MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386833887 · doi:10.1680/jenes.23.00074

Modelling of a wastewater-treatment plant for process reliability and effluent reuse

2023· article· en· W4386833887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omar A. Refaat, Mohamed F. Hamoda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEffluentSewage treatmentWastewaterEnvironmental scienceReuseReliability (semiconductor)Biochemical oxygen demandActivated sludgeEnvironmental engineeringWater qualityChemical oxygen demandTotal suspended solidsIrrigationWaste managementEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluation of wastewater-treatment plant (WWTP) performance is important to determine whether the plant produces an acceptable treated effluent satisfying the water quality standards for reuse. Modelling of WWTPs is required for optimising plant performance and choosing the optimum operation strategy. This study simulated the Kabd WWTP in Kuwait using the BioWin software. The plant receives 180 000 m 3 /day of domestic wastewater and comprises primary, secondary (activated sludge) and tertiary treatment stages. Daily data obtained from the WWTP during 2013–2018 were used for modelling plant performance under steady-state operation. The model could describe plant operation and accurately predict the effluent characteristics for the conditions examined. A high correlation (R 2 = 0.95–0.99) was obtained between the predicted and actual values of chemical oxygen demand (COD), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids as main parameters characterising wastewater. The tertiary-treated effluent consistently satisfied the water quality criteria for reuse in irrigation. Using the model could aid in securing compliance of effluent quality with the local environmental standards. Factorial analysis revealed that COD and BOD are the most important parameters describing plant performance. Reliability analysis showed that the coefficient of variability was low (0.328) at a level of reliability of 95%, leading to a high coefficient reliability of 0.631, which indicates a highly stable plant performance. It is recommended to include reliability analysis in evaluating plant performance to demonstrate consistency in the ability of the plant to produce effluents satisfying requirements set by environmental authorities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207