Comparing Corrosion Control Treatments for Drinking Water Using a Robust Bayesian Generalized Additive Model

Pipe loop studies are used to evaluate corrosion control treatment, and updated regulatory guidance will ensure that they remain important for drinking water quality management. But the data they generate are difficult to analyze: nonlinear time trends, nondetects, extreme values, and autocorrelation are common attributes that make popular methods, such as the t-or rank-sum tests, poor descriptive models. Here, we propose a framework for describing pipe loop data that accommodates all of these challenging attributes: a robust Bayesian generalized additive model with continuous-time autoregressive errors. Our approach facilitates corrosion control treatment comparisons without the need for imputing nondetects or special handling of outliers. It is well suited to describing nonlinear trends without overfitting, and it accounts for the reduced information content in autocorrelated time series. We demonstrate it using a 4-year pipe loop study, with multiple pipe configurations and orthophosphate dosing protocols, finding that an initially high dose of orthophosphate (2 mg P L-1) that is subsequently lowered (0.75 mg P L-1) can yield lower lead release than an intermediate dose (1 mg P L-1) in the long term. Water utilities face difficult trade-offs in applying orthophosphate for corrosion control, and better models of pipe loop data can help inform the decision-making process.

Automated summary

Pipe loop studies are important for assessing corrosion control treatment and ensuring drinking water quality management. However, analyzing the data they generate can be challenging due to various attributes, such as nonlinear time trends, nondetects, extreme values, and autocorrelation. In this study, a robust Bayesian generalized additive model with continuous-time autoregressive errors is proposed as a framework for describing pipe loop data, which can handle these challenging attributes and facilitate corrosion control treatment comparisons.