| 1. |
- Olsson, Gustaf, et al.
(författare)
-
Instrumentation, control and automation in wastewater – from London 1973 to Narbonne 2013
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Water Science and Technology. - : IWA Publishing. - 0273-1223 .- 1996-9732. ; 69:7, s. 1373-1385
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Key developments of instrumentation, control and automation (ICA) applications in wastewater systems during the past 40 years are highlighted in this paper. From the first ICA conference in 1973 through to today there has been a tremendous increase in the understanding of the processes, instrumentation, computer systems and control theory. However, many developments have not been addressed here, such as sewer control, drinking water treatment and water distribution control. It is hoped that this review can stimulate new attempts to more effectively apply control and automation in water systems in the coming years.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Jeppsson, Ulf, et al.
(författare)
-
Benchmark simulation model no 2: general protocol and exploratory case studies
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Water Science and Technology. - : IWA Publishing. - 0273-1223 .- 1996-9732. ; 56:8, s. 67-78
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over a decade ago, the concept of objectively evaluating the performance of control strategies by simulating them using a standard model implementation was introduced for activated sludge wastewater treatment plants. The resulting Benchmark Simulation Model No 1 (BSM1) has been the basis for a significant new development that is reported on here: Rather than only evaluating control strategies at the level of the activated sludge unit (bioreactors and secondary clarifier) the new BSM2 now allows the evaluation of control strategies at the level of the whole plant, including primary clarifier and sludge treatment with anaerobic sludge digestion. In this contribution, the decisions that have been made over the past three years regarding the models used within the BSM2 are presented and argued, with particular emphasis on the ADM1 description of the digester, the interfaces between activated sludge and digester models, the included temperature dependencies and the reject water storage. BSM2-implementations are now available in a wide range of simulation platforms and a ring test has verified their proper implementation, consistent with the BSM2 definition. This guarantees that users can focus on the control strategy evaluation rather than on modelling issues. Finally, for illustration, twelve simple operational strategies have been implemented in BSM2 and their performance evaluated. Results show that it is an interesting control engineering challenge to further improve the performance of the BSM2 plant (which is the whole idea behind benchmarking) and that integrated control (i.e. acting at different places in the whole plant) is certainly worthwhile to achieve overall improvement.
|
|
| 7. |
- Jeppsson, Ulf, et al.
(författare)
-
Benchmark simulation models, quo vadis?
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Water Science and Technology. - : IWA Publishing. - 0273-1223 .- 1996-9732. ; 68:1, s. 1-15
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- As the work of the IWA Task Group on Benchmarking of Control Strategies for wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) is coming to an end, it is essential to disseminate the knowledge gained. For this reason, all authors of the IWA Scientific and Technical Report on benchmarking have come together to provide their insights, highlighting areas where knowledge may still be deficient and where new opportunities are emerging, and to propose potential avenues for future development and application of the general benchmarking framework and its associated tools. The paper focuses on the topics of temporal and spatial extension, process modifications within the WWTP, the realism of models, control strategy extensions and the potential for new evaluation tools within the existing benchmark system. We find that there are major opportunities for application within all of these areas, either from existing work already being done within the context of the benchmarking simulation models (BSMs) or applicable work in the wider literature. Of key importance is increasing capability, usability and transparency of the BSM package while avoiding unnecessary complexity.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Nopens, I., et al.
(författare)
-
Benchmark Simulation Model No 2: finalisation of plant layout and default control strategy
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Water Science and Technology. - : IWA Publishing. - 0273-1223 .- 1996-9732. ; 62:9, s. 1967-1974
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The COST/IWA Benchmark Simulation Model No 1 (BSM1) has been available for almost a decade. Its primary purpose has been to create a platform for control strategy benchmarking of activated sludge processes. The fact that the research work related to the benchmark simulation models has resulted in more than 300 publications worldwide demonstrates the interest in and need of such tools within the research community. Recent efforts within the IWA Task Group on "Benchmarking of control strategies for WWTPs" have focused on an extension of the benchmark simulation model. This extension aims at facilitating control strategy development and performance evaluation at a plant-wide level and, consequently, includes both pretreatment of wastewater as well as the processes describing sludge treatment. The motivation for the extension is the increasing interest and need to operate and control wastewater treatment systems not only at an individual process level but also on a plant-wide basis. To facilitate the changes, the evaluation period has been extended to one year. A prolonged evaluation period allows for long-term control strategies to be assessed and enables the use of control handles that cannot be evaluated in a realistic fashion in the one week BSM1 evaluation period. In this paper, the finalised plant layout is summarised and, as was done for BSM1, a default control strategy is proposed. A demonstration of how BSM2 can be used to evaluate control strategies is also given.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
