| Literature DB >> 31387258 |
Yumin Wang1, Weijian Ran2, Lei Wu3, Yifeng Wu3.
Abstract
In this paper, an improved fuzzy matter-element (IFME) method was proposed, which integrates the classical matter-element (ME) method, set pair analysis (SPA), and variable coefficient method (VCM). The method was applied to evaluate water quality of five monitor stations along Caoqiao River in Yixing city, Jiangsu Province, China. The levels of river water quality were determined according to fuzzy closeness degree. Compared with the traditional evaluation methods, the IFME method has several characteristics as follows: (i) weights were determined by the VCM method, which can reduce workload and overcome the adverse effects of abnormal values, (ii) membership degrees were defined by SPA, which can utilize monitored data more scientifically and comprehensively, and (iii) IFME is more suitable for seriously polluted rivers. Overall, these findings reinforce the notion that an integrated approach is essential for attaining scientific and objective assessment of river water quality.Entities:
Keywords: improved fuzzy matter-element model (IFME); set pair analysis (SPA); variation coefficient method (VCM); water quality assessment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31387258 PMCID: PMC6696173 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16152793
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Upper boundary values of indicators in environmental quality standards for surface water (GB3838-2002) (unit: mg/L).
| Indicators | I | II | III | IV | V | Weights |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CODMn | 2 | 4 | 6 | 10 | 15 | 0.15 |
| CODCr | 15 | 15 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 0.22 |
| NH3-N | 0.15 | 0.5 | 1 | 1.5 | 2 | 0.16 |
| TP | 0.02 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.25 |
| TN | 0.2 | 0.5 | 1 | 1.5 | 2 | 0.22 |
Figure 1Map of the study area with locations of water quality monitoring stations.
Figure 2Yearly water quality of five monitoring stations in Caoqiao River. (a) Permanganate index, (b) Chemical oxygen demand, (c) Ammonia-nitrogen, (d) Total phosphorus, and (e) Total nitrogen.
Closeness degree and river water quality level in 2010 for five stations along the Caoqiao River.
| Station | I | II | III | IV | V | Below Level V |
| Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhongxi Bridge | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.12 | 0.53 | 5.04 | V |
| Xujia tank | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.26 | 0.35 | 0.14 | 0.22 | 4.23 | IV |
| Zhakou | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.19 | 0.33 | 0.20 | 0.27 | 4.51 | V |
| Cao Bridge | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.27 | 0.34 | 0.13 | 0.22 | 4.20 | IV |
| Xicang Bridge | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.25 | 0.26 | 0.06 | 0.37 | 4.45 | IV |
Grade characteristic values and river water quality level from 2008 to 2010 for five stations along the Caoqiao River.
| Station | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | Avarage | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Level |
| Level |
| Level |
| Level |
| Level |
| |
| Zhongxi Bridge | 5.24 | V | 4.90 | V | 5.04 | V | 4.71 | V | 4.50 | V | 4.88 |
| Xujia Tank | 4.76 | V | 4.48 | IV | 4.23 | IV | 4.49 | IV | 4.45 | IV | 4.48 |
| Zhakou | 5.01 | V | 4.63 | V | 4.51 | V | 4.71 | V | 4.57 | V | 4.69 |
| Cao Bridge | 4.95 | V | 4.77 | V | 4.20 | IV | 4.79 | V | 4.83 | V | 4.71 |
| Xicang Bridge | 6.00 | VI | 5.83 | VI | 4.45 | IV | 4.44 | IV | 4.94 | V | 5.13 |
Comparison of the assessment results of different methods.
| Methods | Zhongxi Bridge | Zhakou | Xujia Tank | Xicang Bridge | Cao Bridge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fuzzy matter-element model | V | VI | VI | VI | VI |
| Comprehensive index method | V | VI | VI | VI | VI |
| Fuzzy comprehensive method | V | III | III | III | III |
| Bayesian method | V | III | III | III | III |
| Improved fuzzy matter-element model | V | VI | VI | VI | VI |
Membership degree of the fuzzy comprehensive assessment along the Caoqiao River.
| Station | I | II | III | IV | V | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhongxi Bridge | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.28 | 0.14 | 0.59 | V |
| Xujia Tank | 0.00 | 0.09 | 0.42 | 0.27 | 0.22 | III |
| Zhakou | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.36 | 0.29 | 0.32 | III |
| Cao Bridge | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.47 | 0.25 | 0.23 | III |
| Xicang Bridge | 0.00 | 0.11 | 0.48 | 0.20 | 0.22 | III |
Membership degree of the Bayesian method in five stations along the Caoqiao River.
| Station | I | II | III | IV | V | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhongxi Bridge | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.41 | V |
| Xujia tank | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.12 | III |
| Zhakou | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.35 | 0.29 | 0.17 | III |
| Cao Bridge | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.10 | III |
| Xicang Bridge | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.33 | 0.16 | 0.24 | III |