4.3 Article

Comparison of Advection-Diffusion Models and Neural Networks for Prediction of Advanced Water Treatment Effluent

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE
Volume 29, Issue 7, Pages 660-668

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC
DOI: 10.1089/ees.2011.0246

Keywords

advanced treatment; alum residual; artificial neural network; fixed-bed column test; phosphorus pollution; porosity

Funding

  1. American University of Sharjah [FRG09-28]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An artificial neural network (ANN) can help in the prediction of advanced water treatment effluent and thus facilitate design practices. In this study, sets of 225 experimental data were obtained from a wastewater treatment process for the removal of phosphorus using oven-dried alum residuals in fixed-bed adsorbers. Five input variables (pH, initial phosphorus concentration, wastewater flow rate, porosity, and time) were used to test the efficiency of phosphorus removal at different times, and ANNs were then used to predict the effluent phosphorus concentration. Results of experiments that were conducted for different values of the input parameters made up the data used to train and test a multilayer perceptron using the back-propagation algorithm of the ANN. Values predicted by the ANN and the experimentally measured values were compared, and the accuracy of the ANN was evaluated. When ANN results were compared to the experimental results, it was concluded that the ANN results were accurate, especially during conditions of high phosphorus concentration. While the ANN model was able to predict the breakthrough point with good accuracy, the conventional advection-diffusion equation was not as accurate. A parametric study conducted to examine the effect of the initial pH and initial phosphorus concentration on the effluent phosphorus concentration at different times showed that lower influent pH values are the most suitable for this advanced treatment system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available