64 4 Journal of Taiwan Agricultural Engineering 107 12 Vol. 64, No. 4, December 2018 DOI: 10.29974/JTAE.201812_64(4).0005 WASP - Applying the WASP Model to Evaluate the Effect of Wastewater Sewer Takeover on River Water Quality Improvement A Case Study of the Erren River Li-Lun Chu * Chia-Ling Chang Zong-You Yang Jhih-Ren Su Sin-Yuan Lin 50% 100% BOD 8% SS 0% *40724 100 clchang@fcu.edu.tw 76
WASP 模式 河川水質模擬 水質改善 ABSTRACT The Erren River is one of the important rivers in southwestern Taiwan. The river belongs to the Central Administration. Its pollution mainly comes from Kaohsiung and Tainan. There are many factories in this basin. The sewage entering the river may not be treated, so that the water quality is poor and need to be improved. Therefore, the Erren River is listed as one of the key management river. This study proposes two solutions for water quality improvement for the Erren River. The first is to increase the sewage treatment rate and to improve the drainage concentration so that drainage into the river water quality can meet the discharge water standard. The second way is to control the total pollution loads. The scenarios are to reduce 50% and 100% pollution loads, and the concentration of pollution at the upstream boundary. This study discusses the efficiency of these pollution reduction strategies. The results show that BOD can be reduced when increasing the sewage treatment rate, while SS reduction needs to control upstream pollution loads. Keywords: WASP, water quality simulation, water quality improvement. 1.1 2500 2.6 18 10 7 90% 10% ( 2015) 1.2 77
350 (2011) 2 2.1 1 2 1 2.2 63.2 46.5 5 1 (1998 ) 2.3 1. WASP (Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program)WASP 78
WASP WASP WASP (Ambrose and Wool, 2001) WASP 2005 WINDOWS 16 (Ambrose and Wool, 2009) (2006 2013) 2. (1) 2015 ( 20152015) 2015 7 (2) WASP WASP (Ambrose et al., 1993) 52.5 3 3 (3) (Mean Absolute Percentage Error, MAPE) 79
(1)(2011) x(k) x (k)m 1 M xk ( ) x( k) MAPE 100%...(1) K 1 M xk ( ) MAPE MAPE 1 1 (MAPE) <15% 10%~20% 20%~50% >50% 2.4 WASP WASP 50% 100% 1. 250 CMD BODSS 30 mg/l 2. 50% 100% BODSS 3.1 1 6 7 12 MAPE SS 1 4 5 8 8 80
BODSS MAPE 50% 2 BODSS 2 (a) BOD 1 2 3 4 5 6 56.92% 59.69% 56.77% 31.24% 30.99% 35.83% 45.24% 7 8 9 10 11 12 25.23% 25.97% 26.19% 29.27% 33.74% 34.10% 29.08% BOD 15%SS 69% BOD 15% SS 62% 25 15 mg/l SS (b) SS 1 2 3 4 41.57% 39.59% 26.62% 17.23% 31.25% 5 6 7 8 23.49% 28.19% 84.11% 45.76% 45.39% 3.2 MAPE 1. BOD SS 4 BOD SS 40 20 4 2. 50% 100% (1) 50% 100% 81
5 1 1 BOD 50% 100% SS BOD 50% 100% 8% SS 54% 5 (2) BOD SS SS SS BOD 15% BOD SS 0% SS 6 6 5 1. WASP 82
2. BOD SS BOD 3. BOD BOD SS SS 4. 1. 1998 2. 2011 3. 2015 4. 2011 62 65-103 5. 2006 ( wasp ) 6. 2015 104 7. 2013 WASP 8. Ambrose, R. B. and Wool, T. A. (2001). Modeling tools used for mercury TMDLs in Georgia rivers. Georgia Institute of Technology. 9. Ambrose, R. B. and Wool, T. A. (2009). WASP7 Stream transport-model theory and user s guide, supplement to water quality analysis simulation program (WASP) user documentation. National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA. 10. Ambrose, R. B., Wool, T. A. and Martin, J. L. (1993). The water quality analysis simulation program, WASP5, Part A: Model documentation. Environmental Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA. 107 4 4 107 6 22 107 6 26 83