|
Evaluation On Suitability Of Available Reaeration Equations For River Tungabhadra, Karnataka, India And Derivation Of Refined Equation For The Same.
[Full Text]
AUTHOR(S)
S.Ranjith, Dr. Anand.V. Shivapur, Dr. P. Shiva Keshava Kumar, Chandrashekarayya.G. Hiremath, Santhosh Dhungana
KEYWORDS
Dissolved oxygen, DOBT, Reaeration Coefficient, Tungabhadra River.
ABSTRACT
Re-aeration of a stream is very paramount in improving the ability of the stream to self-purify. It’s compulsory to assess the coefficient of re-aeration in order to assess the oxygen dissolved in the stream or river. The coefficient of re-aeration is usually given as a result of many stream quantities like shear stress velocity, flow depth, mean stream velocity, Froude number, flow depth, and bed slope. Previous years have seen the development of several experimental equations. About 13 of the most widely known empirical equations used to predict re-aeration have been checked to assess how applicable they can be in the river system of the Tungabhadra, Karnataka, India at different places. Between March 2017 and February 2018, a wide array of data has been taken from the field from 6 separate locations in the river to assess the coefficient of re-aeration by applying the mass balance method. Different error assessment measures have been used to know how the re-aeration equations would perform. The error assessments are as follows; mean multiplicative error (MME), correlation statistics, normalized mean error (NME), and standard error (SE). It can be deduced from the results that the equation derived for prediction by Jha et al. (Refinement of predictive re-aeration equations for a typical Indian river. Hydrological Process. 2001;15(6):1047-1060) for an average river in India produced well-matching values of correlation coefficient, r, NME, SE, and MME. In addition, an equation for predictive purposes has been refined for the Tungabhadra river with the help of an algorithm that reduces the error assessments; the least-squares algorithm.
REFERENCES
[1] Jain SK, Jha R. Comparing the stream reaeration coefficient estimated from ANN and empirical models. Hydrol Sci. 2005;50(6):1037–1052.
[2] Lewis WW, Whitman WG. Principles of gas absorption. Ind Eng Chem. 1924;16(2):1215–1220.
[2] Eckenfelder W Jr, O’Connor DJ. Biological waste treatment. Tarrytown, NY: Pergamon; 1961.
[3] Cleasby JL, Baumann RB. Oxygenation efficiency of bladed rotor. J Water Pollut Control Fed. 1968;40(3):412–424.
[4] Chapra SC. Surface water quality modeling. Singapore: McGraw-Hill International Editions; 1997.
[5] Danckwerts PV. Significance of liquid film coefficients in gas absorption. Ind Eng Chem. 1951;43(6):1460–1467.
[6] O’Connor DJ, Dobbins WE. Mechanism of reaeration in natural streams. Am Soc Civil Eng Trans. 1956;86(SA3):35–55.
[7] Streeter HW, Phelps EB. A study of the pollution and natural purification of the Ohio River. Public Health Bulletin No.146. Washington (DC): Public Health Service; 1925.
[8] Churchill MA, Elmore HL, Buckingham RA. The prediction of stream reaeration rates. J Sanitary Eng Division. 1962;88(4):1–46.
[9] Issacs WP, Gaudy AF. Atmospheric oxygenation in a simulated stream. J Sanitary Eng Div. 1968;94(2):319–344.
[10] Edwards RW, Owens M, Gibbs JW. Estimates of surfaceaeration in two streams. J Inst Water Eng. 1961;15(5):395–405.
[11] Zogorski JS, Faust SD. Atmospheric reaeration capacity of streams, Part II, Direct measurement of the atmospheric reaeration rate constant in the upper Raritan river basin. Environ Lett. 1973;4(1):61–85.
[12] Tsivoglou EC, Wallace JR. Characterization of stream reaeration capacity. Report No. EPA-R3-72-012. Washington (DC): US Environmental Protection Agency; 1972.
[13] O’Connor DJ, Dobbins WE. Mechanism of reaeration in natural streams. Am Soc Civil Eng Trans. 1958;123:641–684.
[14] Krenkel PA, Orlob GT. Turbulent diffusion and reaeration coefficient. J Sanitary Eng Div. 1962;88(2):53–83.
[15] Owens M, Edwards RW, Gibbs JW. Some reaeration studies in streams. Int J Air Water Pollut. 1964;8(8/9):469–486.
[16] Langbein WB, Durum WH. The American Capacity of Streams, USGS Circular No. 542. Washington (DC): United States Geological Survey; 1967.
[17] Cadwallader TE, McDonell AJ. A multivariate analysis of reaeration data. Water Res. 1969;3:731–742.
[18] Thackston EI, Krenkel PA. Reaeration prediction in natural streams. J Sanitary Eng Div. 1969;95(1):65–93.
[19] Parkhurst JD, Pomeroy RD. Oxygen absorption in streams. J Sanitary Eng Div. 1972; 98(1):101–124.
[20] Smoot H. An estimation of stream reaeration coefficient and hydraulic conditions in a pool and riffle stream [PhD thesis]. Blacksburg (VA): Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; 1998.
[21] Moog DB, Jirka DH. Analysis of reaeration equations using mean multiplicative error. J Environ Eng Div.1998;112(2):104–110.
[22] Jha R, Ojha CSP, Bhatia KKS. Refinement of predictive reaeration equations for a typical Indian river. Hydrol Process. 2001;15(6):1047–1060.
[23] Jha R, Ojha CSP, Bhatia KKS. A supplementary approach for estimating reaeration rate coefficients. Hydrol Process. 2003;18:65–79.
[24] Texas Water Development Board. Simulation of water quality in streams and canals. Report No. 128. Austin: Texas Department of Water Resources; 1971.
[25] APHA. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 20th ed. Washington (DC): American Public Health Association; 1998.
|
