CALCULATION OF ULTRAVIOLET FLUENCE RATE

DISTRIBUTIONS IN AN ANNULAR REACTOR:

SIGNIFICANCE OF REFRACTION AND REFLECTION
JAMES R. BOLTON*
Calgon Carbon Corporation, PO Box 717, Pittsburgh, PA, 15230-0717, USA
(First received 1 March 1999; accepted in revised form 1 November 1999)
AbstractA model, utilizing the multiple point source summation approximation for a linear lamp, is
presented for the calculation of the uence rate distribution and the average uence rate in an
ultraviolet (UV) reactor. The model is sophisticated, in that it accounts for both reection and
refraction as a beam of UV radiation passes through an air/quartz/water interface. When the eects of
reection and refraction are ``turned o'' (by setting the refractive indices to 1.000), there is only a
small increase (H6.5% arising from reection) in the calculated average uence rate for 10 mm path
length transmittance (T
/
10
) values less than 70%. Thus, under these conditions, the eects of reection
and refraction can be safely neglected (with a 6.5% correction for reection). In many practical
applications, such as drinking water treatment, the T
/
10
is usually much larger than 70%, where the
error of neglecting refraction and reection can be as large as 25%, and thus the more sophisticated
model should be used. 7 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Key wordsultraviolet disinfection, reactor model, UV uence rate, UV dose
INTRODUCTION
Until recently, the use of ultraviolet (UV) radiation
to disinfect drinking water or the euent from sew-
age treatment plants (Whitby et al., 1984; Severin,
1980; Loge et al., 1996; Blatchley et al., 1997) has
involved the use of large banks of low-pressure
mercury lamps (40100 W each), which emit pri-
marily at 253.7 nm. However, a new generation of
UV systems is now emerging (Gehr and Nicell,
1996; Linden et al., 1998) that uses a smaller num-
ber of higher power (15 kW) medium-pressure
mercury lamps. These lamps emit over a broad
range of wavelengths in the germicidal 200300 nm
band (see Fig. 1). In the design of UV reactors, it is
important to be able to calculate the uence rate
2
(mW cm
2
) distribution throughout the reactor
since identication of ``darker'' volumes may allow
placement of eective baes. For the case of the
ideal ``plug ow'' situation with perfect radial mix-
ing and no longitudinal mixing (never achieved in a
real reactor), the applied UV dose (mJ cm
2
) may
be calculated by multiplying the volume averaged
uence rate by the reactor retention time in sec-
onds. Such an ``ideal UV dose'' is a maximum for a
given reactor. In practice, UV doses are determined
by biodosimetry, in which a suspension of a test
organism (e.g., bacillus subtilis or MS2 coliphage) is
injected upstream of the UV reactor and samples
taken downstream. The ratio of the active cell
counts of the euent samples to that of the inuent
samples is then compared with a dose-response
curve determined in a collimated beam apparatus to
obtain the ``reduction equivalent UV dose''. Com-
parison of the ``ideal'' UV dose with the ``reduction
equivalent'' UV dose is a useful concept because
the ratio of the latter to the ideal UV dose is a
measure of the reactor ``mixing eciency''.
The broadband nature of the emission from a
medium-pressure lamp adds complexity because one
needs to know the spectral distribution of the lamp
emission and the absorption spectra both of the
quartz sleeve and of the water being irradiated.
This paper presents a model by which the uence
rate distribution and the average uence rate can be
calculated in an annular UV reactor with either a
monochromatic (254 nm) low-pressure mercury
lamp or a broadband medium-pressure mercury UV
lamp at the center. The calculation of the average
UV uence rate allows the determination of an
``ideal maximum'' UV dose. The average UV u-
ence rate is calculated for a range of values of the
10 mm path length transmittance (T
/
10
) of the water.
Wat. Res. Vol. 34, No. 13, pp. 33153324, 2000
7 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0043-1354/00/$ - see front matter
3315
www.elsevier.com/locate/watres
PII: S0043-1354(00)00087-7
*Present address: Bolton Photosciences Inc., 92 Main
Street, Ayr, ON, Canada N0B 1E0; e-mail:
jbolton@boltonuv.com
2
Many authors use the terms ``irradiance'' or ``intensity''
for ``uence rate''. See denitions in the third section.
PREVIOUS UV REACTOR MODELS
In the design of UV disinfection reactors, it is im-
portant to know the details of how UV radiation
enters the reactor and gets attenuated by absorption
and/or reection by components in the reactor.
Answers to these questions require the application
of the principles of optics to the specic geometry
and composition of the reactor. This is quite simple
if the UV radiation arises from a point source; how-
ever, it is more dicult for a UV lamp of nite di-
ameter and length. Fortunately, an approximation
(Jacob and Drano, 1970; Scheible et al., 1985; Sui-
dan and Severin, 1986) [called the Multiple Point
Source Summation (MPSS) approximation], invol-
ving division of the linear lamp into a series of n
equally-spaced point sources along the axis of the
lamp, proves to be very satisfactory. Blatchley
(1997) has extended this model by introducing a
line source integration (LSI) model (for which a
closed form solution exists when the absorbance of
the medium is zero), in which the MPSS model is
taken to the limit of an innite number of point
sources. Irazoqui et al. (1973) expanded the MPSS
model to consider a three-dimensional source with
volumetric emission, and Foraboschi (1959) con-
sidered a three-dimensional source with supercial
emission. However, Irazoqui et al. (1973) showed
that there is only a small dierence between the
radiation elds for the simple MPSS model with
spherical emission and that for a three-dimensional
cylindrical source with volumetric emission. Thus in
this paper the MPSS model is adopted with spheri-
cal emission from a series of point sources along
the axis of the UV lamp.
Most UV disinfection reactors consist of a paral-
lel array of lamps. For calculational purposes, one
can assume a cylindrical ``volume of inuence'' with
the radius dened as the distance from the center of
a lamp to the point at which the UV radiation hits
an adjacent lamp sleeve or the wall. The uence
rate in any small volume element is then the sum of
the uence rate contributions from each adjacent
lamp. For the calculations in this paper, a simplied
reactor volume is assumed, involving a long lamp
inside a quartz sleeve with the water to be irra-
diated, owing in a cylindrical channel outside the
quartz sleeve (see Fig. 2). The model presented here
is restricted to a cylindrical reactor. However, since
uence rates are spatially additive, multiple lamp
reactors can easily be incorporated into a calcu-
lation.
The UV uence rate varies from point to point in
the reactor, but if the water is well mixed radially
as it ows through the reactor (ideal plug ow
behavior), then all volume elements will receive the
same average UV dose. However, if mixing is not
ecient (and this is often the case), some water
volume elements will receive a higher dose and
some lower. Thus some bacteria or viruses may not
receive a dose sucient for complete inactivation
and after passing through the reactor will still be
capable of replicating. Sophisticated computational
uid dynamics models are now available to address
this mixing issue (Chiu et al., 1999).
SOME PRINCIPLES OF OPTICS AND UV RADIATION
Before analyzing various reactor congurations,
it is important to understand some denitions and
principles of optics and UV radiation (Verhoeven,
1996):
1. Source Radiant Power (F): the radiant power
(W) emitted in all directions by a radiant energy
source.
2. Irradiance (E): dened as the total radiant power
from all directions incident on an innitesimal el-
ement of surface area dS containing the point
under consideration, divided by dS. The SI unit
of irradiance is W m
2
; however, mW cm
2
(=10 W m
2
) is in common usage. For a pos-
ition at r cm from a point source in a non-
absorbing medium, the irradiance is given by
Fig. 2. A cylindrical UV disinfection reactor.
Fig. 1. Comparison of the emission spectra of a low-press-
ure lamp and a typical medium-pressure lamp with the
absorption spectrum of DNA (von Sonntag, 1986).
James R. Bolton 3316
E =
F
4pr
2
(1)
3. Fluence rate (E'): the radiant power passing from
all directions through an innitesimally small
sphere of cross-sectional area dA, divided by dA.
The SI unit of uence rate is W m
2
, but mW
cm
2
or mW cm
2
are in common usage. Note
that uence rate and irradiance are similar (same
units) but conceptually quite dierent terms.
They are the same for a collimated beam. Since a
microorganism can receive UV radiation from
any direction (especially when there are several
UV lamps in the vicinity), uence rate is the
appropriate term to use in a UV reactor. The u-
ence rate or irradiance is often termed ``light
intensity''this is incorrectsee the proper de-
nition of ``radiant intensity'' below.
4. UV Dose or Fluence (H'): dened as the total
radiant energy from all directions passing
through an innitesimally small sphere of cross-
sectional area dA, divided by dA. The UV dose
is the uence rate times the irradiation time in
seconds. The SI unit of UV dose is J m
2
, but
often UV dose is given as mW s cm
2
. The
equivalent mJ cm
2
is preferable (since it empha-
sizes the delivery of UV energy) and will be used
in this paper.
5. Solid Angle (O): dened as the surface area of a
section of a sphere divided by r
2
, where r is the
radius of the sphere. The maximum solid angle
(corresponding to a complete sphere) is 4p stera-
dians (sr). An element of solid angle dO is given
by dA/r
2
, where dA is the area on the sphere
subtended by the solid angle dO (see Fig. 3). dO
is related to spherical-polar angles by dO=
sin ydydf, where y is measured from the z-axis.
6. Radiant Intensity (I ): the power emitted from a
point source into a small solid angle dO stera-
dians (sr) about a given direction from the
source. The SI units of I are W sr
1
. Note that
for a point source, F=4pI, and I does not
diminish with distance in a non-absorbing med-
ium. Note also that the element of radiant power
is dF=IdO=I sin ydydf, where y is measured
from the z-axis.
7. Refraction and Snell's Law: Snell's Law governs
the refraction properties of radiant energy trans-
mitted through a surface (see Fig. 4),
n
1
sin y
1
= n
2
sin y
2
(2)
where n
1
and n
2
are the refractive indices of the
two media. Note that if n
2
> n
1
, the angle of
refraction (y
2
) is less than the angle of incidence
(y
1
).
8. Reection and the Fresnel Laws: Whenever radi-
ant energy passes through an interface between
two media of dierent refractive indices, a cer-
tain fraction of the radiant energy is reected at
the angle y
r
=y
1
(see Fig. 4); the rest passes
through the interface into the second medium
and undergoes refraction. The optics involving
the description of this process are complicated,
since the amount reected depends on the polar-
ization of the radiant energy. If r
_
is the ampli-
tude of radiant energy perpendicular to the plane
of incidence and r
|
is the amplitude of the radiant
energy parallel to the plane of incidence, then the
Fresnel Laws (Meyer-Arendt, 1984) dene these
two amplitudes as
r
J
=
n
1
cos y
1
n
2
cos y
2
n
1
cos y
1
n
2
cos y
2
(3a)
r
|
=
n
2
cos y
1
n
1
cos y
2
n
1
cos y
2
n
2
cos y
1
(3b)
The Reectance R for unpolarized radiant energy
is given by
Fig. 4. Reection and refraction between a medium of
refractive index n
1
and another medium of refractive index
n
2
. Fig. 3. Solid angle O in spherical polar coordinates.
Calculation of UV uence rate distributions in a UV reactor 3317
R =
1
2
[r
2
|
r
2
J
] (4)
Figure 5 illustrates how R varies with angle for
an air/quartz interface. It is interesting that R
remains fairly independent of angle (at about 4
5%) up to about 408 and then increases rapidly.
The transmittance T refracted into the second
medium is given by
T = 1 R (5)
Thus, the incident beam is split into two parts
(see Fig. 4): a reected part of fraction R and a
refracted and transmitted part of fraction T.
9. The Air/Quartz/Water Interface: Figure 6 illus-
trates a beam of radiant energy passing
from air (n
air
=1.00) through a layer of
quartz (n
quartz
=1.52) and then into water
(n
water
=1.38). (All refractive indices are averages
over the wavelength range 200300 nm at
H208C. The refractive indices vary by only
about 22% over this range (CRC, 1992; Thor-
ma hlen et al., 1985).)
For angles <408, about 4% of the radiant
energy is reected at the air/quartz interface but
only about 0.2% at the quartz/water interface.
Using Snell's Law [equation (3)], the three angles
are related by
y
2
= arcsin[(n
1
an
2
) sin(y
1
)] (6a)
y
3
= arcsin{(n
2
an
3
) sin(arcsin[(n
1
an
2
) sin y
1
])]
= arcsin[(n
1
an
3
) sin y
1
]
(6b)
Note that y
3
is independent of the material in
the middle (quartz).
10. Absorption and the BeerLambert Law: As a
given beam passes through the reactor, any ma-
terial absorbing UV in the water will attenuate
it. If a(l ) is the (napierian) absorption coecient
(cm
1
) at wavelength l, and l is the path length
(cm), then the attenuation factor U for a given
beam is
U = exp[a(l)l ] (7a)
where a(l ) is related to the absorbance A(l ) at
a given wavelength l by
a(l) = [A(l)al ] ln(10) (7b)
Of course, from the BeerLambert Law,
A(l) = E(l)cl (8a)
where E(l ) is the molar absorption coecient
(M
1
cm
1
) at wavelength l, c is the molar con-
centration of the absorbing species and l is the
path length (cm). The transmittance T(l ) over
the path length l is related to A(l) by
T(l) = 10
A(l)
(8b)
Often the transmittance is measured for a xed
path length. For example, if the path length is
10 mm, the transmittance should be designated
as the ``10 mm path length transmittance'' (sym-
bol T
/
10
).
THE CONCEPT OF RADIANT INTENSITY
In the calculation of the radiant power incident
on a surface, the concept of radiant intensity I
(units of W steradian
1
) is important, since as
noted above, I does not diminish with distance,
except for absorption and reection. For example,
the beam intensity is diminished by the factor
(1R) as it passes through the quartz sleeve into
Fig. 5. Reectance R vs the angle of incidence y
1
.
Calculations are for n
air
=1.00 and n
quartz
=1.52.
Fig. 6. The air/quartz/water interface.
James R. Bolton 3318
the water. Thus one can consider a beam of radiant
energy coming out in a certain direction within an
element of solid angle dO. The radiant power dF in
this beam is then IdO=I sinydydf, where y is
measured from the vertical axis and f is the azi-
muthal angle about the radial axis (see Fig. 3):
dF
y, f
=
F
4p
sin y dy df (9a)
Since the reactor has cylindrical symmetry, one can
integrate out the f variable and obtain
dF
y
=
F
4p
sin y dy

2p
0
df (9b)
=
F
2
sin y dy (9c)
The uence rate dE
/
y
is then obtained by dividing
equation (9c) by the cross-sectional area dA
y
of a
circular segment between y and y+dy at the dis-
tance of interest from the lamp
dE
/
y
=
F
2 dA
y
sin y dy (10a)
For purposes of calculation, we shall use equation
(10a) in its ``nite dierence'' form, that is
DE
/
y
=
F
2DA
y
sin yDy (10b)
As long as Dy is small, equation (10b) should be a
good approximation to equation (10a).
Equation (10b) is appropriate for calculation of
the uence rate between the lamp and the quartz
sleeve (see Fig. 7), in which case y = (y
1
y
/
1
)a2,
Dy = y
/
1
y
1
and DA
y
=A
1
, dened by
A
1
=
2px(h
/
h)
sin[(y
1
y
/
1
)a2]
(11)
where x is the perpendicular distance from the lamp
and h is the vertical distance from the central plane
of the reactor to the volume element of interest in
the space between the lamp and the quartz sleeve
(see Fig. 7). However, after the beam has been
transmitted and refracted into the water through
the quartz sleeve, equation (9c) becomes
dF
y
= (1 R)U
F
2
sin y dy (12a)
where R is the reectance [equation (4c)] and U is
the absorption attenuation factor [equation (7a)],
which represents the attenuation of the beam as it
passes through the water. The pathlength l in
equation (7a) is given by (see Fig. 7)
l =
x s
sin[(y
3
y
/
3
)a2]
(12b)
Fig. 7. Cross-section of a UV reactor. L is the electrode-to-electrode length of the lamp; S is the reac-
tor internal radius and s is the radius of the quartz sleeve; h=scoty; H=h+(xs )coty
3
; A
1
and A
3
are
the cross-sectional areas needed to calculate the uence rate.
Calculation of UV uence rate distributions in a UV reactor 3319
where s is the perpendicular distance from the lamp
to the quartz sleeve.
After conversion to nite dierences, one obtains
the uence rate DE
/
y
for any volume element in the
reactor volume as
DE
/
y
= (1 R)U
F sin yDy
2A
3
(13a)
where y
3
and y
/
3
are calculated from equation (6b);
y = (y
3
y
/
3
)a2 and Dy = y
/
3
y
3
and
A
3
=
2px(H
/
H )
sin[(y
3
y
/
3
)a2]
(13b)
Note that equation (13a) is the uence rate for the
volume element characterized by an azimuthal
angle between y and y', a perpendicular direction of
x cm from the lamp and a vertical distance of H
cm above the central plane of the lamp (see Fig. 7).
To obtain the uence rate distribution, this uence
rate must be calculated for a range of x and H
values. Note also that equations (12a) and (13a) do
not account for absorption by the quartz. This can
be accommodated by inserting the factor
exp[a
q
(l)t
q
a sin y] into equations (12) and (13a),
where a
q
(l ) is the absorption coecient of the
quartz at the wavelength l and t
q
is the thickness of
the quartz at y=0. However, it is more convenient
Fig. 8. Fluence rate distributions calculated for a UV lamp (4.6 kW electrical power input with a UV
power eciency of 23% in the 200300 nm band) 64.5 cm long (electrode to electrode) in a cylindrical
reactor of diameter 25.4 cm (10 in), and length 74.5 cm with a 10 cm diameter quartz sleeve and con-
taining water with a T
/
10
of 70%. n = 1001 for the MPSS calculation. (a) Radial prole at H = 0 cm;
the heavy-lined curve is for a calculation with refraction and reection included and the light-lined
curve is without these terms included. (b) The longitudinal prole for half the reactor length from the
center of the reactor at x =8.85 cm.
James R. Bolton 3320
to take account of the quartz absorption at the end
(see Table 2).
MULTIPLE POINT SOURCE SUMMATION
APPROXIMATION
In the Multiple Point Source Summation (MPSS)
approximation (Jacob and Drano, 1970; Scheible
et al., 1985; Suidan and Severin, 1986), the emission
of a linear lamp is approximated by assuming it is
equivalent to that of n point sources spaced equally
along the long axis of the lamp. The power output
of each point source is F/n, where F is the total
UV power output of the linear lamp in the wave-
length band of interest. The overall value of a given
property is then the sum of the values of that prop-
erty calculated for each of the n point sources. In
particular, the total uence rate in a given volume
element dV is the sum of the uence rates for each
of the n lamp elements, calculated as each beam
passes through the volume element (see Fig. 7).
For a cylindrical reactor in the case of no absorp-
tion and the neglect of reection and refraction, it
is possible to obtain an integral form (Blatchley,
1997) for the uence rate at a distance x from the
lamp and a height H above the center of the lamp
of length L:
E
/
(x, H ) =
F
4pLx

arctan

La2 H
x

arctan

La2 H
x
!
(14)
Equation (14) is equivalent to taking n to innity.
This expression for the uence rate is very useful in
checking calculational models and for determining
when n is suciently large. In practice, n was
increased until the results of the MPSS model (at
T
/
10
=100% and refractive indices set to 1.000)
agreed with equation (14) within less than 1%. n =
1001 was usually sucient to achieve this condition.
DETAILED CALCULATION OF THE FLUENCE RATE
DISTRIBUTION IN THE REACTOR
A detailed description of the uence rate distri-
bution in the reactor is now presented, which fully
takes account of reection and refraction at the air/
quartz/water interface.
First consider the spherical volume element dV in
the reactor at a radial distance x from the lamp and
at a longitudinal distance H from the center plane
of the reactor (see Fig. 7). This volume element is
being irradiated by each of the n point sources,
each coming from a dierent direction. The uence
rate passing through the cross-sectional area dA of
the volume element is then just the sum of the u-
ence rates from each of the n point sources.
The uence rate distribution can then be deter-
mined by calculating the uence rate as a function
of either the radial or longitudinal distances. An
example is shown in Fig. 8, where the distributions
are shown (T
/
10
=70%) in the radial direction at
the center of the reactor (Fig. 8(a)) and in the longi-
tudinal direction halfway between the quartz sleeve
and the reactor wall (Fig. 8(b)). From a comparison
of the two curves in Fig. 8(a), it is clear that calcu-
Table 1. Average uence rates calculated from the model and the values calculated from a sixth-order polynomial t as a function of T
/
10
T
/
10
(%) Average uence rate (mW cm
2
) in the UV
reactor without refraction and reection
Average uence rate (mW cm
2
) in the UV reactor
with refraction and reection
Ratio of column 3 to
column 5
Model calculation Polynomial t
a
Model calculation Polynomial t
b
5 11.50 11.72 10.78 10.79 1.0667
10 14.94 14.54 14.01 13.99 1.0664
15 18.18 18.08 17.04 17.07 1.0669
20 21.59 21.70 20.20 20.16 1.0685
25 24.93 25.24 23.36 23.37 1.0673
30 28.57 28.80 26.80 26.82 1.0663
35 32.64 32.63 30.64 30.64 1.0654
40 37.25 37.01 34.99 34.98 1.0646
45 42.57 42.24 40.01 39.99 1.0640
50 48.81 48.57 45.88 45.87 1.0638
55 56.23 56.23 52.85 52.85 1.0639
60 65.20 65.45 61.22 61.24 1.0649
65 76.21 76.59 71.40 71.42 1.0673
70 89.91 90.20 83.90 83.91 1.0717
75 107.24 107.22 99.38 99.37 1.0792
80 129.51 129.11 118.66 118.64 1.0914
85 158.64 158.13 142.82 142.80 1.1108
90 197.57 197.56 173.19 173.19 1.1408
95 251.15 251.99 211.45 211.48 1.1877
100 328.05 327.67 259.71 259.70 1.2631
a
E
/
av
=10.872660.15267831 (T
/
10
)+0.080334101 (T
/
10
)
2
0.00352492 (T
/
10
)
3
+7.63259 10
5
(T
/
10
)
4
7.70410 10
7
(T
/
10
)
5
+3.12515 10
9
(T
/
10
)
6
.
b
E
/
av
=7.414051+0.6984899 (T
/
10
)0.0048018 (T
/
10
)
2
+0.000037932 (T
/
10
)
3
+3.34834 10
6
(T
/
10
)
4
5.06318 10
8
(T
/
10
)
5
+3.64004 10
10
(T
/
10
)
6
.
Calculation of UV uence rate distributions in a UV reactor 3321
T
a
b
l
e
2
.
C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
a
v
e
r
a
g
e

u
e
n
c
e
r
a
t
e
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
d
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
r
e
a
c
t
o
r
v
o
l
u
m
e
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
r
a
n
g
e
2
0
0

3
0
0
n
m
a
W
a
v
e
l
e
n
g
t
h
(
n
m
)
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d
l
a
m
p
p
h
o
t
o
n

o
w
b
Q
u
a
r
t
z
t
r
a
n
s
m
i
t
t
a
n
c
e
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
e
d
f
o
r
r
e

e
c
t
a
n
c
e
c
L
a
m
p
p
h
o
t
o
n

o
w
i
n
t
o
r
e
a
c
t
o
r
(
r
e
l
)
d
G
e
r
m
i
c
i
d
a
l
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
f
a
c
t
o
r
(
r
e
l
)
e
T
/
1
0
(
%
)
U
n
w
e
i
g
h
t
e
d
a
v
e
r
a
g
e

u
e
n
c
e
r
a
t
e
(
m
W
c
m

2
)
G
e
r
m
i
c
i
d
a
l
a
v
e
r
a
g
e

u
e
n
c
e
r
a
t
e
(
m
W
c
m

2
)
2
0
0

2
0
4
0
.
0
2
0
1
0
.
7
9
2
0
.
0
1
5
9
1
.
5
2
2
2
.
4
0
.
3
4
5
0
.
5
2
4
2
0
5

2
0
9
0
.
0
2
6
4
0
.
8
2
8
0
.
0
2
1
9
1
.
3
1
2
7
.
6
0
.
5
4
9
0
.
7
1
9
2
1
0

2
1
4
0
.
0
3
2
9
0
.
8
7
1
0
.
0
2
8
7
1
.
0
7
3
3
.
0
0
.
8
3
3
0
.
8
9
1
2
1
5

2
1
9
0
.
0
4
0
9
0
.
9
0
3
0
.
0
3
6
9
0
.
8
0
3
8
.
3
1
.
2
3
5
0
.
9
8
8
2
2
0

2
2
4
0
.
0
4
5
2
0
.
9
2
0
0
.
0
4
1
6
0
.
5
7
4
4
.
0
1
.
6
1
9
0
.
9
2
3
2
2
5

2
2
9
0
.
0
4
5
2
0
.
9
1
8
0
.
0
4
1
5
0
.
4
7
4
9
.
8
1
.
8
9
3
0
.
8
9
0
2
3
0

2
3
4
0
.
0
4
2
6
0
.
9
0
6
0
.
0
3
8
6
0
.
4
6
5
4
.
9
2
.
0
3
4
0
.
9
3
6
2
3
5

2
3
9
0
.
0
5
2
0
0
.
9
0
4
0
.
0
4
7
0
0
.
5
3
5
8
.
4
2
.
7
4
4
1
.
4
5
4
2
4
0

2
4
4
0
.
0
1
9
7
0
.
9
2
7
0
.
0
1
8
3
0
.
6
7
6
0
.
7
1
.
1
4
2
0
.
7
6
5
2
4
5

2
4
9
0
.
0
6
2
9
0
.
9
5
5
0
.
0
6
0
1
0
.
8
3
6
2
.
8
4
.
0
0
6
3
.
3
2
5
2
5
0

2
5
4
0
.
1
4
2
7
0
.
9
7
5
0
.
1
3
9
1
0
.
9
7
6
4
.
5
9
.
7
8
2
9
.
4
8
9
2
5
5

2
5
9
0
.
0
8
0
0
0
.
9
9
0
0
.
0
7
9
2
1
.
0
2
6
5
.
5
5
.
7
4
6
5
.
8
6
1
2
6
0

2
6
4
0
.
1
2
1
1
0
.
9
9
8
0
.
1
2
0
9
1
.
0
1
6
5
.
1
8
.
6
5
9
8
.
7
4
6
2
6
5

2
6
9
0
.
0
4
4
2
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
4
4
2
0
.
9
3
6
4
.
9
3
.
1
4
7
2
.
9
2
7
2
7
0

2
7
4
0
.
0
2
5
7
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
2
5
7
0
.
8
1
6
3
.
7
1
.
7
6
2
1
.
4
2
7
2
7
5

2
7
9
0
.
0
7
0
8
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
7
0
8
0
.
6
7
6
1
.
2
4
.
4
9
6
3
.
0
1
2
2
8
0

2
8
4
0
.
0
1
2
1
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
1
2
1
0
.
5
1
6
0
.
2
0
.
7
4
5
0
.
3
8
0
2
8
5

2
8
9
0
.
0
2
0
6
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
2
0
6
0
.
3
4
6
0
.
3
1
.
2
7
3
0
.
4
3
3
2
9
0

2
9
4
0
.
0
2
0
3
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
2
0
3
0
.
2
1
6
0
.
5
1
.
2
6
2
0
.
2
6
5
2
9
5

2
9
9
0
.
0
7
4
7
1
.
0
0
0
0
.
0
7
4
7
0
.
1
1
7
9
.
5
8
.
7
0
4
0
.
9
5
7
T
o
t
a
l
u
n
w
e
i
g
h
t
e
d
a
v
e
r
a
g
e

u
e
n
c
e
r
a
t
e
=
6
2
.
0
m
W
c
m

2
T
o
t
a
l
g
e
r
m
i
c
i
d
a
l
a
v
e
r
a
g
e

u
e
n
c
e
r
a
t
e
=
4
4
.
9
m
W
c
m

2
a
L
a
m
p
p
o
w
e
r
=
4
.
6
k
W
,
U
V
C
l
a
m
p
e

c
i
e
n
c
y
=
2
3
%
,
c
y
l
i
n
d
r
i
c
a
l
r
e
a
c
t
o
r
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
:
d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
=
2
5
.
1
c
m
,
l
a
m
p
a
r
c
l
e
n
g
t
h
=
6
4
.
5
c
m
,
r
e
a
c
t
o
r
l
e
n
g
t
h
7
4
.
5
c
m
,
q
u
a
r
t
z
s
l
e
e
v
e
d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
=
1
0
c
m
.
T
h
e
t
r
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
(
c
o
l
u
m
n
6
)
i
s
t
h
a
t
o
f
a
t
y
p
i
c
a
l
w
a
s
t
e
w
a
t
e
r
.
b
T
h
e
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d
p
h
o
t
o
n

o
w
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
r
e
a
c
t
o
r
i
s
t
h
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
p
h
o
t
o
n
e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
o
f
a
t
y
p
i
c
a
l
m
e
d
i
u
m
p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
U
V
l
a
m
p
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d
t
o
u
n
i
t
y
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
2
0
0

3
0
0
n
m
b
a
n
d
.
c
T
h
e
q
u
a
r
t
z
t
r
a
n
s
m
i
t
t
a
n
c
e
w
a
s
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
b
y
p
l
a
c
i
n
g
a
p
i
e
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
q
u
a
r
t
z
i
n
t
o
a
s
p
e
c
t
r
o
p
h
o
t
o
m
e
t
e
r
.
0
.
0
8
w
a
s
a
d
d
e
d
t
o
e
a
c
h
t
r
a
n
s
m
i
t
t
a
n
c
e
v
a
l
u
e
t
o
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
8
%
r
e

e
c
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
q
u
a
r
t
z
/
a
i
r
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
.
d
C
o
l
u
m
n
2

C
o
l
u
m
n
3
.
e
T
h
e
g
e
r
m
i
c
i
d
a
l
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
f
a
c
t
o
r
i
s
d
e

n
e
d
a
s
t
h
e
r
a
t
i
o
o
f
t
h
e
m
o
l
a
r
a
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n
c
o
e

c
i
e
n
t
o
f
D
N
A
i
n
a
g
i
v
e
n
5
n
m
b
a
n
d
t
o
t
h
a
t
a
t
2
5
4
n
m
.
T
h
e
D
N
A
m
o
l
a
r
a
b
s
o
r
p
t
i
o
n
c
o
e

c
i
e
n
t
s
w
e
r
e
o
b
t
a
i
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
v
o
n
S
o
n
n
t
a
g
(
1
9
8
6
)
.
James R. Bolton 3322
lations that do not include reection and refraction
considerably overestimate the uence rate near the
quartz wall.
In some situations (e.g., for very high T
/
10
values),
the irradiance at the walls of the reactor will be sig-
nicant. A certain fraction of this radiation will be
reected back into the reactor and thus will increase
the uence rate near the walls. In practice, many
UV reactors are fabricated from stainless steel,
which has a reectance of <20% in the UVC
region. Although this eect has been neglected in
the current treatment, reection from the walls can
easily be incorporated into the model by adding u-
ence rate contributions from volume elements ``out-
side'' the reactor walls (modied by the reection
coecient) to the corresponding ``mirrored'' volume
element in the reactor volume.
The calculation of the average uence rate
requires an average over all the volume elements in
the reactor. It is convenient to calculate the normal
average of the uence rate along the longitudinal
direction H for a given value of the radial distance
x and then do this for equal increments (e.g., every
0.3 mm) along the radial axis. The average of the
latter uence rates must be a weighted average,
weighted by the radius x, since the number of
volume elements around the circle increases as r.
This then gives the nal result, namely the uence
rate averaged over the entire volume of the cylin-
der.
The calculation above should be carried out for a
range of T
/
10
values that might be found in the UV
spectrum (200300 nm) of a given water. It is con-
venient to t these data to a sixth-order polynomial
equation in T
/
10
(see Table 1 and Fig. 9). The 200
300 nm range is then split into 5 nm bands, within
which the BeerLambert law is assumed to hold
(Table 1 gives a set of sample data). Based on the
measured absorption spectrum (a versus wave-
length) and the derived T
/
10
value, the tted poly-
nomial equation allows one to calculate the average
uence rate for each wavelength band. These values
are then subjected to a weighted average, weighted
according to the photon ux spectral distribution
from the UV lamp as it appears in the water (i.e.,
corrected for quartz absorption). This gives the
nal result, namely the uence rate averaged over
the entire reactor volume and over the UV spec-
trum of the water. The UV dose (mJ cm
2
) (not
wavelength weighted) is then obtained by multiply-
ing this uence rate by the retention time (eective
reactor volume divided by the ow rate) of the
water in the reactor. Table 2 shows an example cal-
culation. Thus, for a ow rate of 1.44 mgd or 1000
gpm, the residence time through a single reactor is
8.193 60/1000=0.49 s and thus the ``ideal'' UV
dose is 62.0 0.49=30.4 mJ cm
2
.
In reality, not all photons are equally eective in
the 200300 nm range because of the absorption
spectrum of DNA (Fig. 1). To correct for this fac-
tor, Meulemans (1987) and Linden and Darby
(1997) have suggested dening a germicidal UV dose
(mJ cm
2
), in which the incident photon ow in
each volume element is weighted by the action spec-
trum of the microorganism (assuming a reference
value of 1.00 at 254 nm). Since the germicidal
action of UV involves the photochemistry of DNA,
it has been proposed (Bolton, 1999) to use the
absorption spectrum of DNA as the germicidal
action spectrum. Table 2 shows the eect of consid-
ering the germicidal correction factors. Thus the
``ideal'' germicidal UV dose is 44.9 0.49=22.0 mJ
cm
2
. This is likely to be a better value to compare
with biodosimetry determined UV doses, since the
reference for those measurements is usually a colli-
mated beam dose response curve at 254 nm.
The eect of reection and refraction can easily
be assessed in the calculation by setting all refrac-
tive indices to 1.00. The ratio (secondary axis of
Fig. 9) of the upper (dottedwithout reection/
refraction) to the lower (solidwith reection/
refraction) curve in Fig. 9 stays at about 6.5% for
T
/
10
< 70% and then increases to above 1.25 at
T
/
10
=100%. For T
/
10
< 70% the eect can be
ascribed primarily to reection, whereas for T
/
10
>
70%, the path lengths are long enough that refrac-
tion increases the eective path lengths, particularly
at larger angles, and causes increased absorption
and hence a lower average uence rate. In most
wastewater applications where UV disinfection is
used, the T
/
10
values are usually much less than
70%. Thus, the neglect of reection and refraction
causes only a minor error and can be accounted for
Fig. 9. The reactor volume averaged uence rate E
av
vs
the T
/
10
(%) of the water. The conditions are the same as
those in Fig. 8. The lower curve is the calculation in which
reection and refraction are included (``with''), and for the
upper curve they are not included (``without'') by setting
all refractive indices to 1.00. The dotted line, referenced to
the secondary y-axis, is the ratio of the curves for ``with-
out'' to ``with'' inclusion of reection and refraction.
Calculation of UV uence rate distributions in a UV reactor 3323
by a correction of about 6.5% for reection. How-
ever, for drinking water applications, where T
/
10
values are often >90%, the errors will be much lar-
ger, and, hence, the eects of reection and refrac-
tion must be included.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The optics of cylindrical UV reactors have been
described in detail.
2. A method (including the eects of reection and
refraction) has been developed by which the u-
ence rate distribution and the average uence
rate (averaged over the entire volume of the reac-
tor and over the UV spectrum of the lamp from
200300 nm) can be calculated for a given reac-
tor geometry. Multiplication of this average u-
ence rate by the hydraulic retention time
(obtained from the ratio of the reactor volume to
the ow rate) gives the maximum ``ideal'' UV
dose. UV doses in real reactors will be less than
ideal due to imperfect mixing.
AcknowledgementsI am very grateful to Keith Bircher,
Stephen Cater, Bertrand Dussert and Sam Stevens of the
Calgon Carbon Corp., Peter Cartwright of Cartwright,
Olsen and Associates, and Mihaela Stefan of the
University of Western Ontario, who made many helpful
suggestions. Also each of the reviewers provided many
constructive comments, which helped to improve the
paper considerably.
REFERENCES
Blatchley III E. R. (1997) Numerical modelling of UV
intensity: application to collimated-beam reactors and
continuous-ow systems. Water Res. 31, 22052218.
Blatchley III E. R., Hunt B. A., Duggirala R., Thompson
J. E., Zhao J., Halaby T., Cowger R. L., Straub C. M.
and Alleman J. E. (1997) Eects of disinfectants on
wastewater euent toxicity. Water Res. 31, 15811588.
Bolton J. R. (1999) Draft Report of the International
Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry Working Party
on UV Disinfection, Commission III.3, Photochemistry.
IUPAC General Assembly, Berlin, Germany, August.
Chiu K., Lyn D. A., Savoye P. and Blatchley III E. R.
(1999) Integrated UV disinfection model based on par-
ticle tracking. J. Environ. Eng. 125, 716.
CRC (1992) Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 72nd ed.
CRC, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 10290.
Foraboschi F. P. (1959) La conversione in un reattore
fotochimico continuo. Chem. Ind. (Milan) 41, 731737.
Gehr R. and Nicell J. (1996) Pilot studies and assessment
of downstream eects of UV and ozone disinfection of
physicochemical wastewater. Water Qual. Res. J.
Canada 31, 263281.
Irazoqui H. A., Cerda J. and Cassano A. E. (1973) Radi-
ation proles in an empty annular photoreactor with a
source of nite spatial dimensions. A.I.Ch.E. J 19, 460
468.
Jacob S. M. and Drano J. S. (1970) Light intensity pro-
les in a perfectly mixed photoreactor. A.I.Ch.E. J. 16,
359363.
Linden K. G. and Darby J. L. (1997) Estimating eective
germicidal dose from medium pressure UV lamps. J.
Environ. Engng 123, 11421149.
Linden K. G., Soriano G. S. and Darby J. L. (1998) Inves-
tigation of disinfection by-product formation following
low and medium pressure UV irradiation of wastewater.
Disinfection '98 The latest trends in wastewater disinfec-
tion: chlorination vs UV disinfection, pp. 137147. Balti-
more, MD, Water Environment Federation, Alexandria,
VA.
Loge F. J., Emerick R. W., Heath M., Jacangelo J. G.,
Tchobanoglous G. and Darby J. L. (1996) Ultraviolet
disinfection of secondary wastewater euents: predic-
tion of performance and design. Wat. Environ. Res. 68,
900916.
Meulemans C. C. E. (1987) The basic principles of UV-
disinfection of water. Ozone Sci. Engng 9, 299314.
Meyer-Arendt J. R. (1984) Introduction to Classical and
Modern Optics, 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Clis,
NJ, pp. 300302.
Scheible O. K., Casey M. C. and Forndran A. (1985)
Ultraviolet disinfection of wastewaters from secondary
euent and combined sewer overows. Report No. EPA/
600/2-86/005. US Environmental Protection Agency,
National Technical Information Service, Springeld,
VA.
Severin B. F. (1980) Disinfection of municipal wastewater
euents with ultraviolet light. J. WPCF 52, 20072018.
Suidan M. T. and Severin B. F. (1986) Light intensity
models for annular UV disinfection reactors. A.I.Ch.E.
J. 32, 19021909.
Thorma hlen I., Straub J. and Grigull U. (1985) Refractive
index of water and its dependence on wavelength, tem-
perature and density. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 14, 933
945.
Verhoeven J. W. (1996) Glossary of terms used in photo-
chemistry. Pure Appl. Chem. 68, 22232286.
von Sonntag C. (1986) Disinfection by free radicals and
UV-radiation. Water Supply 4, 1118.
Whitby G. E., Palmateer G., Cook W. G., Maarschalker-
weerd J., Huber D. and Flood K. (1984) Ultraviolet dis-
infection of secondary euent. J. WPCF 56, 844850.
James R. Bolton 3324