Skip to main content

Sensitivity analysis of water quality for Delhi stretch of the River Yamuna, India

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment volume 184, pages 1487–1508 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

Simulation models are used to aid the decision makers about water pollution control and management in river systems. However, uncertainty of model parameters affects the model predictions and hence the pollution control decision. Therefore, it often is necessary to identify the model parameters that significantly affect the model output uncertainty prior to or as a supplement to model application to water pollution control and planning problems. In this study, sensitivity analysis, as a tool for uncertainty analysis was carried out to assess the sensitivity of water quality to (a) model parameters (b) pollution abatement measures such as wastewater treatment, waste discharge and flow augmentation from upstream reservoir. In addition, sensitivity analysis for the “best practical solution” was carried out to help the decision makers in choosing an appropriate option. The Delhi stretch of the river Yamuna was considered as a case study. The QUAL2E model is used for water quality simulation. The results obtained indicate that parameters K 1 (deoxygenation constant) and K 3 (settling oxygen demand), which is the rate of biochemical decomposition of organic matter and rate of BOD removal by settling, respectively, are the most sensitive parameters for the considered river stretch. Different combinations of variations in K 1 and K 2 also revealed similar results for better understanding of inter-dependability of K 1 and K 2. Also, among the pollution abatement methods, the change (perturbation) in wastewater treatment level at primary, secondary, tertiary, and advanced has the greatest effect on the uncertainty of the simulated dissolved oxygen and biochemical oxygen demand concentrations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Bhargava, D. S. (1983). Most rapid BOD assimilation in Ganga and Yamuna river. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 109(1), 174–188.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bhargava, D. S. (1986). DO Sag model for extremely fast river purification. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 112(3), 572–585.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L. C., & Barnwell, T. O. (1987). The enhanced stream water quality models QUAL2E and QUAL2E— UNCAS: Documentation and user manual. Athens, GA: USEPA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, M. A., Elmore, H. L., & Buckingham, R. A. (1962). The prediction of stream reaeration rates. Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, ASCE, 88(SA4), 1–46.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • C.P.C.B. (2000). Water quality status of Yamuna river, Assessment and development of river basin, ADSORBS/32/1999–2000. Delhi, India: Central Pollution Control Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • C.P.C.B. (2005). Status of sewage and sewage treatment plants in Delhi. CUPS/57/2005. Delhi, India: Central Pollution Control Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, B. A., & Whitehead, P. G. (2005). Parameter sensitivity and predictive uncertainty in a new water quality model Q2. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 131(1), 147–157.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Delhi Jal Board (2005). Delhi water supply and sewerage project. Final report—Project preparation study, Part C: Sewerage.

  • Jha, R., Ojha, C. S. P., & Bhatia, K. K. K. (2000). Development of deoxygenation and reaeration rate coefficients for a small tributary of river Hindon, U.P., India. In R. Mehrotra, B. Soni, & K. K. S. Bhatia (Eds.), Proc. of international conference on integrated water resources management for sustainable development (pp. 464–474). New Delhi.

  • Jha, R., Ojha, C. S. P., & Bhatia, K. K. K. (2001). Refinement of predictive reaeration equations for a typical Indian river. Hydrological Processes, 15(1), 1047–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazmi, A. A., & Agrawal, L. (2005). Strategies for water quality management of Yamuna river, India. In Proc. of third international symposium on South East Asian water environment, Bangkok (pp. 70–80).

  • Kazmi, A. A., & Hansen, I. S. (1997). Numerical models in water quality management: a case study for the Yamuna river (India). Water Science and Technology, 36(5), 193–200.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kothandaraman, V., & Ewing, B. B. (1969). A probabilistic analysis of dissolved oxygen biochemical oxygen demand relationship in streams. Journal of Water Pollution Control and Federation, 41(2), R73–R90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langbein, W. B., & Durum, W. H. (1967). The aeration capacity of streams. USGS Circular No. 542:6, Washington, DC.

  • Liu, W. C., Liu, S., Hsu, M., & Kuo, A. (2005). Water quality modeling to determine minimum in stream flow for fish survival in tidal rivers. Journal of Environmental Management, 76, 293–308.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Manache, G., & Melching, C. S. (2004). Sensitivity analysis of a water quality model using Latin Hypercube sampling. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 130(3), 232–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAvoy, D. C., Masscheleyn, P., Morrall, S. W., Casilla, A. B., Lim, J. M. U., & Gregorio, E. G. (2003). Risk assessment approach for untreated wastewater using the QUAL2E water quality model. Chemosphere, 52(1), 55–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCutcheon, S. C. (1989). Water QualityModeling. Transport and Surface Exchange in Rivers (Vol. I). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, N., Jackson, B., Wade, A. J., Butterfield, D., & Wheater, H. S. (2005). Sensitivity analysis of a catchment scale nitrogen model. Journal of Hydrology, 315, 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melching, C. S., & Anmangandla, S. (1992). Improved first-order uncertainty method for water quality modeling. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 118(5), 791–805.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Melching, C. S., & Bauwens, W. (2001). Uncertainty in coupled non point source and stream water quality models. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 127(6), 403–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melching, C. S., & Flores, H. E. (1999). Reaeration equations derived from U.S. Geological Survey database. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 125(5), 407–414.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Melching, C. S., & Yoon, C. G. (1996). Key sources of uncertainty in QUAL 2E model of Passaic river. Journal of Water Resources Planning and management, 122(2), 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newham, L. T. H., Norton, J. P., Prosser, I. P., Croke, B. F. W., & Jakeman, A. J. (2003). Sensitivity analysis for assessing the behavior of a landscape-based source and transport model. Environmental Modeling and Software, 13, 741–751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnari, G., Dorling, S., Schlink, U., Cawley, G., Foxall, R., & Chatterton, T. (2004). Modeling SO2 concentrations at a point with statistical approaches. Environmental Modeling and Software, 19, 887–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, D. J., & Dobbins, W. E. (1958). Mechanisms of reaeration in natural streams. Transactions of the American Society Civil Engineers, 123, 641–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortolano, L. (1984). Environmental planning and decision making. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owens, M., Edwards, R. W., & Gibbs, J. M. (1964). Some reaeration studies in streams. International Journal of Air and Water Pollution, 8, 469–486

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paliwal, R., Sharma, P., & Kansal, A. (2007). Water quality modeling of the river Yamuna (India) using QUAL2E-UNCAS. Journal of Environmental Management, 83(2), 131–144.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parmar, D.L. (2008). Simulation and multiobjective optimization for river quality management. Ph. D. Thesis, I.I.T. Delhi, India.

  • Streeter, W. H., & Phelps, E. B. (1925). A study of the pollution and natural purification of the Ohio River. Public Health Bulletin (Vol. 146). Washington D.C.: U.S. Public Health Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberghe, V., Bauwens, W., & Vanrolleghem (2006). Evaluation of uncertainty propagation into river water quality predictions to guide future monitoring campaigns. Environmental Modeling and Software, 1–8.

  • Wu, J., Zou, R., & Yu, S. L. Y. (2006). Uncertainty analysis for coupled watershed and water quality modeling system. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 132(5), 351–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou, R., Lung, W., & Guo, H. (2002). Neural network embedded Monte Carlo approach for water quality modeling under input information uncertainty. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 16(2), 135–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, H.B. Technological Institute, Kanpur, 208002, India

    D. L. Parmar

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, 110016, India

    Ashok K. Keshari

Authors
  1. D. L. Parmar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ashok K. Keshari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. L. Parmar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Parmar, D.L., Keshari, A.K. Sensitivity analysis of water quality for Delhi stretch of the River Yamuna, India. Environ Monit Assess 184, 1487–1508 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2055-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2055-1

Keywords

  • Water quality simulation
  • Sensitivity analysis
  • Pollution abatement
  • Model parameters