United States Office of Water EPA 832-F-99-040

Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. September 1999

Agency

Combined Sewer Overflow

Technology Fact Sheet
Screens
DESCRIPTION • Direct straining of all particles larger than
the screen openings.
In 1994, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) recognized the importance of controlling C Filtering of smaller particles by straining
solid and floatable materials under the “nine flow through the mat of solids already
minimum controls” described in the Combined deposited on the screen.
Sewer Overflow (CSO) Control Policy. CSOs can
contain high levels of floatable materials, suspended Generally there are two types of bar screens- coarse
solids, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), oils and and fine. Both are used at CSO control facilities,
grease, toxic pollutants, and pathogenic with each different type providing a different level
microorganisms. Floatables are often the most of removal efficiency. While there is no industry
noticeable and problematic CSO pollutant. They standard for classifying screens based on aperture
create aesthetic problems and boating hazards, size coarse bar screens generally have 0.04 to 0.08
threaten wildlife, foul recreational areas, and cause meter (1.5 to 3.0 inch) clear spacing between bars
beach closures. There are numerous methods and fine screens generally have rounded or slotted
available for floatables control, including baffles, openings of 0.3 to 1.3 centimeters (0.1 to 0.5 inch)
catch basin modifications, netting systems, clear space.
containment booms, skimming processes, and
screening and trash rack devices. These Coarse Screens
technologies are summarized in EPA’s CSO
Technology Fact Sheet entitled “Floatables Control” Course screens are constructed of parallel vertical
(EPA 832-F-99-008). This fact sheet focuses on bars and are often referred to as bar racks or bar
screens and trash racks for CSO floatables control. screens. In CSO control and treatment facilities,
coarse screens are usually the first unit of equipment
Screens are considered an effective and in the system. These screens are usually set at 0 to
economically efficient method of removing solids 30 degrees from vertical and are cleaned by an
and floatables from CSOs. CSO screens are electrically or hydraulically driven rake mechanism
typically constructed of steel parallel bars or wires, that removes the material entrained on the screen on
wire mesh (wedgewire), grating, or perforated plate; a continuous or periodic basis. There are three
some screens, however, are constructed of milled types of bar screens used at CSO control facilities:
bronze or copper plates. In general, the openings trash racks; manually cleaned screens; and
are circular or rectangular slots, varying in size from mechanically cleaned screens.
0.25 to 15.24 centimeter (0.1 to 6 inch) spacings.
The amount and size of the solids and floatables Trash racks
removed is dependent on the type of screen and the
size of the screen openings. Solids are removed Trash racks (also known as trash grates) are
from the flow by two basic treatment mechanisms: intended to remove only very large objects from the
flow stream. Trash racks are generally provided at
the intersection of the combined sewer and the Chain driven mechanical raking systems consist of
sanitary interceptor to prevent major blockages in a series of bar rakes connected to chains on each
the interceptor or to protect pumping equipment. side of the bar rack. During the cleaning cycle, the
Since both dry and wet weather flows pass through rakes travel in a continuous circuit from the bottom
this type of screening device, daily cleaning is to the top of the bar rack, removing materials
usually required. Trash racks typically have 0.04 to retained on the bars and discharging them at the top
0.08 meter (1.5 to 3.0 inch) clear spacing between of the rack. A disadvantage of chain-driven systems
bars. Figure 1 is a diagram of a typical trash rack. is that the lower bearings and sprockets are
submerged in the flow and are susceptible to
Manually cleaned bar screens blockage and damage from grit and other materials.
Accelerated chain wear and corrosion can also be a
Manually cleaned bar screens have a 2.54 to 5.08 problem.
centimeter (1.0 to 2.0 inches) clear spacing between
bars. The bars are set 30 to 45 degrees from the Climber-type systems employ a single rake
vertical and the screenings are manually raked onto mechanism mounted on a gear driven rack and
a perforated plate for drainage prior to disposal. pinion system. The gear drive turns cogwheels that
move along a pin rack mounted on each side of the
Mechanically cleaned bar screens bar rack. During the cleaning cycle, the rake
mechanism travels up and down the bar rack to
Mechanically cleaned bar screens have a 0.64 to remove materials retained on the bars. Screenings
2.54 centimeter (0.25 to 1.0 inch) clear spacing are typically discharged from the bars at the top of
between bars. The bars are set 0 to 30 degrees from the rack. This type of bar screen has no submerged
the vertical. Electrically driven rake mechanisms bearings or sprockets and is, therefore, less
will either continuously or periodically remove susceptible to blockages, damage and corrosion than
material entrained on the bar screen itself. The three chain driven units.
common types of mechanically cleaned screens are:
(1) chain driven, (2) climber type rake, and (3) Catenary systems also employ chain-driven rake
catenary. mechanisms, but all sprockets, bearings, and shafts
are located above the flow level in the screenings

Source: Metcalf and Eddy, 1991.

FIGURE 1 DIAGRAM OF TRASH RACK USED FOR TREATMENT OF CSOs

channel. This in turn reduces the potential for • Low Flow- no drum movement.
damage and corrosion and facilitates routine
maintenance. During the cleaning cycle, the rakes • Intermediate Flow- drum moves a short
travel in a continuous circuit from the bottom to the distance and stops with brush coming on as
top of the bar rack to remove materials retained on head loss rises.
the bars. Screenings are typically discharged from
the bars at the top of the rack. The cleaning rake is • High Flows- continuous operation where the
held against the bars by the weight of its chains, drum rotates at 1 rpm and brush at 10 rpm.
allowing the rake to be pulled over large objects that
are lodged in the bars and that might otherwise jam In response to the need for solids and floatables
the rake mechanism. control during storm events, proprietary screen
products, such as the ROMAGTM screen (Figure 2),
Fine Screens have been designed for wet weather applications.
The ROMAGTM screen partitions the flow, sending
Fine screens at CSO facilities typically follow coarse screened flow to the CSO discharge point, while
bar screening equipment and provide the next level keeping solids and floatables in the flow directed
of physical treatment in removing the smaller solid towards the sanitary sewer.
particles from the waste stream. Both fixed (static)
and rotary screens have been used in CSO treatment The ROMAGTM screen works as follows: excess
facilities. flow enters the screening chamber, flows over a spill
weir and proceeds through the screen into a channel
Fixed fine screens are typically provided with which discharges flow to a receiving water body.
horizontal or rounded slotted openings of 0.02 to Floatables trapped by the screen move laterally
1.27 centimeters (0.010 to 0.5 inches). The screens along the face of the screen via combs/separators to
are usually constructed of stainless steel in a the transverse end section of the pipe where they
concave configuration, at a slope of approximately can be directed to the sanitary sewer line for
30 degrees. Flow is discharged across the top of the ultimate removal at the wastewater treatment plant.
screen. The flow then passes through the slotted Screen blinding is prevented by a hydraulically-
openings and solids are retained on the screen driven rake assembly.
surface. Solids are discharged from the screen
surface by gravity and by washing onto a conveyer The ROMAGTM screen surface is accessible from
belt or other collecting system.

Rotary fine screens include externally and internally

fed screens. Externally fed screens allow
wastewater to flow over the top of the drum
mechanism and through the screens while collecting
solids on the screen surface. As the screen rotates,
a system of cleaning brushes or sprayed water
removes debris from the drum. Internally fed
systems discharge wastewater in the center of the
drum, allowing water to pass through the screen
into a discharge channel, while solids are removed
from the screen surface by cleaning brushes or a
water spray. Screened material is usually washed
from the screen with a high pressure spray into a
Source: Pisano, 1995.
discharge trough. Screen diameters can range from
0.5 to 2 meters (1.6 to 6.6 feet), while the lengths FIGURE 2 ROMAGTM “COMBING”
can vary from 2 to 6 meters (6.6 to 19.7 feet). MECHANICAL SCREEN (VERTICAL) FOR CSO
There are three modes of operation which include: FLOATABLES CONTROL
both sides to facilitate inspections and maintenance. screens have been installed in Europe since 1990.
The screen consists of horizontal bars with 4 mm Recently, several Romag™ screens have been
(0.16 inches) openings that are mounted on a weir installed in the U.S. The first was installed in
in the collection system. Screens range from 2 to 9 Rahway, NJ, in 1997.
meters (6.6-29.5 feet) in length and 330-1200 mm
(13- 47.2 inches) in height. Units can be stacked to In addition, Deerfield, Illinois has had success
create a customized mesh opening for a specified utilizing rotating fine screens at their overflow
design flow at a particular location. The nominal facilities. Their fine screens have 1.02 millimeter
velocity through the bar openings is approximately (0.04 inch) openings that remove all large solids and
1.5 meters per second (4.9 feet per second). floatables. The screened wastewater is discharged
inside the screen and conveyed to a chlorine contact
The hydraulically driven mechanical combs used to tank for disinfection prior to discharge to the
clean the screen move laterally along the front face receiving stream. The screenings are conveyed by
of the screen when activated by a level control, internal conveyors to a discharge chute for storage
which detects rising water. As the screen surface is and eventual return to the POTW at the end of the
cleaned, captured material is transported forward to overflow event. The entire operation is automatic
the end section for storage and subsequent removal. (West et al., 1990).
The hydraulic combing unit is located outside the
screen and consists of an oil tank, pump and control ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
valves.
Since screening is a physical treatment process, it
TM
The ROMAG screen may be designed for a will remove only those objects that are larger than
variety of flow scenarios. Water may pass through the screen openings. Screening systems are very
the screen horizontally (RSW type), as shown in effective in removing floatable and visible solids, but
Figure 2; over the top of the screen (RSO type) or do not remove a significant amount of suspended
up from under the screen (RSU) type. This unit has solids. In cases where water quality evaluations
proven useful in remote settings and is capable of indicate the need for removal of suspended solids or
handling flows from 300-6100 L/sec (6-140 MGD). oxygen demanding materials, additional treatment
processes downstream from the screening units
APPLICABILITY would be required.

While screening is widely used to control solids and Because screens at CSO control facilities remove
floatables at the headworks of wastewater treatment debris, rags, and other floatables that would
plants, screening for solids at remote locations, otherwise be discharged into a receiving stream,
such as at CSO or storm water overflow points, is they are vital in preserving water quality and
less common. However, some types of screens are aesthetics. Unscreened material in CSOs can
effective for remote solids and floatables control due become a nuisance if the floatables, and other solids
to their large aperture size and self-cleaning ability. end up in receiving waters. They can create
As a result, mechanically-cleaned bar screens have navigational hazards, attract nuisance vectors, and
proven to be a relatively simple and inexpensive retain bacteria and other pollutants.
means of removing floatables and visible solids.
They are typically the screen of choice in many CSO Properly screened and removed materials in CSSs
treatment facilities, and are widely used or prevent materials from settling out in the system,
implemented at a large number of CSO facilities thus preventing potential back ups and possible
across the country and abroad. overflows elsewhere. The screenings and debris
that are removed from the screens are typically not
There has been less success in removing fine solids hazardous and can be disposed of in a licensed
from storm water and CSO overflows. However, landfill or incinerated. Negative environmental
proprietary methods, such as the Romag™ screen, impacts can occur from improper disposal of
have addressed this issue. More than 250 Romag™ screened materials, such as by stockpiling in areas
adjacent to receiving waters or in areas where they • Grit classifiers are effective in separating,
may be seen by the public. washing, and dewatering grit, sand, finds,
and silt from an effluent flow normally
DESIGN CRITERIA downstream form the screens.

Hydraulic losses through bar screens are a function • Coarse screens with moving parts out of the
of approach velocity and the velocity through the flow stream are preferable to coarse screens
bars. The headloss through a clean bar screen can with submerged parts.
be estimated using the following equation:
• Fine screens using steel wire mesh or
2 2
hL = (1/0.7) * ((V - v )/ 2g) perforated panels are very prone to clogging
from fibrous materials and are not easily
where: cleaned. Plastic mesh panels have proven to
be effective, are resistant to clogging and
hL = headloss, ft (m) are easily cleaned with water sprays.

0.7 = an empirical discharge coefficient to Pumping or conveying large amounts of large and
account to turbulence and eddy losses small solids typically removed by screening systems
has proven to be very difficult and a major
V = velocity of flow through the openings maintenance problem. Screw conveyors and
of the bar racks, ft/s (m/s) compactor type screws have been shown to be
effective in handling solids, especially those
v = approach velocity in upstream channel, removed by fine screens. Design parameters for
ft/s (m/s) different types of screens are given on Tables 1, 2,
and 3.
g = acceleration due to gravity, ft/s2 (m/s2)
Additional design issues to consider include:
Headloss increases as the bar screen becomes
clogged, or blinded. For coarse screens, the • Backwater from a storage/sedimentation
approach velocity should be at least 0.38 meters per tank effluent weir can create quiescent
second (1.25 feet per second) to minimize settling conditions in the bar screen channel.
deposition, while the velocity through the bars Therefore, a means of flushing or
should be less than 0.91 meters per second (3 feet backwashing the screenings channel should
per second) to prevent entrained solids from being be provided.
forced through the bars. Instrumentation provided
with mechanically-cleaned screens is configured to • A redundant or back-up bar screen should
send a signal to the cleaning mechanism so the be provided so that peak flow to the facility
headloss across the screen is limited to 6 inches. can be maintained with one unit out of
service. Providing stop grooves or slide
The following general factors should be considered
in the design and operation of coarse and fine
screens:

• Grit will tend to accumulate upstream and

downstream of screens. Provisions must be
made for easy access to such areas and
alternative methods of grit removal,
including vacuum systems, high pressure
water cannons or spray systems.
 TABLE 2 DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
TABLE 1 DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR
DRUM SCREENS AND ROTARY SCREEN
STATIC SCREENS
Hydraulic loading, gal/min/ft of width 100-180
Parameter Drum/Band Rotary Screen
Incline of screens, degrees from vertical* 35 Screen

Slot space, µm 250-1600 Screen spacing, 100-420 74-167

Fm
Automatic controls None 105 recommended
TM
*Bauer Hydrasieves have 3-stage slopes on each Screen material stainless stainless steel or
screen: 25E, 35E, 45E. steel or plastic
plastic
Note: gal/min/ft X 0.207 = l/m/s
Drum speed,
r/min

Speed range 2-7 30-65

gates in the channel allows the user to
isolate the screen from the flow for Recommended
speed 5 55
maintenance.
Peripheral 14-16
• Guards, railings, and gratings should be speed, ft/s
provided in the area around the screening
Submergence of 60-70
equipment to ensure operator safety. drum, %
Electrical fittings and equipment associated
with the screening equipment must Flux density,
gal/ft2/min of
conform to the exposure rating for the submergence 20-50 70-150
space in which the equipment is located. screen

Hydraulic 75-90
PERFORMANCE efficiency, % of
inflow
Removal efficiency is a function of bar screen Headloss, in. 6-24
spacing and floatable solids characteristics.
Backwash
Removal efficiency increases as the size and
concentration of the solids increases and the spacing Volume, % of 0.5-3 0.02-2.5
dimension decreases. Screenings typically inflow
30-50 50
containing 10-20 percent dry solids will typically Pressure, lb/in2
have a bulk density ranging from 640 to 1100 Note: gal/ ft2/ min x 2.44 = m3/h/m2
kilograms per cubic meter (40 to 70 pounds per in. X 2.54 = cm
cubic foot). Typical floatable removal rates for ft X 0.305 = cm; lb/in.2 X 0.0703 = kg/cm2
coarse screens range from 3.5 to 84 liters per 1000
cubic meters (0.469 to 11.2 cubic feet per MG). • Velocity of the flow through the screens.

The quantity of screenings can vary greatly and, in • Screen aperture.

general, depends on the following factors:
Studies have found average CSO screenings loads
• Configuration of the drainage system. varying from approximately 3.7x10-9- 8.23x10-8
cubic meters per liter (0.5 to 11 cubic feet per
• Time of year. million gallons), with peaking factors based on
hourly flows ranging from 2:1 to greater than 20:1.
• Interval between storms.
Field studies performed in Canada and Europe have
• Intensity of the storm. revealed the following floatable removal efficiencies:
• Samplings taken at different CSO outfalls screens, thus increasing headlosses. Fine screens
in Montreal, Canada showed that up to 80 can be cleaned with high pressure water, steam, or
percent of floatable material can be retained cleaning agents to maintain performance. Screening
by properly designed bar screens with 6.35 systems should be regularly inspected to ensure that
millimeters (0.25 inch) bar spacing. chains and roller mechanisms are lubricated and
functioning. The trunnions associated with fine
• A year-long study was conducted in screens are the least reliable component due to the
Germany to determine the efficiency of an abusive forces they receive. The manufacturer's
externally fed rotary screen in controlling operation and maintenance manual should be
downstream floatable pollution. The consulted for the maintenance requirements and
screen, which was activated by high flows, schedules.
received 42 percent of the CSO discharge,
with no visible solids reported after COSTS
frequent inspections of river banks.
The cost for CSO screens varies and depends on
• A pilot study in Great Britain tested a 4 such factors as:
mm ROMAGTM bar spaced "weir mount"
storm overflow screen. The average solids • The size of the screen.
loading before the screen was 2369 grams
per minute, while the solids concentration • The means of cleaning (manual or
after the screen was 3.5 grams per minute, automatic).
exhibiting a 98.5 percent deflection rate. In
a similar study, on 11 different occasions • The materials of construction (e.g.,
during a 12 week period, average mass aluminum or stainless steel).
reduction of floatables and solids material
greater than 6 millimeters (0.24 inches) was • The flow rate that the screen will be
98.5 percent. required to physically treat.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE • Whether the construction is new or

retrofit construction.
Instrumentation and control of screens typically
includes some combination of the following: The costs included in Table 4 are presented as a
guide only and may not be applicable for all
• Manual start/stop. conditions. Other costs may include costs for
handling and disposal of residual solids. EPA has
• Automatic start/stop on timer. summarized this data in the Storm Water O&M Fact
Sheet “Handling and Disposal of Collected
• Automatic start/stop on differential head. Solids/Residuals from Storm Water and Sediment
Control Practices” (EPA 832-F-99-032).
Activation of mechanically cleaned screens is
triggered by remote sensing of flow into the
screenings channel, or the water level in the
screening channel.

As screens are subject to blinding from grease and

the "first flush" in a CSO event, the screen should
be kept clean to minimize headloss. Due to the
intermittent nature of CSOs it is important for the
screening units spray system to be working properly
to prevent solids from drying and sticking to the
 TABLE 4
COST SUMMARY OF SELECTED SCREENING ALTERNATIVES

Type of Screen Project Location Screening Capital Cost Annual O&M

Capacity Cost ($) ($/MG/d ($1,000 gal)
(MG/d) )
Climber Bar Screen (5 mm Atlanta, GA 375 2,230,300 5,948 0.08
plastic media rotary drum)
300 1,926,200 6,421 0.08

200 1,774,150 8,900 0.08

Rotary screen Belleville, Ont. (1) 1.8 91,800 51,000 0.23

5.4 267,800 49,600 0.23
7.2 352,000 48,900 0.23
Seattle, WA (2) 25 1,645,200 65,800 0.27
a 5 355,000 71,000
Syracuse, NY (3)
Fort Wayne, IN (4) 18 1,603,300 89,100 0.13

Drum screen Cleveland, OH (5) 25 1,668,600 66,700

50 2,434,200 48,700
100 4,785,300 47,900
200 9,159,200 45,800
Racine, WI (4) 3.9 62,000 15,900
a 10 704,700 70,500
Syracuse, NY (3)
Fort Wayne, IN (4) 18 697,900 38,700 0.11

Static screen Fort Wayne, IN (4) 18 746,900 41,500 0.06

Belleville, Ont (1) 0.75 40,800 54,400 0.12
5.3 262,100 49,500 0.12
7.5 358,400 47,800 0.12

Microstrainer Mount Clemens, MI (6) 1.0 71,800 71,80

with chemical addition Philadelphia, PA (4) 7.4 249,000 33,600 0.13

without chemical addition 7.4 405,800 54,800 0.13

ROMAGTM RSW 2X2 Vendor Specified 5.9 55,000b

5X5 40 105,000b
8X8 100 185,000b

ENR = 5484
(a) Estimates not including supplemental pumping stations and appurtenances.
(b) Unit cost and does not include installation, freight or start-up assistance.
(1) Operational data for the Belleville Screening Project, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, August 6, 1976.
(2) EPA 11023fdd03/70
(3) EPA 600/2-76-826
(4) EPA 60018-77-014. As provided in EPA 960018-77-014.
(5) EPA 11023EY104/72
(6) EPA 670/2-75-010
Note: Conversion factors: MG/d x 0.0438 = m3/s; $/1,000 gal x 0.264 = $/m3
REFERENCES for the City of Atlanta, Georgia,"
Presented at the Water Pollution Control
1. Gavle, Darrel R., and David G. Mitchell, Federation 63rd Annual Conference.
1995. Innovative and Economical SSO
Treatment Utilizing Fine Screens and ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Chlorination. Presented at the EPA
National Conference on Combined Sewer Deerfield Wastewater Reclamation Facility
Overflows, Washington, D.C. Jon Kaeding
Chief Operator and Foreman
2. Couture, M., J. Lamontagne, and B. Gagne, 850 Waukegan Rd.
John Meunier, Inc.; O. Dalkir, Cegeo Deerfield, IL 60015
Technologies; and C. Marche, University of
Montreal; 1997. Abstract of a presentation City of Kingston, New York
at the New York Water Environment Paul Van Wagen
Association, New York, NY. Brinnier & Larios
Hasbrouck and Wilbur Avenues
3. Metcalf and Eddy, 1991. Wastewater Kingston, NY 12401
Engineering - Treatment, Disposal, and
Reuse. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York. North Vernon Wastewater Department
Russell Vaught
4. Northumbrian Water, LTD., 1994. Wastewater Treatment Plant Superintendent
"Effectiveness of RomagTM Screen Test 725 N. Greensburg St.
Report." Engineering Department, North Vernon, IN 47265
Stockton-on-Taes, Cleveland, U.K. TS17
OEQ. Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority
Artie Wright
5. Pisano, William C., 1995. "Comparative Plant Superintendent
Assessment: Vortex Separators, Rotary 1050 East Hazelwood Ave.
Sieves, and "Combing" Screens for CSO Rahway, NJ 07065
Floatable Control.” Presented at the Water
Environment Federation Annual Conference, City of Savannah, Georgia
Miami, FL. Don Atwell
City of Savannah Stormwater Management
6. U.S. EPA, 1977. Urban Storm Water P.O. Box 1027
Management and Technology: Update and Savannah, GA 31402
User's Guide. EPA-960018-77-014.
The mention of trade names or commercial
7. U.S. EPA, 1993. Combined Sewer Overflow products does not constitute endorsement or
Control Manual. EPA-625R-93-007. recommendation for the use by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
8. Water Environment Federation and the
American Society of Civil Engineers, 1991. For more information contact:
Design of Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Plants, Volumes 1 & 2. WEF Manual of Municipal Technology Branch
Practice No. 8. ASCE Manual and Report U.S. EPA
on Engineering Practice No. 76. Mail Code 4204
401 M St., S.W.
9. West et. al., 1990. Control and Treatment of Washington, D.C., 20460
Combined Sewer Overflows, "Design of
Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO) Facilities