4.6 Article

Estimation of Biological Oxygen Demand and Chemical Oxygen Demand for Combined Sewer Systems Using Synchronous Fluorescence Spectra

期刊

SENSORS
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 2460-2471

出版社

MOLECULAR DIVERSITY PRESERVATION INTERNATIONAL-MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s100402460

关键词

sewer system; fluorescence; prediction; BOD; COD

资金

  1. Small and Medium Business Administration in Korea [S6080030111]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Real-time monitoring of water quality for sewer system is required for efficient sewer network design because it provides information on the precise loading of pollutant to wastewater treatment facilities and the impact of loading on receiving water. In this study, synchronous fluorescence spectra and its first derivatives were investigated using a number of wastewater samples collected in sewer systems in urban and non-urban areas, and the optimum fluorescence feature was explored for the estimation of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) concentrations of sewer samples. The temporal variations in BOD and COD showed a regular pattern for urban areas whereas they were relatively irregular for non-urban areas. Irrespective of the sewer pipes and the types of the areas, two distinct peaks were identified from the synchronous fluorescence spectra, which correspond to protein-like fluorescence (PLF) and humic-like fluorescence (HLF), respectively. HLF in sewer samples appears to be associated with fluorescent whitening agents. Five fluorescence characteristics were selected from the synchronous spectra and the first-derivatives. Among the selected fluorescence indices, a peak in the PLF region (i.e., Index I) showed the highest correlation coefficient with both BOD and COD. A multiple regression approach based on suspended solid (SS) and Index I used to compensate for the contribution of SS to BOD and COD revealed an improvement in the estimation capability, showing good correlation coefficients of 0.92 and 0.94 for BOD and COD, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据