 25% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements 14

Table 5 AS-3 25% MTFR QA/QC Results 15

















Table 22 Annualized Weighted TSS Removal of the AS-3 28

v

Table 23 Scour Test Sediment PSD 28

Table 24 Flow and Background Concentrations for AS-3 Scour Testing 29

Table 25 Effluent Concentration Results for AS-3 Scour Test at 203% MTFR 30

Table A-1 MTFRs and Required Sediment Removal Intervals for Aqua-Swirl®

Models 43

Table A-2 Standard Dimensions for Aqua-Swirl® Models 44

1

1. Description of Technology

The Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System is a vortex hydrodynamic separator designed

and supplied by AquaShieldTM, Inc. Aqua-Swirl® technology removes pollutants including

suspended solids, debris, floatables and free-floating oil from stormwater runoff.

The Aqua-Swirl® is a rapid or high flow rate device that has no moving parts and operates on

gravity flow or movement of the stormwater runoff entering the structure. Operation begins

when stormwater enters the swirl chamber by means of its tangential inlet pipe thereby inducing

a circular (swirl or vortex) flow pattern. The swirl chamber diameter represents the effective

treatment area of the device. Both sediment capture and sediment storage is accomplished within

the swirl chamber. A combination of gravitational and hydrodynamic drag forces results in solids

dropping out of the flow and migrating to the center of the swirl chamber where velocities are

the lowest. The treated flow exits the Aqua-Swirl® behind the arched inner baffle. The top of the

baffle is sealed across the treatment channel to eliminate floatable pollutants from escaping the

swirl chamber. A vent pipe is extended up the riser to expose the backside of the baffle to

atmospheric conditions, thus preventing a siphon from forming at the bottom of the baffle.

2. Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing was performed to independently verify that the Aqua-Swirl® is eligible for

certification by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) as a 50%

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) removal device.

The Aqua-Swirl® was tested in accordance with the “New Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection Laboratory Protocol to Assess Total Suspended Solids Removal by a Hydrodynamic

Sedimentation Manufactured Treatment Device” (NJDEP 2013). Testing was conducted in

Chattanooga, Tennessee at the hydraulics laboratory of AquaShieldTM, Inc. under the supervision

of Dr. Gregory Williams, P.E. of Good Harbour Laboratories, Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario. Dr.

Williams served as the independent observer.

The particle size distribution (PSD) of both the removal efficiency test sediment samples and the

scour test sediment samples were independently prepared under the direction of Dr. Williams at

the Good Harbour Laboratories facility. All PSD testing was performed in accordance with

ASTM D 422-63 (2007) by Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario. All test sediment was

collected, labeled and security sealed under the direction of the independent observer prior to

shipment to the AquaShieldTM test facility. The independent observer confirmed that the security

seals were intact prior to opening the test sediment shipment containers at the AquaShieldTM test

facility.

2.1 Test Unit

The test unit was a full scale, commercially available Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 constructed of

polymer coated steel measuring 3.5 feet in diameter and approximately 8.5 feet in height (Figure

1).

2

Figure 1 Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3

3

Key dimensions of the test unit were measured by the independent observer prior to the

beginning of the testing program to ensure that the assembly was consistent with a commercial

AS-3. The false floor depth was also confirmed by the observer. The test unit used 12-inch

diameter influent and effluent pipe with an internal bypass weir.

2.2 Test Setup

Two closed loop recirculation test loops are illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3. Figure 2

represents the test loop used for the May 2016 test runs. The test loop was modified for the

September 2016 test runs to improve background sediment control using a 1-micron filter

assembly manufactured by Filtra Systems (Model 080808CSVR2, Option B). The modification

to the original test loop did not yield any material change to the testing program other than

providing more reliable background samples that did not exceed 20 mg/L per the protocol

requirement.

Metered flow for both test loops was directly supplied to the AS-3 with a Berkeley Model

B5ZPBH centrifugal pump drawing water from the water supply tanks. All inflow to the test unit

was measured using an inline Badger M-2000 flow meter within a vertical section of pipe

leading to a raised platform used to accommodate the influent piping, background sample port

location and the test sediment feeder. The test flow rate was recorded every 60 seconds

throughout the duration of each test run using a Lascar EL-USB-4 Data Logger.

A 6-inch pipe diameter exits the supply tank and expands to a 12-inch pipe diameter at a 1.0%

slope that leads to the AS-3. The pipe expansion is downstream of the flow meter and 9.6 feet

upstream of the sediment injection point. The test loop piping is constructed of Schedule 40

PVC. Background samples were manually collected from the 6-inch piping section via a sample

port for the TSS removal efficiency testing. As discussed in Section 2.5 the background

measuring procedure was modified for the scour testing.

The 12-inch diameter influent pipe includes an open sediment feed port (tee) for injecting

sediment through the crown of the 12-inch diameter influent pipe at a distance of 5 feet upstream

of the test unit. Test sediment injection used an IPM Systems Auger® volumetric screw feeder,

model VF-2, with an attached vibrator mounted on the hopper. The sediment feeder assembly

was positioned adjacent to and above the influent pipe to accommodate sediment feed sampling

and injection. Both the background sample location and the auger feeder are situated on the

raised platform to allow for the influent piping to enter the AS-3 at the design elevation.

Effluent piping from the AS-3 is also 12-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC at a 1.0% slope that

leads to the effluent sample location. Effluent water is sampled as it free falls from the effluent

pipe into the water supply tank. Water is then re-circulated through the test loop as shown in

Figure 2 and Figure 3.

4

Figure 2 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, May 2016

Figure 3 Schematic Illustration of Test Loop Setup, September 2016

5

Total Suspended Solids Removal Efficiency Test Setup

For the total suspended solids (TSS) removal efficiency test runs, sediment was introduced in the

flow at a consistent, calibrated rate using the above-cited auger feeder. The designated 100%

sediment storage zone of the Aqua-Swirl® is 14 inches as measured upward from the base of the

unit. In accordance with the protocol, a false floor was positioned 7 inches from the base of the

test unit to simulate a 50% full condition. The false floor was secured and sealed around the

edges to prevent material from collecting below it.

Scour Test Setup

To simulate the 50% full condition for the scour test, a false floor was positioned 3 inches from

the base of the test unit. The false floor was secured and sealed around the edges to prevent

material from collecting below it. Four (4) inches of scour test sediment was then added to a

level of 7 inches above the base of the test unit.

2.3 Test Sediment

Test Sediment Feed for Suspended Solids Removal Efficiency Testing

All test sediment used for the Suspended Solids Removal Efficiency Testing was blended by

Good Harbour Laboratories using high purity silica supplied by AGSCO and U.S. Silica. All

blending activities took place at the Good Harbour Laboratories facility under the direction of the

independent observer. Three random sediment samples were collected from sediment blends and

delivered to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for particle size distribution (PSD)

analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The PSD of each of the 3 samples were averaged and reported

as the overall PSD (see Figure 4 in Section 4.1). It was determined that the test sediment blends

meet the protocol specification. Test sediment was placed in shipping containers, security sealed,

and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. All

container seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the independent observer at the

initiation of testing.

Scour Test Sediment

Test sediment used for Scour Testing was also blended by Good Harbour Laboratories of high

purity silica supplied by AGSCO Corporation. Three random sediment samples were collected

from the sediment blend and delivered to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for PSD

analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The particle size distribution of each of the 3 samples were

averaged and reported as the overall PSD (see Figure 5 in Section 4.3). It was determined that

this scour test sediment blend meets the protocol specification. Test sediment was placed in

shipping containers, security sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility

in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The security seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the

observer at the initiation of scour testing.

6

2.4 Removal Efficiency Testing Procedure

Removal efficiency testing was performed in accordance with Section 5 of the NJDEP

Laboratory Protocol for HDS MTDs. A total of 5 flow rates were tested: 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%

and 125% of the Maximum Treatment Flow Rate (MTFR).

The test sediment mass was fed into the flow stream at a known rate using a screw auger.

Sediment was introduced at a rate within 10% of the targeted concentration of 200 mg/L influent

concentrations throughout the duration of the removal efficiency testing program.

Six calibration samples were collected at the injection point. The calibration samples were timed

at evenly spaced intervals over the total duration of the test for each tested flow rate and timed

such that no collection interval exceeded 1 minute in duration. Each calibration sample was

collected in a clean 1-liter container over an interval timed to the nearest second. A factory-

calibrated stop watch was used for timing all sediment calibration sampling intervals. These

samples were weighed to the nearest milligram using a calibrated Tree® Model HRB-413

electronic balance. This data was used to confirm that the COV of sediment feed rate stayed

below the limit of 0.10 as required by the protocol.

The average influent TSS concentration used for calculating removal efficiency was calculated

using the total mass of the test sediment added during injection divided by the volume of water

that flowed through the test unit during injection (Equation 1), as required by the protocol. The

mass extracted for calibration samples was subtracted from the total mass injected to the system

when removal efficiency was subsequently calculated. The volume of water for each test was

calculated by multiplying the average flow rate by the time of sediment injection only.

Equation 1 Calculation for Average Influent Sediment Concentration

During each flow rate test, the flow meter data logger recorded flow rate once per minute. The

Effluent Grab Sampling Method was used per Section 5D of the protocol. Once constant flow

rate and test sediment feed were established, three MTD detention times passed before the first

effluent sample was collected. All effluent samples were collected in clean, laboratory-provided

1-liter plastic bottles using a sweeping grab sampling motion through the effluent stream as

described in Section 5D of the protocol. Samples were then time stamped and placed into a

cooler. The observer confirmed that each effluent sample was properly recorded.

The time interval between sequential samples was evenly spaced during the test sediment feed

period to obtain 15 samples for each flow rate. The water temperature was recorded at 60 second

intervals.

Background samples were collected at the background sample port using a clean, laboratory-

provided 1-liter plastic bottle. Influent background samples were collected at the same time as

7

odd numbered effluent grab samples (first, third, fifth, etc.). The collection time for each

background sample was recorded. Background samples were time stamped and placed in a

cooler. The observer confirmed that each background sample was properly recorded.

A chain of custody form was completed for each test run and samples were transported on ice in

a cooler(s) to the independent laboratory for TSS analysis. All samples were analyzed by AIRL,

Inc. of Cleveland, Tennessee in accordance with ASTM D 3977-97 (re-approval 2007) “Standard

Test Methods for Determining Sediment Concentrations in Water Samples.”

The background data were plotted on a curve for use in adjusting the effluent samples for

background concentration. The AS-3 removal efficiency for each tested flow rate was calculated

following Equation 2:

Equation 2. Equation for Calculating Removal Efficiency

2.5 Scour Testing Procedure

In order to simulate the 50% full sediment storage depth, the AS-3 false floor was set to a height

of 3 inches above the base of the unit and filled with 4 inches of scour test sediment. The

sediment layer was leveled and afterwards the test unit was filled with tap water that same day at

a slow rate in an effort to minimize disturbance to the scour test sediment. Scour testing

commenced within 96 hours after the unit was pre-loaded with scour test sediment. All scour test

setup activities, measurements, testing and sampling were performed in the presence of the

independent observer.

Scour testing commenced by ramping up the flow rate to 647 gpm (1.44 CFS) which

meets/exceeds 200% MTFR. The flow rate was recorded once per minute. Effluent samples were

collected and time stamped every 2 minutes after the target flow rate was reached. A total of 15

effluent samples were collected over the duration of the scour test. Effluent samples were

collected in clean, laboratory provided plastic 1 liter bottles using the grab sampling method as

described in Section 5D of the protocol. Water temperature was recorded every 60 seconds to

ensure it did not exceed 80 °F during the test run.

Fifteen (15) background samples were collected at evenly spaced intervals to coincide with the

times at which effluent samples were collected (every 2 minutes). The 15 background samples

exceed the minimum number of 8 background samples as cited in Section 4A of the protocol.

The background sample port is a 6-inch x 6-inch x 2-inch tee with the 2-inch branch facing down

from the bottom (invert) of the 6-inch pipe run. Due to the high velocity of the water through the

6-inch pipe occurring at the scour test flow rate, a sufficient volume of water could not be

conveyed through the background sample port to allow for background sediment sampling to be

)

8

consistent with the TSS removal efficiency testing approach. Using an alternative background

sampling approach, water samples were drawn directly from the influent flow pipe through the

12-inch sediment feeder tee to coincide with the effluent samples. A clean, laboratory provided

plastic 1-liter bottle was lowered into the flow stream to the base of the 12-inch diameter influent

pipe. The bottle cap was then removed to allow the bottle to fill. The cap was replaced when the

bottle became full. The background sample bottle was removed from the influent pipe after the

cap was intact. Background samples were time stamped accordingly.

A chain of custody form was completed for the scour test samples. Once it was established by

the observer that the samples were properly recorded, ice was added to the cooler for

transportation to the independent analytical laboratory. All samples were analyzed by AIRL, Inc.

of Cleveland, Tennessee in accordance with ASTM D3977-97 (re-approval 2007) “Standard Test

Methods for Determining Sediment Concentrations in Water Samples.”

3. Performance Claims

In keeping with the NJCAT verification process, Aqua-Swirl® performance claims are cited

below.

Total Suspended Solids Removal Rate

For the particle size distribution and weighted calculation method specified by the NJDEP HDS

MTD protocol, the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 at an MTFR of 0.71 cfs will demonstrate at least

50% TSS removal efficiency.

Maximum Treatment Flow Rate

The MTFR for the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 was demonstrated to be 320 gpm (0.71 cfs) which

corresponds to a surface area loading rate of 33.4 gpm/ft2.

Sediment Storage Depth and Volume

The maximum sediment storage depth of the Aqua-Swirl® is 14 inches. Available sediment

storage volume varies with each Aqua-Swirl® model, as Aqua-Swirl® model dimensions increase

in diameter. A sediment storage depth of 7 inches corresponds to 50% full sediment storage

capacity.

Effective Treatment Area

The effective treatment area of the Aqua-Swirl® models vary with model size, as it corresponds

to the surface area of the Aqua-Swirl® model diameter. The tested Aqua-Swirl® AS-3 model has

an effective treatment surface area of 9.6 square feet.

Detention Time and Volume

The detention time of the Aqua-Swirl® depends on flow rate and model size. The detention time

is calculated by dividing the treatment volume by the flow rate. The treatment volume is defined

as the surface area multiplied by the depth between the pipe inverts (which are at the same

elevation) and the top of the sediment storage zone. The tested Aqua-Swirl® AS-3 model at the

MTFR of 0.71 cfs has a detention time of 60 seconds.

9

Online or Offline

Based on the results of the Scour Testing as described in Section 4.4, the Aqua-Swirl® qualifies

for online installation.

4. Supporting Documentation

The NJDEP Procedure (NJDEP, 2013a) for obtaining verification of an MTD from NJCAT

requires that copies of the laboratory test reports, including all collected and measured data, all

data from performance test runs, all pertinent calculations, etc. be included in this section. It is

the understanding of AquaShieldTM that this was discussed with NJDEP and it was agreed that as

long as such documentation could be made available by NJCAT upon request that it would not

be necessary to include all such supporting documentation in verification reports.

4.1 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Removal Efficiency Testing

AquaShieldTM retained the services of Good Harbour Laboratories to prepare all test sediment

using high quality silica from two commercial suppliers. These silica blends were mixed together

at the proportions needed to produce a test sediment that complied with the particle size

distributions (PSDs) that are specified in the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol. The independent

observer directed the blending activities at the laboratory’s facility. Three representative

sediment samples were collected from the sediment blends and directly transported to Maxxam

Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario for PSD analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The PSD of each of

the three (3) samples were averaged and reported as the overall PSD. It was determined that all

test sediment meets the protocol specification. Test sediment was placed in shipping containers,

security sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility in Chattanooga,

Tennessee. The container security seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by the

independent observer at the initiation of sediment removal testing. The PSD results and the

comparison to the protocol specification are shown in Tables 1-A and 1-B. Figure 4 illustrates

the comparison of the NJDEP PSD specification to the average PSDs for both the May and

September test runs (labeled TRJC20160428-01 and TRJC20160909-01, respectively).

10

Table 1-A Particle Size Distribution of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment

May 2016 Test Runs

Particle Size

(µm)

Test Sediment Particle Size (% passing) NJDEP Minimum

Specification QA/QC

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average

1,000 98 98 97 98 98 PASS

500 95 96 95 95 93 PASS

250 91 90 90 90 88 PASS

150 85 80 79 81 73 PASS

100 62 63 63 63 58 PASS

75 56 58 56 57 48 PASS

50 49 49 50 49 43 PASS

20 36 37 36 36 33 PASS

8 19 20 20 20 18 PASS

5 13 13 13 13 8 PASS

2 7 6 6 6 3 PASS

d50 53 µm 52 µm 51 µm 52 µm < 75 µm PASS

11

Table 1-B Particle Size Distribution of Removal Efficiency Test Sediment

September 2016 Test Runs

Particle Size

(µm)

Test Sediment Particle Size (% passing) NJDEP Minimum

Specification QA/QC

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average

1000 99 99 99 99 98 PASS

500 96 96 96 96 93 PASS

250 91 91 91 91 88 PASS

150 76 77 78 77 73 PASS

100 63 67 64 65 58 PASS

75 57 74 63 64 48 PASS

50 49 52 50 51 43 PASS

20 35 37 36 36 33 PASS

8 18 19 20 19 18 PASS

5 12 13 13 13 8 PASS

2 5 5 6 5 3 PASS

d50 53 µm 47 µm 50 µm 50 µm < 75 µm PASS

12

Figure 4 Average Removal Efficiency Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification

4.2 Removal Efficiency Testing

In accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD Protocol, sediment removal efficiency testing was

conducted on the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 unit in order to establish the ability of the Aqua-

Swirl® to remove the specified test sediment at 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% and 125% of the target

MTFR with the goal to demonstrate at least 50% annualized weighted sediment removal as

defined in the protocol. The target MTFR was 320 gpm (0.71 cfs).

All results reported in this section were obtained from test runs that comply with the protocol.

None of the sediment calibration samples exceeded 1 minute for any of the tests. The inlet feed

concentration coefficient of variance (COV) did not exceed 0.10 for any test flow rate. The

average influent sediment concentration was calculated using Equation 1 from Section 2.4

herein. The average effluent sediment concentration was adjusted by subtracting the measured

background concentrations. No background TSS concentrations exceeded the 20 mg/L maximum

allowed by the protocol. Water temperature did not exceed 80° F during any of the test runs.

Also note that background sample concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the

method detection limit of 4 mg/L (reported by the laboratory as <4 mg/L).

13

25% MTFR Results

The 25% MTFR test was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP HDS MTD protocol at a

target flow rate of 0.18 cfs. A summary of test readings, measurements and calculations are

shown in Table 2. Feed calibration results are shown in Table 3. Background and effluent

sampling measurements are shown in Table 4.

The AS-3 removed 61.4% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.17 cfs. Table 5 shows

that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background

concentration are compliant with the protocol.

Table 2 Summary of AS-3 25% MTFR Test

Test Date

Target

Flow

(cfs/gpm)

Detention

Time

(sec)

Target Sediment

Concentration

(mg/L)

Target Feed

Rate

(mg/min)

Test

Duration

(min:sec)

9/14/16 0.18/80.1 241 200 60,632 67:06

Measured Values

Avg.

Flow

Rate

(cfs/gpm)

Avg.

Influent

Conc.

(mg/L)

Max.

Water

Temp.

(°F)

Avg. Adjusted

Effluent Conc.

(mg/L)

Avg. Removal

Efficiency

(%)

QA/QC

Compliance

0.17/74.8 194.5 78 75.1 61.4 Yes

Table 3 AS-3 25% MTFR Sediment Feed Results

Target

Concentration 200 mg/L Target Feed Rate 60,632 mg/min

Sample ID

Sample

Time

(min:sec)

Sample

Mass

(gm)

Sample

Duration

(sec)

Feed Rate

(mg/min)

Calculated Influent

Concentration

(mg/L)

Feed Rate 1 0.:00 54.022 60 54,022 190.3

Feed Rate 2 13:14 56.842 60 56,842 200.2

Feed Rate 3 26:27 56.733 60 56,733 199.9

Feed Rate 4 39:40 53.957 60 53,957 190.1

Feed Rate 5 52:53 54.847 60 54,847 193.2

Feed Rate 6 66:06 59.120 60 59,120 208.5

14

Table 4 AS-3 25% MTFR Background and Effluent Measurements

Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Background 1 12:14 2








Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)

Associated Background

Concentration

(mg/L)

Adjusted

Concentration

(mg/L)

Effluent 1 12:14 68 2 66

Effluent 2 12:44 67 2 65

Effluent 3 13:14 71 2 69

Effluent 4 25:27 72 2 70

Effluent 5 25:57 74 2 72

Effluent 6 26:27 75 2 73

Effluent 7 38:40 79 2 77

Effluent 8 39:10 75 2 73

Effluent 9 39:40 83 2 81

Effluent 10 51:53 81 2 79

Effluent 11 52:23 83 2 81

Effluent 12 52:53 79 2 77

Effluent 13 65:06 86 2 84

Effluent 14 65:36 83 3 80

Effluent 15 66:06 84 4 80

Average 77.3 2.2 75.1

* Background concentrations listed as 2 mg/L represent one half of the method detection limit of

4 mg/L as reported by the laboratory.

15

Table 5 AS-3 25% MTFR QA/QC Results

Flow Rate

Target

(cfs/gpm)

Average

(cfs/gpm)

Coef. Of

Variance

Acceptable Parameters

COV

0.18/80.1 0.17/74.8 0.007 <0.03

Feed Rate

Target Average Coef. Of

Variance


COV (mg/min) (mg/min)

60,632 55,920 0.036 <0.1

Influent Concentration

Target

(mg/L)

Average

(mg/L)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

200 194.5 0.036 <0.1

Background Concentration

Low High Average Acceptable Threshold

(mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

2 4 2.2 <20

50% MTFR Results





The AS-3 removed 54.9% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.35 cfs. Table 9 shows

that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background


16


Test Date

Target

Flow

(cfs/gpm)

Detention

Time

(sec)

Target Sediment

Concentration

(mg/L)

Target Feed

Rate

(mg/min)

Test

Duration

(min:sec)

5/19/16 0.36/160.2 120 200 121,264 46:37

Measured Values

Avg. Flow

Rate

(cfs/gpm)

Avg.

Influent

Conc.

(mg/L)

Max.

Water

Temp.

(°F)

Avg. Adjusted

Effluent Conc.

(mg/L)

Avg. Removal

Efficiency

(%)

QA/QC

Compliance

0.35/156.7 197.3 73.5 89.0 54.9 Yes


Target


Sample ID

Sample

Time

(min:sec)

Sample

Mass

(gm)

Sample

Duration

(sec)

Feed Rate

(mg/min)

Calculated Influent

Concentration

(mg/L)

Feed Rate 1 0:00 117.521 60 117,521 196.5

Feed Rate 2 9:07 110.476 60 110,476 184.7

Feed Rate 3 18:15 125.112 60 125,112 211.9

Feed Rate 4 27:22 106.146 60 106,146 179.8

Feed Rate 5 36:30 126.124 60 126,124 210.9

Feed Rate 6 45:37 111.724 60 111,724 188.7

17


Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Background 1 8:07 2

Background 2 9:7 2







Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)


Concentration

(mg/L)

Adjusted

Concentration

(mg/L)

Effluent 1 8:07 87 2 85

Effluent 2 8:37 87 2 85

Effluent 3 9:07 80 2 78

Effluent 4 17:15 91 4.5 86.5

Effluent 5 17:45 92 7 85

Effluent 6 18:15 83 5.5 77.5

Effluent 7 26:22 92 4 88

Effluent 8 26:52 98 3 95

Effluent 9 27:22 95 2 93

Effluent 10 35:30 96 3.5 92.5

Effluent 11 36:00 104 5 99

Effluent 12 36:30 90 6 84

Effluent 13 44:37 106 7 99

Effluent 14 45:07 106 7.5 98.5

Effluent 15 45:37 97 8 89

Average 93.6 4.6 89.0



18


Flow Rate

Target

(cfs/gpm)

Average

(cfs/gpm)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

0.36/160.2 0.35/156.7 0.01 <0.03

Feed Rate


Variance



121,264 116,017 0.07 <0.1


Target

(mg/L)

Average

(mg/L)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

200 197.3 0.07 <0.1




2 8 4.6 <20

75% MTFR Results





The AS-3 removed 43.9% of the test sediment at an average flow rate of 0.52 cfs. Table 13

shows that the QA/QC results for flow rate, feed rate, influent concentration and background


19


Test Date

Target

Flow

(cfs/gpm)

Detention

Time

(sec)

Target Sediment

Concentration

(mg/L)

Target Feed

Rate

(mg/min)

Test

Duration

(min:sec)

9/15/16 0.54/240.3 80 200 181,896 26:13

Measured Values

Avg.

Flow

Rate

(cfs/gpm)

Avg.

Influent

Conc.

(mg/L)

Max.

Water

Temp.

(°F)

Avg. Adjusted

Effluent Conc.

(mg/L)

Avg. Removal

Efficiency

(%)

QA/QC

Compliance

0.52/233.9 205.5 77.5 115.3 43.9 Yes


Target


Sample ID

Sample

Time

(min:sec)

Sample

Mass

(gm)

Sample

Duration

(sec)

Feed Rate

(mg/min)

Calculated Influent

Concentration

(mg/L)

Feed Rate 1 0:00 101.906 35 174,696 196.4

Feed Rate 2 5:08 108.710 35 186,360 210.4

Feed Rate 3 10:15 104.963 35 179,937 203.2

Feed Rate 4 15:23 104.742 35 179,558 203.6

Feed Rate 5 20:31 107.189 35 183,753 207.0

Feed Rate 6 25:38 107.605 35 184,466 209.0

20


Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Background 1 4:08 2

Background 2 5:08 2

Background 3 9:45 2






Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)


Concentration

(mg/L)

Adjusted

Concentration

(mg/L)

Effluent 1 4:08 96 2 94

Effluent 2 4:38 109 2 107

Effluent 3 5:08 109 2 107

Effluent 4 9:15 118 2 116

Effluent 5 9:45 113 2 111

Effluent 6 10:15 113 2 111

Effluent 7 14:23 129 2 127

Effluent 8 14:53 115 2 113

Effluent 9 15:23 129 2 127

Effluent 10 19:31 117 2 115

Effluent 11 20:01 118 2 116

Effluent 12 20:31 121 2 119

Effluent 13 24:38 123 2 121

Effluent 14 25:08 128 3 125

Effluent 15 25:38 124 4 120

Average 117.5 2.2 115.3



21


Flow Rate

Target

(cfs/gpm)

Average

(cfs/gpm)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

0.54/240.3 0.52/233.9 0.006 <0.03

Feed Rate


Variance



181,896 181,461 0.023 <0.1


Target

(mg/L)

Average

(mg/L)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

200 205.5 0.023 <0.1




2 4 2.2 <20

100% MTFR Results








22


Test Date

Target

Flow

(cfs/gpm)

Detention

Time

(sec)

Target Sediment

Concentration

(mg/L)

Target Feed

Rate

(mg/min)

Test

Duration

(min:sec)

9/16/16 0.71/320.4 60 200 242,528 20:57

Measured Values

Avg.

Flow

Rate

(cfs/gpm)

Avg.

Influent

Conc.

(mg/L)

Max.

Water

Temp.

(°F)

Avg. Adjusted

Effluent Conc.

(mg/L)

Avg. Removal

Efficiency

(%)

QA/QC

Compliance

0.71/320.5 203.3 77.5 123.6 39.2 Yes


Target


Sample ID

Sample

Time

(min:sec)

Sample

Mass

(gm)

Sample

Duration

(sec)

Feed Rate

(mg/min)

Calculated Influent

Concentration

(mg/L)

Feed Rate 1 0:00 126.497 30 252,994 208.2

Feed Rate 2 4:06 123.000 30 246,000 202.5

Feed Rate 3 8:11 117.574 30 235,148 192.9

Feed Rate 4 12:17 118.815 30 237,630 196.2

Feed Rate 5 16:22 124.823 30 249,646 208.1

Feed Rate 6 20:27 119.839 30 239,678 201.0

23


Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Background 1 3:06 2

Background 2 4:06 2

Background 3 7:41 2






Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)


Concentration

(mg/L)

Adjusted

Concentration

(mg/L)

Effluent 1 3:06 109 2 107

Effluent 2 3:36 118 2 116

Effluent 3 4:06 116 2 114

Effluent 4 7:11 126 2 124

Effluent 5 7:41 122 2 120

Effluent 6 8:11 125 2 123

Effluent 7 11:17 133 2 131

Effluent 8 11:47 122 2 120

Effluent 9 12:17 131 2 129

Effluent 10 15:22 126 2 124

Effluent 11 15:52 128 2 126

Effluent 12 16:22 134 3.5 130.5

Effluent 13 19:27 127 5 122

Effluent 14 19:57 142 5 137

Effluent 15 20:27 135 5 130

Average 126.3 2.7 123.6



24


Flow Rate

Target

(cfs/gpm)

Average

(cfs/gpm)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

0.71/320.4 0.71/320.5 0.007 <0.03

Feed Rate


Variance



242,528 243,516 0.029 <0.1


Target

(mg/L)

Average

(mg/L)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

200 203.3 0.029 <0.1




2 5 2.7 <20

125% MTFR Results








25


Test Date

Target

Flow

(cfs/gpm)

Detention

Time

(sec)

Target Sediment

Concentration

(mg/L)

Target Feed

Rate

(mg/min)

Test

Duration

(min:sec)

5/11/16 0.89/400.5 48 200 303,160 22:45

Measured Values

Avg. Flow

Rate

(cfs/gpm)

Avg.

Influent

Conc.

(mg/L)

Max.

Water

Temp.

(°F)

Avg. Adjusted

Effluent Conc.

(mg/L)

Avg. Removal

Efficiency

(%)

QA/QC

Compliance

0.83/373.7 198.8 75.5 115.1 42.1 Yes


Target


Sample ID

Sample

Time

(min:sec)

Sample

Mass

(gm)

Sample

Duration

(sec)

Feed Rate

(mg/min)

Calculated Influent

Concentration

(mg/L)

Feed Rate 1 0:00 146.411 30 292,822 202.0

Feed Rate 2 4:21 140.081 30 280,162 194.3

Feed Rate 3 8:42 140.914 30 281,828 198.2

Feed Rate 4 13:03 141.189 30 282,378 201.1

Feed Rate 5 17:24 130.728 30 261,456 188.2

Feed Rate 6 21:45 246.057 60 246,057 177.7

26


Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Background 1 3:21 2

Background 2 4:21 2

Background 3 8:12 2






Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)


Concentration

(mg/L)

Adjusted

Concentration

(mg/L)

Effluent 1 3:21 118 2 116

Effluent 2 3:51 129 2 127

Effluent 3 4:21 104 2 102

Effluent 4 7:42 117 2 115

Effluent 5 8:12 143 2 141

Effluent 6 8:42 124 6.5 117.5

Effluent 7 12:03 134 11 123

Effluent 8 12:33 129 8 121

Effluent 9 13:03 132 5 127

Effluent 10 16:24 122 7 115

Effluent 11 16:54 130 9 121

Effluent 12 17:24 73 10 63

Effluent 13 20:45 121 11 110

Effluent 14 21:15 127 9.5 117.5

Effluent 15 21:45 118 8 110

Average 121.4 6.3 115.1



27


Flow Rate

Target

(cfs/gpm)

Average

(cfs/gpm)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

0.89/400.5 0.83/373.7 0.017 <0.03

Feed Rate


Variance



303,160 274,117 0.041 <0.1


Target

(mg/L)

Average

(mg/L)

Coef. Of

Variance


COV

200 198.8 0.041 <0.1




2 11 6.3 <20

Excluded Data/Results

Two test sediment blends were used for the TSS removal efficiency testing. The test setup for the

May 2016 testing provided random background TSS concentrations that did not consistently

comply with the protocol threshold of 20 mg/L. Following trial testing of a modified test loop

that included an additional reservoir tank and a 1-micron filter assembly to meet the background

concentration requirement, testing resumed in September 2016 using the second PSD blend that

also complied with the protocol specification. Analytical data from the May 2016 testing that did

not comply with the background TSS concentration requirement were excluded from the results

presented herein.

Annualized Weighted TSS Removal Efficiency

The annualized weighted TSS removal efficiency calculation is shown below in Table 22 based

on the results of the removal efficiency testing.

Testing in accordance with the provisions detailed in the NJDEP HDS MTD Protocol

demonstrate that the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 achieved a 50.8% annualized weighted TSS

removal at an MTFR of 0.71 cfs (33.4 gpm/ft2). This testing demonstrates that the Aqua-

Swirl® Model AS-3 meets the NJDEP requirement that HDS devices demonstrate at least 50%

weighted annualized TSS removal efficiency at the MTFR.

28

Table 22 Annualized Weighted TSS Removal of the AS-3

% MTFR

Average Flow

Rate Tested

(cfs)

Actual %

MTFR

Measured

Removal

Efficiency

Annual

Weighting

Factor

Weighted

Removal

Efficiency

25% 0.17 24% 61.4 0.25 15.4

50% 0.35 49% 54.9 0.30 16.5

75% 0.52 73% 43.9 0.20 8.8

100% 0.71 100% 39.2 0.15 5.9

125% 0.83 117% 42.1 0.10 4.2

Weighted Annualized TSS Removal Efficiency 50.8

4.3 Test Sediment PSD Analysis – Scour Testing

Test sediment used for Scour Testing was independently blended by Good Harbour Laboratories

of high purity silica supplied by AGSCO Corporation. Three representative sediment samples

were collected from the sediment blend and delivered to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga,

Ontario for independent PSD analysis using ASTM D 422-63. The particle size distribution of

each of the 3 samples were averaged and reported as the overall particle size distribution. It was

determined that this test sediment blend meets the protocol specification. The test sediment was

placed in shipping containers, sealed, and transported to the AquaShieldTM laboratory test facility

in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The container seals were intact upon receipt and were removed by

the independent observer at the initiation of the scour testing program. The results and the

comparison to the protocol specification are shown in Table 23 and Figure 5. This test sediment

was determined to be overall finer than the specified scour test sediment.

Table 23 Scour Test Sediment PSD

Particle

Size (µm)

Test Sediment Particle Size (% passing) NJDEP

Minimum

Specification

QA/QC Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average

1,000 100 100 100 100 98 PASS

500 98 97 97 97 88 PASS

250 70 67 64 67 53 PASS

150 59 56 52 56 38 PASS

100 44 42 38 41 23 PASS

75 28 24 23 25 8 PASS

50 10 9 11 10 0 PASS

29

Figure 5 Scour Test Sediment PSD vs. Protocol Specification

4.4 Scour Testing for Online Installation

Scour testing for the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 was conducted in accordance with Section 4 of

the NJDEP HDS protocol. A flow rate of 1.44 cfs (646.9 gpm) was used in order to establish its

capability to be installed in an online configuration. Based on an MTFR of 0.71 cfs (320.4 gpm),

the scour test flow rate represents 203% of the MTFR. The flow rate COV was 0.002. Flow and

background concentrations are shown in Table 24.

Table 24 Flow and Background Concentration Results for AS-3 Scour Testing

Date May 18, 2016 Average Flow Rate = 1.44 cfs

Maximum

Temperature 72.5 Flow Rate COV = 0.002

Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Background 1 2:00 2

Background 2 4:00 2

Background 3 6:00 2

Background 4 8:00 2




30











Unadjusted effluent concentrations ranged from 4 mg/L to 18 mg/L. When adjusted for

background concentrations, effluent concentrations ranged from 2 to 16 mg/L and averaged 9.7

mg/L. Table 25 summarizes effluent, background and adjusted effluent concentrations.

Based on the results of this scour test, the Aqua-Swirl® can be installed online.

Table 25 Effluent Concentration Results for AS-3 Scour Testing at 203% MTFR

Sample ID Time

(min:sec)

Effluent

Concentration

with Background

Concentration

(mg/L)*

Adjusted

Effluent

Concentration

(mg/L)

Background

Concentration

(mg/L)

S-1 2:00 4 2 2

S-2 4:00 5 2 3

S-3 6:00 5 2 3

S-4 8:00 6 2 4

S-5 10:00 9 2 7

S-6 12:00 16 2 14

S-7 14:00 18 2 16

S-8 16:00 17 2 15

S-9 18:00 16 2 14

S-10 20:00 13 2 11

S-11 22:00 14 2 12

S-12 24:00 14 2 12

S-13 26:00 14 2 12

S-14 28:00 14 2 12

S-15 30:00 11 2 9



31

Excluded Data/Results

No data or results were excluded for the scour test.

5. Design Limitations

The Aqua-Swirl® is an engineered system designed to meet site-specific installation

requirements. General terms of design parameters and limitations are cited below.

Soil Characteristics

The Aqua-Swirl® is a post-construction, flow-through modular device. AquaShieldTM specifies

that stone backfill material be used. Site-specific native soils can be used as backfill provided

that the material substantially conforms to the backfill specification. AquaShieldTM engineers can

assist contractors with backfill questions when using native soil.

Slope of Drainage Pipe

There is no specific drainage pipe slope limitation. Given that both the inlet and outlet pipe

elevations are identical, the site design should consider piping configurations to accommodate

the level flow-through piping design. AquaShieldTM engineers can work with site design

engineers to facilitate an appropriate conveyance design.

Maximum Water Quality Treatment Flow Rate

The maximum water quality treatment flow rate varies by Aqua-Swirl® model size and should be

taken into consideration for site designs. AquaShieldTM engineers can assist site designers with

managing peak flow rates.

Maintenance Requirements

Aqua-Swirl® stormwater systems should be inspected and maintained following the

recommendations and guidelines included in the Aqua-Swirl® Inspection & Maintenance Manual

at: http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua-swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf.

Section 6 herein includes additional information.

Driving Head

Aqua-Swirl® technology does not require a driving head, beyond that required to achieve flow, to

achieve operating conditions.

Installation Limitations

Pick weights vary by Aqua-Swirl® model size. Aqua-Swirl® can provide contractors with model-

specific pick weights prior to delivery.

Configurations

Aqua-Swirl® technology is based on the tangential inlet to set up the vortex separation. Both off-

line and on-line configurations can accommodate clockwise and counter clockwise flow

processes. In addition, Aqua-Swirl® installations can utilize a range of inlet to outlet pipe angles.

http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua-swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf

32

Loading

Aqua-Swirl® systems are designed for HS-25 or greater loading. Contact AquaShieldTM

engineering staff when heavier loading conditions are anticipated.

Pre-treatment Requirements

The Aqua-Swirl® has no pre-treatment requirements.

Depth to Seasonal High Water Table

Aqua-Swirl® performance is independent of high groundwater conditions. AquaShieldTM

routinely performs buoyancy calculations for all system installations to ensure long term

functionality. Anti-floatation controls can be added for system installations when necessary.

Pipe Size

Each Aqua-Swirl® system has a maximum recommended inlet and outlet pipe size. The

maximum recommended pipe size for each model is shown in Table A-2 of the Verification

Appendix.

6. Maintenance Plan

The Aqua-Swirl® Inspection and Maintenance Manual provided at installation is available at:

http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua-swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf.

The Aqua-Swirl® is designed to remove suspended sediment, debris, floatables and free-floating

oil from stormwater runoff using a single chamber for both treatment and pollutant storage.

Periodic removal of these captured materials is essential to ensure long term functionality. Aqua-

Swirl® performance may be diminished when sediment and/or oil storage capacities are reached.

An Aqua-Swirl® Inspection and Maintenance manual is provided for each site delivery to track

and document system operations.

Both inspection and maintenance activities of the Aqua-Swirl® are simply performed and are

accomplished from the surface. There are no moving parts, no internal components that need

replacement, and no product-specific tools are needed from AquaShieldTM. A typical

maintenance event for the cleaning of the swirl chamber can be accomplished with a vacuum

truck. Aqua-Swirl® units utilize one or two manholes depending on model size to facilitate

inspection and maintenance events.

Inspection

Upon installation and during construction, AquaShieldTM recommends that an Aqua-Swirl®

treatment system be inspected every three months and the system be cleaned as needed. Essential

elements of a swirl chamber inspection include observing floating materials and measuring the

accumulated sediment at the base of the swirl chamber. The Aqua-Swirl® should be inspected

and cleaned at the end of construction regardless of whether it has reached its capacity for

sediment or oil storage. During the first year post-construction, the Aqua-Swirl® should again be

inspected every three months and cleaned as needed depending on site conditions. The ultimate


33

inspection frequency will be determined by site-specific runoff conditions. Yet, AquaShieldTM

recommends a minimum inspection frequency of once per year post-construction.

AquaShieldTM recommends that the units be cleaned when sediment depth reaches 7 inches,

representing 50% sediment storage capacity. The full sediment storage depth in the Aqua-Swirl®

is 14 inches.

Maintenance

Clean-out frequency will ultimately be determined by post-installation and post-construction

runoff conditions. As a general rule, AquaShieldTM recommends that Aqua-Swirl® systems be

maintained at a minimum of once per year. There is no need to enter an Aqua-Swirl® chamber

for inspections or maintenance activities. If entry is necessary, confined space entry procedures

should be employed.

Cleaning is performed by a vacuum truck, but it may be warranted to remove gross debris and

floatable objects by an alternate suitable means (i.e., skimming pole with net). Any accumulated

oil can be vacuumed from the surface. Accumulated sediment at the base of the swirl chamber

can be removed via vacuum through the manhole(s) opening from the surface. There are no

hidden or blind access chambers in the Aqua-Swirl® which allows for a complete cleaning of the

unit.

The manhole lid(s) should be replaced at the conclusion of inspection and maintenance activities.

AquaShieldTM advises that all removed pollutants be disposed in accordance with all applicable

local regulations and ordinances.

7. Statements

The following signed statements from the manufacturer, third party observer and NJCAT are

required to complete the NJCAT verification process. Additionally, this report has been

subjected to public review and all comments and concerns have been satisfactorily addressed.

34

35

36

37

38

Center for Environmental Systems

Stevens Institute of Technology

One Castle Point

Hoboken, NJ 07030-0000

October 7, 2016

Titus Magnanao

NJDEP

Division of Water Quality

Bureau of Non-Point Pollution Control

401-02B

PO Box 420

Trenton, NJ 08625-0420

Dear Mr. Magnanao,

Based on my review, evaluation and assessment of the testing conducted on the Aqua-Swirl®

Stormwater Treatment System by AquaShield and observed by Dr. Gregory Williams, P.E. of

Good Harbour Laboratories, Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario, the test protocol requirements contained

in the “New Jersey Laboratory Testing Protocol to Assess Total Suspended Solids Removal by a

Hydrodynamic Sedimentation Manufactured Treatment Device” (NJDEP HDS Protocol) were

met or exceeded. Specifically:

Test Sediment Feed

The mean PSD of the AquaShield test sediments comply with the PSD criteria established by the

NJDEP HDS protocol. The AquaShield removal efficiency test sediment PSD analysis was

plotted against the NJDEP removal efficiency test PSD specification. The test sediment was

shown to be finer than the sediment blend specified by the protocol (<75µ); the test sediment d50

was approximately 50 microns. The scour test sediment PSD analysis was plotted against the

NJDEP removal efficiency test PSD specification and shown to be finer than specified by the

protocol.

39

Removal Efficiency Testing

In accordance with the NJDEP HDS Protocol, removal efficiency testing was executed on the

Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3, a 3.5 ft. diameter commercially available unit, in order to establish the

ability of the Aqua-Swirl to remove the specified test sediment at 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% and

125% of the target MTFR. The Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 demonstrated 50.8% annualized

weighted solids removal as defined in the NJDEP HDS Protocol. The flow rates, feed rates and

influent concentration all met the NJDEP HDS test protocol’s coefficient of variance

requirements and the background concentration for all five test runs never exceeded 20 mg/L.

Scour Testing

In order to demonstrate the ability of the Aqua-Swirl to be used as an online treatment device

scour testing was conducted at greater than 200% of MTFR in accordance with the NJDEP HDS

Protocol. The average flow rate during the online scour test was 1.44 cfs, which represents

203% of the MTFR (MTFR = 0.71 cfs). Background concentrations were 2 mg/L throughout the

scour testing, which complies with the 20 mg/L maximum background concentration specified

by the test protocol. Unadjusted effluent concentrations ranged from 4 mg/L to 18 mg/L. When

adjusted for background concentrations, the effluent concentrations range from 2 to 16 mg/L

with a mean of 9.7 mg/L. These results confirm that the Aqua-Swirl® Model AS-3 did not scour

at 203% MTFR and meets the criteria for online use.

Maintenance Frequency

The predicted maintenance frequency for all models is 56 months.

Sincerely,

Richard S. Magee, Sc.D., P.E., BCEE

40

8. References

ASTM D422-63. Standard Test Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soils.

ASTM D3977-97. Standard Test Methods for Determining Concentrations in Water Samples.

AquaShieldTM, Inc. April 2016, layout revised June 2016. Verification Testing of the Aqua-

Swirl® Model AS-3 in Accordance with the NJDEP Laboratory Testing Protocol 2013, Quality

Assurance Project Plan.

NJDEP 2013a. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Procedure for Obtaining

Verification of a Stormwater Manufactured Treatment Device from New Jersey Corporation for

Advanced Technology. Trenton, NJ. January 25, 2013.

NJDEP 2013b. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Laboratory Protocol to

Assess Total Suspended Solids Removal by a Hydrodynamic Sedimentation Manufactured

Treatment Device. Trenton, NJ. January 25, 2013.

41

VERIFICATION APPENDIX

42

Introduction

Manufacturer: AquaShieldTM, Inc., 2733 Kanasita Drive, Suite 111, Chattanooga,

Tennessee 37343. General Phone: (423) 870-8888. Website: www.aquashieldinc.com.

MTD: Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System (Aqua-Swirl®). Verified Aqua-Swirl®

models are shown in Table A-1.

TSS Removal Rate: 50%

Offline or Online installation

Detailed Specification

NJDEP sizing tables attached as Table A-1 and Table A-2.

Pick weights and installation procedures vary with model size. AquaShieldTM provides

contractors with project-specific unit pick weights and installation instructions as

warranted prior to delivery.

Maximum recommended sediment depth prior to cleanout is 14 inches for all models.

An Inspection and Maintenance Manual is provided for each project installation and is

available at: http://www.aquashieldinc.com/uploads/1/3/6/1/13618853/aqua-

swirl_i_m_manual_11-16.pdf.

According to N.J.A.C. 7:8-5.5, NJDEP stormwater design requirements do not allow a

hydrodynamic separator such as the Aqua-Swirl® to be used in series with another

hydrodynamic separator to achieve an enhanced TSS removal rate.

http://www.aquashieldinc.com/



43

Table A-1 MTFRs and Required Sediment Removal Intervals for Aqua-Swirl® Models

Model

Manhole

Diameter

(ft)

NJDEP 50% TSS

Maximum

Treatment

Flow Rate

(cfs)

Treatment

Area

(ft2)

Hydraulic

Loading

Rate

(gpm/ft2)

50%

Maximum

Sediment

Storage

Volume

(ft3)

Required

Sediment

Removal

Interval1

(months)

AS-2 2.5 0.36 4.9 33.4 2.86 56

AS-3 3.5 0.71 9.6 33.4 5.60 56

AS-4 4.5 1.18 15.9 33.4 9.28 56

AS-5 5 1.46 19.6 33.4 11.43 56

AS-6 6 2.11 28.3 33.4 16.51 56

AS-7 7 2.87 38.5 33.4 22.46 56

AS-8 8 3.74 50.3 33.4 29.34 56

AS-9 9 4.73 63.6 33.4 37.10 56

AS-10 10 5.84 78.5 33.4 45.79 56

AS-11 11 7.07 95.0 33.4 55.42 56

AS-12 12 8.42 113.1 33.4 65.98 56

AS-13 13 9.87 132.7 33.4 77.41 56

1Sediment Removal Interval (months) = (50% HDS MTD Max Sediment Storage Volume * 3.57)

(MTFR * TSS Removal Efficiency)

Required sediment removal interval calculated using equation specified in Appendix B, Part B of the

NJDEP Laboratory Protocol for HDS MTDs.

44

Table A-2 Standard Dimensions for Aqua-Swirl® Models

Model

Maximum

Treatment

Flow Rate

(cfs)

Depth Below

Invert

(DBI)1

(ft)

Scaling

Depth2

(ft)

Aspect

Ratio

Depth: Dia3

Sediment

Sump

Depth

(ft)

Maximum

Pipe

Diameter

(in)

AS-2 0.36 4.21 3.63 1.45 1.17 15

AS-3 0.71 5.67 5.08 1.45 1.17 21

AS-4 1.18 6.13 5.55 1.23 1.17 27

AS-5 1.46 6.75 6.17 1.23 1.17 30

AS-6 2.11 7.98 7.40 1.23 1.17 36

AS-7 2.87 9.22 8.64 1.23 1.17 42

AS-8 3.74 10.45 9.87 1.23 1.17 48

AS-9 4.73 11.68 11.10 1.23 1.17 54

AS-10 5.84 12.92 12.34 1.23 1.17 60

AS-11 7.07 14.15 13.57 1.23 1.17 66

AS-12 8.42 15.38 14.80 1.23 1.17 72

AS-13 9.87 16.62 16.04 1.23 1.17 78

1 DBI is the depth from the invert of inlet pipe to the bottom of the unit.

2 Scaling depth is the DBI minus 0.58 ft (7 in.), the location of the false floor of the tested unit.

3 The aspect ratio of scaling depth/model diameter for the tested unit is 1.45. An aspect ratio of

1.45±15% indicates that the treatment depth of the model is proportional as required by the

protocol based on the tested model ratio of scaling depth to manhole diameter.

Documents

NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION Aqua-Swirl …njcat.org/uploads/newDocs/AquaSwirlNJCATReportFinal.pdf · NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION Aqua-Swirl® Stormwater Treatment System AquaShieldTM,