This summary sets the framework for the first half of a two-part interactive debate. The intent of the authors in conducting this debate is to transfer to designers and operators what is known about the issues raised, and to cause them to think about the issues raised in their daily practice. Most importantly, we want to encourage our industry to collect the information in formal and informal research programs that will ultimately allow our profession to settle these issues.
The Great Secondary Clarifier Debate: I. Surface Overflow Rate is Not an Appropriate Design Criterion For Dimensioning Secondary Clarifiers
Authors: Denny S. Parker (for the proposition), Thomas E. Wilson(opposed)
1998 The Great Secondary Clarifier Debate, two-part interactive