The Use of Risk Analysis Techniques to Determine the\nProbability of Producing Non-Compliant Drinking\nWater: Focusing on Dual Media Rapid Gravity\nFiltration
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The main goal of a drinking water treatment plant is to provide safe drinking water for its consumers. Historically, this was accomplished through monitoring the influent and effluent water quality to ensure that the water quality met a set of guidelines and regulations. However, as the limitations of relying on compliance monitoring become more evident, water utilities and drinking water treatment plants are beginning to utilize risk management frameworks to help provide safe drinking water and to mitigate potential risks. Applying a risk management framework requires an evaluation of potential risks. This systematic evaluation can be performed through using risk analysis methods. <br /><br /> \n The overall goal of this research is to analyze and evaluate risk analysis methodologies that are used in a variety of engineering fields, select two risk analysis methods, and use them to evaluate the probability of producing non-compliant drinking water from a rapid gravity filtration unit with respect to turbidity. <br /><br /> \n The risk analysis methodologies that were used in this research were the consequence frequency assessment and computer modelling combined with probabilistic risk analysis. Both of the risk analysis methodologies were able to determine the probability of producing non-compliant water from a rapid gravity filtration unit with respect to turbidity. However, these methodologies were found to provide different numerical results with respect to each other. The consequence frequency assessment methodology was found to be easier to implement; however, the consequence frequency assessment was only able to be performed on one parameter at a time. Computer modelling and probabilistic risk analysis enabled the inclusion of multiple parameters which provided a more comprehensive understanding of the filtration unit. <br /><br /> \n The primary conclusion from this research is that the risk analysis methods, as they are described in this thesis, are not sufficient to use directly on a rapid gravity filtration unit without further modification. Furthermore, although the risk analysis methods provided some guidance, these methods should only be used as a part of a complete risk management process.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle