A

MICROPROJECT

On

“Prepare House Hold Water Filtration Report.”

Submitted By

1. Name of Student 2. Enrollment No:

Class: CE4I

Under The Guidance

Miss. S. B. Pokale

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Padmashri Dr. Vitthalrao Vikhe Patil Institute of Technology and
Engineering (Polytechnic) Pravaranagar-413736.
(2023-2024)
 Padmashri Dr. Vitthalrao Vikhe Patil Institute of Technology and
Engineering (Polytechnic) Pravaranagar-413736

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that

1. Name of Student 2. Enrollment No

Class: CE4I

Has successfully submitted the Micro Project on

“Prepare House Hold Water Filtration Report”

Towards the partial fulfillment of
Diploma in Civil Engineering affiliated to Maharashtra State Board of
Technical Education, Mumbai during academic year 2023-2024

(Miss. S. B. Pokale) (Mr. S. K. Gorde )

Guide HOD

Place: Loni
Date:
 Micro Project Evaluation Sheet (Group)

Academic Year: Name of Faculty:

Course: Course: Code: Semester:

Title of Micro Project: ……………………………………………………………………………

Cos addressed by the Micro Project:

a)……………………………………………………………………………………………
b) …………………………………………………………………………………………
c) …………………………………………………………………………………………
d) …………………………………………………………………………………………

Major Learning Outcomes achieved by students by doing the project:

a) Practical Outcomes: …………………………………………………………………………

………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………

b) Outcomes in Cognitive domain: ……………………………………………………………

………….…………………………………………………………………………………………

c) Outcomes in Affective domain: ………………………………………………………………

………….…………………………………………………………………………………………
Comments /Suggestions about team work / leadership/inter-personal communication (if any)
…………………………………………………………………………

………….…………………………………………………………………………………………
Marks out Marks out of
of 6 for 4 for
Total out
Roll Enrollment Performance Performance
Full Name of Student of
No. No. in group in oral/
10
activity presentation
(D5) (D5)
Add more rows if required

Name & Sign of Faculty

Micro Project Evaluation Sheet (Individual)
 Micro-Project Proposal (to be filled before start of project)

Title of Micro Project: ……………………………………………………………………………

1.0 Aims/Benefits of Micro Project (min 30-50 words)

………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………....

2.0 Course Outcome(s) Addressed:

a)……………………………………………………………………………………………
b) …………………………………………………………………………………………
c) …………………………………………………………………………………………
d) …………………………………………………………………………………………
e)……………………………………………………………………………………………

3.0 Proposed Methodology (procedure in brief that will be followed to do the micro project in
about 100-200 words)

4.0 Action Plan (sequence and time required for major activities)
Sr. Planned Planned Name of responsible
Details of Activity
No. start date finish date team members
5.0 Resources Required (Major resources such as raw material, some machining facility,
software, etc.)
Sr.
Name of resource/material Specifications Qty. Remark
No.

Name of Team Members:

Roll No. Name of Student

Name & Sign of Faculty

Micro-Project Report

(Minimum 4 pages)

1.0 Rationale (Importance of the project, in about 30-50 words)

2.0 Aims/Benefits of the Micro Project:

3.0 Course Outcome(s) Achieved:

a)……………………………………………………………………………………………
 b) …………………………………………………………………………………………
c) …………………………………………………………………………………………
d) …………………………………………………………………………………………
e)……………………………………………………………………………………………

4.0 Literature Review:

5.0 Actual Methodology Followed (Write step wise work done, data collected and its analysis (if
any).

6.0 Actual Resources Used (Mention the actual resources used for Micro Project).
Sr. Name of resource/material Specifications Qty. Remark
No.

7.0 Output(s) of the Micro project: (drawings of prototype or survey, presentation os collected
data, findings, ect)
8.0 Skill(s) developed / Learning outcome of this Micro Project:

9.0 Application(s) of this Micro project:

 Introduction

It has been estimated that 1.1 billion people do not have access to
improved drinking water sources. Consumption of unsafe water
continues to be one of the major causes of the 2.2 million diarrhoeal
disease deaths occurring annually, mostly in children. There is now
conclusive evidence that simple, acceptable, low-cost interventions at the
household and community level are capable of dramatically improving
the microbial quality of household stored water and reducing the risks of
diarrheal disease. In this review the candidate technologies and
approaches for household water treatment are examined on the basis of
their technical feasibility, practicality, availability and effectiveness in
improving the microbiological quality of water and reducing waterborne
disease.
 Boiling

Boiling or heating of water is effective in destroying all classes of

waterborne pathogens and can be effectively applied to all waters,
including those high in turbidity. Although boiling is the preferred
thermal treatment for contaminated water, heating to pasteurization
temperatures (60°C) for tens minutes will destroy most waterborne
pathogens. Even heating to as little as 55°C for several hours has been
shown to dramatically reduce non-spore forming bacterial pathogens as
well as many viruses and parasites, including the waterborne
Cryptosporidium parvum, Giardia lamblia and Entamoeba histolytica.

Thermal Treatment with Solar Radiation

Water can be heated to temperatures of 55°C in transparent bottles

exposed to sunlight for several hours, especially if the bottle is painted
black on one side or is lying on a dark surface that collects and radiates
heat. This method of treatment utilizes both the UV radiation in sunlight
as well as the thermal effects of sunlight to inactivate waterborne
microbes. A major limitation of solar heating is the availability of
sunlight, which varies greatly with season and geographic location.
Another potential limitation of solar heating to disinfect water is the
determination of water temperature. Several simple, low cost
temperature indicators have been devised. One of the simplest and most
effective is a reusable water pasteurization indicator based on the
melting temperature of soyabean wax.
 Solar Treatment by UV and Thermal Effects

Treatment to control waterborne microbial contaminants by exposure to

sunlight in clear vessels that allows the combined germicidal effects of
both UV

radiation and heat also has been developed, evaluated and put into field
practice. A number of different solar treatment systems have been
described, but one of the technically simplest and most economical is the
SODIS system. The SODIS system consists of four basic steps; removing
solids from highly turbid (>30 NTU) water by settling or filtration,
placing low turbidity (<30 NTU) water in clear plastic bottles, aerating
the water by vigorous shaking in contact with air and exposing the filled,
aerated bottles to full sunlight for about five hours or longer if only part
sunlight. There was a measurable reduction in diarrheal disease and
cholera in Kenyan children drinking solar disinfected water.
 UV Disinfection using Lamps

Disinfection of drinking water with UV lamps has been practiced since

the early part of the 20th century. This method of drinking water
disinfection has received renewed interest in recent years because of its
well-documented ability to extensively (>99.9%) inactivate two
waterborne, chlorine-resistant protozoans, Cryptosporidium parvum
oocysts and Giardia lamblia cysts. However, dissolved organic matter and
suspended matter absorb UV radiation or shield microbes from UV
radiation, resulting in lower delivered UV doses and reduced microbial
disinfection. In addition, UV provides no residual effect in the water to
protect against post-treatment contamination.

Go to:
 Fiber, Fabric and Membrane Filters

Most fabric and paper filters have pore sizes greater than the diameters
of viruses and bacteria, so removal of these microbes is low, unless the
microbes are associated with larger particles. However, some membrane
and fiber filters have pore sizes small enough to efficiently remove
parasites (one to several micrometers pore size), bacteria (0.1-1
micrometer pore size) and viruses (0.01 to 0.001 micrometer pore size or
ultrafilters). Paper filters have been recommended for the removal of
schistosomes and polyester or monofilament nylon cloth filters have
been recommended for the removal of the Cyclops. Such filters have been
used successfully at both the household and community levels. Various
types of sari cloth and nylon mesh can be used in single or multiple layers
to remove from water the zooplankton and phytoplankton harboring
Vibrio cholerae, thereby reducing their concentrations by >95 to >99%.
 Porous Ceramic Filters

Most modern ceramic filters are in the form of vessels or hollow

cylindrical “candles”. Water generally passes from the exterior of the
candle to the inside, although some porous clay filters are designed to
filter water from the inside to the outside. Many commercially produced
ceramic filters are impregnated with silver to act as a bacteriostatic agent
and prevent biofilm formation on the filter surface. However, all porous
ceramic media filters require regular cleaning to remove accumulated
material and restore normal flow rate. Porous ceramic filters can be
made in various pore sizes and most modern ceramic filters produced in
the developed countries of the world are rated to have micron or
submicron pore sizes that efficiently remove bacteria as well as parasites.
Ceramic filters in various countries of the developed world have been
extensively tested for efficacy in reducing various waterborne microbial
contaminants and some of these are rated to remove at least 99.9% of
bacteria, such as Klebsiella terrigena, 99.9% of viruses, such as
polioviruses and rotaviruses, and 99.9% of Giardia cysts and
Cryptosporidium oocysts.
 Alum and Iron Coagulation and Sedimentation

When potash alum was evaluated for household water treatment in a

suburban community in Myanmar by adding it to water in traditional
storage vessels, fecal coliform contamination was reduced by 90-98%
and consumer acceptance of the treated water was high. In another
study, alum potash was found to be effective in reducing illness among
family members in intervention households (9.6%) than in control
households (17.7%) in a cholera affected area.

Charcoal and Activated Carbon Adsorption

Main application of charcoal and activated carbon is the reduction of

toxic organic compounds as well as objectionable taste and odour
compounds in the water. Although fresh or virgin charcoal or activated
carbon will adsorb microbes, including pathogens, from water, dissolved
organic matter in the water rapidly takes up adsorption sites and the
carbon rapidly develops a biofilm. In many point-of-use devices the
carbon is impregnated or commingled with silver that serves as a
bacteriostatic agent to reduce microbial colonization and control
microbial proliferation in the product water.
 Ion Exchange Disinfection

Ion exchange disinfection is primarily with iodine in the form of tri-iodide

or penta-iodide exchange resins. Portable and point-of-use iodine
exchange resins have been developed and extensively evaluated for
inactivation of waterborne pathogens, primarily in developed countries.
Most of these are in the form of pour through cups, pitchers, columns
through which water is passed so that microbes come in contact with the
iodine on the resin. Point-of-use iodine resins have been found to
extensively inactivate viruses, bacteria and protozoan parasites.

Chlorine Treatment

Chlorine is the most affordable, easily and widely used agent. It is highly
effective against nearly all waterborne pathogens, with notable
exceptions being Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts and mycobacteria
species. At doses of a few mg/l and contact times of about 30 minutes,
free chlorine generally inactivates >4 log10 (>99.99%) of enteric bacteria
and viruses. Water should be free of turbidity for effective chlorination.
Advantages of chlorine treatment are that it is cheap and provides
residual effect.
 Combined Treatment Systems

In South Africa commercial tablets containing chlorine and aluminium

sulfate have been developed, evaluated and promoted for community and
household water treatment. Overall, combined coagulation-flocculation
and chlorine disinfection systems have shown considerable promise as
microbiological purifiers of household water. Water purifiers based on
multiple interventions such as filtration/activated carbon adsorption /
UV rays disinfection are available in the market which can be used to
purify the water at point to use but they have high installation and
maintenance cost.
 Conclusion

Table 1 summarizes the various household technologies for water

purification on the basis of their practicality, availability and
effectiveness in improving the microbiological quality of the water, cost
and limitations. Water purifiers based on multiple interventions such as
filtration / ultra filtration / activated carbon adsorption / UV rays
disinfection are available in the market which can be used to purify the
water at point to use in catering establishments and individual houses if
quality of water supplied to these places is not satisfactory, otherwise
water purifiers based on single interventions like candle filters, resins
filters (zero B suraksha) or ultraviolet lamp can be used since most of
these places are being supplied water after purification by Military
Engineering Services / Cantonments. Troops on operational move can
purify water by chlorine disinfection (aqua tab).
 References
1. Human development report 2003. Oxford University Press; New York: 2003. United
Nations Development Program. [Google Scholar]
2. World Health Organization . The World Health Report 2005. World Health
Organization; Geneva: 2005. [Google Scholar]
3. Mintz ED, Reiff FM, Tauxe RV. Safe water treatment and storage in the home: a
practical new strategy to prevent waterborne disease. JAMA. 1995;273:948–
953. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Mintz E, Bartram J, Lochery P, Wegelin M. Not just a drop in the bucket: expanding
access to point-of-use water treatment systems. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:1565–
1570. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Clasen TF, Cairncross S. Household water management: refining the dominant
paradigm. Trop Med Int Health. 2004;9:187–191. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Sobsey MD, Leland JSE. Antiprotozoan and Anthelmintic Agents. In: Block SS,
editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. 5th edition. Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins; New York: 2001. [Google Scholar]
7. Joyce TM, McGuigan KG, Elmore M, Conroy RM. Inactivation of fecal bacteria in
drinking water by solar heating. Applied & Environmental Microbiolog. 1996;62:399–
402. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. McGuigan KG, Joyce TM, Conroy RM. Solar disinfection: Use of sunlight to
decontaminate drinking water in developing countries. Journal of Medical
Microbiology. 1999;48:785–787. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Wegelin M, Sommer B. Solar water disinfection (SODIS). Destined for worldwide
use? Waterlines. 1998;16:30–32. [Google Scholar]
10. Conroy RM, Meegan ME, Joyce T, McGuigan K, Barnes J. Solar disinfection of
water reduces diarrhoeal disease: An update. Archives of Disease in
Childhood. 1999;81:337–338. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Blatchley IER, Peel M. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins; New York: 2001. Disinfection by Ultraviolet Irradiation. [Google
Scholar]
12. Aikhomu SE, Brieger WR, Kale O. Acceptance and use of communal filtration units
in guinea worm eradication. Tropical Medicine and International Health. 2000;5:47–
52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Huq AB. Simple Filtration Method to Remove Plankton-Associated Vibrio
cholerae in Raw Water Supplies in Developing Countries. Applied and Environmental
Microbiology. 1996;62:2508–2512. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Pesticide Program Guide Standard and Protocol for Microbiological Water
Purifiers. EPA, Office of Drinking Water; Washington, DC. US: 1992. [Google Scholar]
15. Oo KN, Aung KS. Effectiveness of Potash Alum in Decontaminating Household
Water. Diarrhoeal Disease Research. 1993;11:172–174. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Khan MU, Khan MR. Alum Potash in Water to Prevent
Cholera. Lancet. 1984;3:1032. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. AWWA (American Water Works Association) Water Quality and Treatment. 5th
edition. 1999. 1233 pages. Denver, CO. (ISBN 0-07-001659-3). [Google Scholar]
18. Naranjo JE, Chaidez C. Evaluation of a Portable Water Purification System for the
Removal of Enteric Pathogens. Water Science & Technology. 1997;35:55–58. [Google
Scholar]
19. Sobsey MD. Inactivation of health-related microorganisms in water by
disinfection processes. Water Science and Technology. 1989;21:179–195. [Google
Scholar]
20. Procter and Gamble Company . Press Release: New P&G Technology Improves
Drinking Water in Developing Countries. Procter and Gamble; Cincinnati, Ohio:
2001. [Google Scholar]
21. Crump JA, Otieno PO, Slutsker L. Household based treatment of drinking water
with flocculant-disinfectant for preventing diarrhoea in areas with turbid source
water in rural western Kenya: cluster randomised controlled
trial. BMJ. 2005;331:478. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]