Influence of sampling intake position on suspended solid measurements in sewers: two probability/time-series-based approaches.

Environ Monit Assess

INSA Lyon, DEEP-Laboratoire Déchets Eaux Environnement Pollutions, Université de Lyon, 34 avenue des Arts, F-69621, Villeurbanne Cedex, France.

Published: June 2016

AI Article Synopsis

  • - Total suspended solid (TSS) measurements in urban drainage systems are important, and two methods are proposed to assess uncertainties due to sampling position and vertical concentration gradients in sewer pipes: a Simplified Method (SM) and a Time Series Grouping Method (TSM).
  • - The study used data from the Chassieu urban catchment in Lyon, France, analyzing TSS over 89 rainfall events, revealing that TSM has a lower probability of underestimating TSS values compared to SM (39% vs. 269%).
  • - The findings suggest that TSM provides more realistic and reliable estimates of TSS, highlighting the importance of considering vertical concentration profiles for better measurement performance and sampling protocols.

Article Abstract

Total suspended solid (TSS) measurements in urban drainage systems are required for several reasons. Aiming to assess uncertainties in the mean TSS concentration due to the influence of sampling intake vertical position and vertical concentration gradients in a sewer pipe, two methods are proposed: a simplified method based on a theoretical vertical concentration profile (SM) and a time series grouping method (TSM). SM is based on flow rate and water depth time series. TSM requires additional TSS time series as input data. All time series are from the Chassieu urban catchment in Lyon, France (time series from 2007 with 2-min time step, 89 rainfall events). The probability of measuring a TSS value lower than the mean TSS along the vertical cross section (TSS underestimation) is about 0.88 with SM and about 0.64 with TSM. TSM shows more realistic TSS underestimation values (about 39 %) than SM (about 269 %). Interquartile ranges (IQR) over the probability values indicate that SM is more uncertain (IQR = 0.08) than TSM (IQR = 0.02). Differences between the two methods are mainly due to simplifications in SM (absence of TSS measurements). SM assumes a significant asymmetry of the TSS concentration profile along the vertical axis in the cross section. This is compatible with the distribution of TSS measurements found in the TSM approach. The methods provide insights towards an indicator of the measurement performance and representativeness for a TSS sampling protocol.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5335-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

time series
20
tss measurements
12
tss
11
influence sampling
8
sampling intake
8
suspended solid
8
tss concentration
8
vertical concentration
8
concentration profile
8
tss underestimation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!