4.7 Article

Application of safety and reliability analysis in wastewater reclamation system

期刊

PROCESS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
卷 146, 期 -, 页码 338-349

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2020.09.010

关键词

Wastewater reclamation system; Safety; Reliability; STAMP; HACCP; Formal verification

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China on Domestic waste water Treatment Technology Development [2018YFC0408103]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper discusses the concept of safety and reliability of wastewater reclamation systems, and proposes verification methods and evaluation systems to support the construction of safe, reliable, and economical wastewater recovery systems. The research aims to improve analysis models and evaluation index systems for further development in this field.
With the development of the world water resources situation, the reuse of wastewater will be one of the essential measures for solving water resources' problems and implementing practical and sustainable use of water resources. Wastewater reclamation risks have received considerable attention in all worlds, but research in this area is minimal, and a unified understanding and evaluation method has not yet been formed. Therefore, based on the system theory process analysis (STPA) method and hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) theory, this paper expounds on the concept of the safety and reliability of the wastewater reclamation system. Through the application of analysis methods, this paper proposes a verification method for the safety of the wastewater reclamation system and a reliability evaluation system for the wastewater reclamation system. Besides, the next research direction is further to improve the analysis model and evaluation index system to provide technical support for the construction of a safe, reliable, and economical wastewater recovery system. (C) 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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