4.5 Article

Analyzing multi-variate water quality signals for water quality monitoring station placement in water distribution systems

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROINFORMATICS
卷 20, 期 6, 页码 1323-1342

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/hydro.2018.162

关键词

event detection; optimization; uncertainty; water distribution systems; water security

资金

  1. United States - Binational Science Foundation (BSF)
  2. Technion Funds for Security research
  3. joint Israeli Office of the Chief Scientist (OCS) Ministry of Science, Technology and Space (MOST)
  4. Germany Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) [02WA1298]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Placing fixed water quality monitoring stations in a water distribution system can greatly improve the security of the system via prompt detection of poor water quality. In the event that a harmful substance is injected into a water distribution system, large populations can be put at risk of exposure to the contaminant. Promptly detecting the presence of a contaminant will reduce the number of people put at risk of exposure. However, to protect against a wide variety of possible contaminants, a water quality monitoring station will need to identify contamination via recognition of anomalous changes in a suite of surrogate water quality indicators (chlorine, pH, etc.). This work attempts to place water quality monitoring stations within the water distribution at locations that best detect contamination events via surrogate water quality signals. Networks of water quality monitoring stations are designed to minimize the population affected prior to contamination event detection, and simultaneously minimize the expected number of false positive detections, under uncertain water quality conditions. Solutions generated in this study are compared to solutions designed via classical detection methods. Results show the sensor networks designed without consideration to detection via surrogate water quality parameters have higher false positive detection rates.

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

4.5
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