Escuela Luis Espinal On-site Wastewater Treatment
Spamm Jammel

a

b

c

d

f

Project Scope

Design Concerns

Could the system…

Function in an area with clay soil?

Handle a wastewater volume of at least 9,500 gpd?

Function with a water table depth of 1.7 m?

Fit within the area available within the schoolyard?

Drainfields

Standard, Gravity

Pressure Distribution

Dripline effluent

Figure 3: Cost analysis

Final Options

After assessing all the systems applicable for the needs of the school, Spam Jammel narrowed the options to recirculating sand filters and standard, or pressure, drainfields. The pros of the sand filters included functionality, location and feasibility since the system could be contained within the schoolyard. The cons to this system are that it occupies much of the usable area within the school grounds, creates unusable land, and is complex to maintain. Drainfields were researched as a second option, due to the concerns with the recirculating sand filter. The pros of the drainfield are reduced costs, simpler to maintain and construct, and will not interfere with land use. The con is the assumed social acceptability of using the adjacent soccer field for the drainfield.

Pressure Distribution

Conclusion

Spam Jammel recommends the construction of a septic tank system combined with a pressurized drainfield. The system has lower maintenance, simpler construction, lower cost, does not restrict the use of the soccer field, occupies the minimal amount of schoolyard and is a proven system. Spam Jammel recommends connecting to city sanitary sewers as soon as they are available, as the maximum life span of the drainfield is ten years.