ارزیابی کاربرد مدل WASP در بررسی تأثیر آلودگی انسانی بر کیفیت آب (مطالعه موردی: رودخانه اترک)
نویسندگان
1
دانشیار گروه مهندسی عمران آب و سازههای هیدرولیکی، دانشگاه بجنورد، بجنورد، ایران،
2
استادیار گروه مهندسی عمران آب و سازههای هیدرولیکی، دانشگاه بجنورد، بجنورد، ایران
3
کارشناس ارشد گروه مهندسی عمران آب و سازههای هیدرولیکی، دانشگاه بجنورد، بجنورد، ایران
10.22034/wmji.2026.2077211.1133
چکیده
آلودگی آبهای سطحی عموماً در اثر عوامل بیماریزا، مواد مغذی، پلاستیکها، مواد شیمیایی مانند فلزات سنگین، آفتکشها، تخلیه زبالههای صنعتی به رودخانهها ایجاد میشود همچنین آب آشامیدنی باکیفیت خوب برای زندگی ضروری است. لذا در این پژوهش از مدل WASP برای کیفیت آب رودخانه اترک واقع در محدوده حصارگرمخوان بجنورد استفادهشده است. بدین منظور در ماههای فروردین تا خرداد و تیر تا آذر سال 1402 پارامترهای انتروکوکوسفکالیس و کلیفرمکل و اشریشیاکلی و دمای آب و نیتروژن نیترات و نیتروژن کل شبیهسازی شدند. شبیهسازی پارامترهای فوق در سه مرحله، مرحله اول در ماههای تیر تا آذر و مرحله دوم در ماههای فروردین تا خرداد و مرحله سوم نیز نیتروژن کل در ماههای فروردین تا خرداد و تیر تا آذر به دلیل مقایسه ماههای مختلف سال انجام شد. بهطوریکه نتایج حاصل از آن تقریباً مشابه نتایج حاصل از مشاهدات اندازهگیری شده بود و خطای جذر میانگین مربعات (RMSE) هم این موضوع را تأیید کرد. برای مرحله اول و دوم نتایج مربوط بهدقت مدل نشاندهندهی خطای کمتر از 0/08 برای شبیهسازی پارامترها و همچنین خطای کمتر از 0/04 برای اشریشیاکلی و خطای کمتر از 0/02 برای نیتروژن نیترات است که از دقت قابل قبولی به شمار میرود. برای مرحله سوم نیز نتایج مربوط بهدقت مدل نشاندهندهی خطای کمتر از 0/04 برای شبیهسازی نیتروژن کل است که از دقت قابل قبولی به شمار میرود. بر اساس نتایج فوق مدل WASP دقت بسیار خوبی در شبیهسازی رودخانه اترک واقع در محدوده حصارگرمخوان داشته و میتوان آن را بهعنوان یک مدل مناسب برای شبیهسازی در رودخانه پیشنهاد کرد.
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
Evaluation of the Application of the WASP Model in Investigating the Impact of Human Pollution on Water Quality (Case Study: Atrak River)
نویسندگان English
Gholamhossein Akbari
1
Sadegh Partani
2
Iman Lotfi
3
1
Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, Water and Hydraulic Structures, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran
2
Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, Water and Hydraulic Structures, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran.
3
Master of Civil Engineering, Water and Hydraulic Structures, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran.
چکیده English
In this study, the WASP model was used for the water quality of the Atrak River located in the Hesar Garmkhan area of Bojnord. For this purpose, during the months of April to June and July to December 2023, the indices and parameters of Enterococcus faecalis, total coliforms, Escherichia coli, water temperature, nitrate nitrogen, and total nitrogen were simulated. The simulation of the above parameters was carried out in three stages: the first stage in the months of July to December, the second stage in the months of April to June, and the third stage, total nitrogen in the months of April to June and July to December. So that the results obtained were almost similar to the results obtained from the measured observations, and the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) also confirmed this. For the first and second stages, the results related to the accuracy of the model indicate an error of less than 0.08 for the simulation of parameters, as well as an error of less than 0.04 for Escherichia coli and an error of less than 0.02 for nitrate nitrogen, which is considered an acceptable accuracy. For the third stage, the results related to the accuracy of the model indicate an error of less than 0.04 for the simulation of total nitrogen, which is considered an acceptable accuracy. Based on the results obtained, the WASP model has very good accuracy in simulating the Atrak River located in the Hesar-e-Garmkhan area and can be suggested as a suitable model for simulating the river.
کلیدواژهها English
Atrak River
Hesar-Garmkhan
E.faecalis
Total Coliforms
E.Coil
1. Ambrose, J. R., Martin, R.B., J. L., and Wool, T.A. 1991. WASP4, A Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model - Model Theory, User's Manual and Programmer's Guide. USEPA, Athens, GA.
2. Anna, G. P., and Iwona, G. 2023. The Importance of Enterococci in the Monitoring of Fecal Pollution in River Water in Forests and Urban Areas. Water, 15(21): 1–15.
3. Cope, B., Shaikh, T., Parmar, R., Chapra, S., and Martin, J. 2020. Literature Review on Nutrient-Related Rates, Constants, and Kinetics Formulations in Surface Water Quality Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA.
4. Dumlu, E., and Elci, S. 2022. Application of the WASP Model for Assessment of Aeration Impact on Water Quality of Porsuk River, Turkey. Scientific Research Communications. 2022, 2(2): 1-12.
5. Ejigu, M. T. 2021. Overview of water quality modeling. Cogent Engineering, 8(1): 18–29.
6. Gordillo, G., Morales-Hernandez, M., and Garcia-Navarro, P. 2020. Finite volume model for the Simulation of 1D unsteady river flow and water quality based on the WASP. Journal of Hydro informatics, 22(2): 327–345.
7. Lin, Y. P., Mukhtar, H., Huang, K. T., Petway, J.R., Lin, C. M., Chou, C. F., and Liao, S.W. 2020. Real-Time Identification of Irrigation Water Pollution Sources and Pathways with a Wireless Sensor Network and Blockchain Framework. Sensors, 20(13): 36–43.
8. Mamani Larico, A. J., and Zuniga Medina, S. A. 2019. Application of WASP model for assessment of water quality for eutrophication control for a reservoir in the Peruvian Andes. Lakes Reservoirs Research Management, 24(1): 37–47.
9. Mbuh, M. J., Mbih, R., and Wendi, C. 2019. Water Quality modeling and sensitivity analysis using Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program (WASP) in the Shenadoah River Watershed. Physical Geography, 40(2): 1–24.
10. Muhammetoglu, A., Orhan, P., Akdegirmen, O., Dugan, S. T., and Muhammetoglu, H. 2023. An integrated modeling approach to assess Best Management Practices (BMPs) for improving stream water quality using the MapShed and WASP8 Models. Water Resources Management, 37(15): 6237-6253.
11. Neale, P. J., Williamson, C. E., Banaszak, A. T. Hader, D. P., Hylander, S., Ossola, R., Rose, K. C. Wangberg, S. A., and Zepp, R. 2023. The response of aquatic ecosystems to the interactive effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation, and climate change. Photochemical Photobiological Sciences, 22(1): 1093–1127.
12. Obin, N., Tao, H., Ge, F., and Liu, X. 2021. Research on Water Quality Simulation and Water Environmental Capacity in Lushui River Based on WASP Model. Water, 13(1): 28–39.
13. Schlattmann, A., Neuendorf, F., and Burkhard, K. 2022. Ecological Sustainability Assessment of Water Distribution for the Maintenance of Ecosystems, their Services and Biodiversity. Environmental Management, 70(6): 329–349.
14. Shabani, A., Woznicki, S. A., Mehaffey, M., Butcher, J., Wool, T. A., and Whung, P. Y. 2021. A coupled hydrodynamic (HEC-RAS 2D) and water quality model (WASP) for simulating flood-induced soil, sediment, and contaminant transport. J of Flood Risk Managment, 14(4): 1-16.
15. Stocker, M. D., Jeon, D. J., Sokolova, E., Lee, H., Kim, M. S., and Pachepsky, Y. A. 2020. Accounting for the Three-Dimensional Distribution of Escherichia coli Concentrations in Pond Water in Simulations of the Microbial Quality of Water Withdrawn for Irrigation. Water, 12(1): 1708–1719.
16. Swarnkar, K., Gupta, K., and Nikam, V. 2024. Water Quality monitoring and modeling for an urban strom drainage channel in Thane, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 196(5): 440–450.
17. Szpak, D., Boryczko, K., Zywiec, J., Piegdon, I., Tchorzewska-Cieslak, B., and Rak, J. R. 2021. Risk Assessment of Water Intakes in South-Eastern Poland in Relation to the WHO Requirements for Water Safety Plans. Resources, 10(10): 1-15.
18. Tejero, I., Suarez, J., Ascorbe, A., Liano, A., Sainzn, J.A., and Temprano, J. 2025. Dynamic Simulation of Water Quality in Rivers. WASP Application to the River Nalon (Spain). Short course on Introduction to Pollution Modelling, 13(1): 1–10.
19. Terry, J., and Lindenschmidt, K. E. 2023. Water Quality and Flow Management Scenarios in the Qu’Appelle River–Reservoir System Using Loosely Coupled WASP and CE-QUAL-W2 Models. Water, 15(1): 20–30.
20. Thushari, G., and Senevirathna, J. 2020. Plastic pollution in the marine environment. Heliyon, 6(8): 1–16.
21. United States Environmental Protection Agency. US Army Corps of Engineers. 2022. Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Anaysis System (HEC-RAS). Available online, (accessed on 20 November 2022).
23. Wang, D., Wang, K., and Chen, Y. 2021. Optimal Return Policies and Micro-Plastics Prevention Based on Environmental Quality Improvement Efforts and Consumer Environmental Awareness. Water, 13(1): 15-37.
24. Wollenberg, E., Vermeulen, S. J., Girvetz, E., Loboguerrero, A.M., and Ramirez-Villegas, J. 2016. Reducing risks to food security from climate change. Global Food Security, 11(1): 34–43.
25. Wool, T. A., Ambrose, R. B., Martin, J. L., and Comer, A. 2020. WASP 8: The Next Generation in the 50-year Evolution of USEPA’s Water Quality Model. Water, 12(5): 1-33.
26. Wu, S., Wu, S., Yi, Z., Zeng, F., Wu, W., Qiao, Y., and Tian, Y. 2018. Hydrogel-based fluorescent dual pH and oxygen sensors loaded in 96-well plates for high-throughput cell metabolism studies. Sensors. 18(2): 564–575.
27. Zelazny, M., Bryła, M., Ozga-Zielinski, B., and Walczykiewicz, T. 2023. Applicability of the WASP Model in an Assessment of the Impact of Anthropogenic Pollution on Water Quality-Dunajec River Case Study. Sustainability, 15(1): 24–44.
28. Zhai, Y., Han, Y., Xia, X., Li, X., Lu, H., Teng, Y., and Wang, J. 2021. Anthropogenic Organic Pollutants in Groundwater Increase Releases of Fe and Mn from Aquifer Sediments: Impacts of Pollution Degree, Mineral Content, and pH. Water, 13(1): 19–29.
29. Zhao, J., Zhang, F., Chen, S., Wang, C., Chen, J., Zhou, H., and Xue, Y. 2020. Remote Sensing Evaluation of Total Suspended Solids Dynamic with Markov Model: A Case Study of Inland Reservoir across Administrative Boundary in South China. Sensors (Basel), 20(23): 6911–6939.
30. Zieminska-Stolarska, A., and Kempa, M. 2021. Modeling and Monitoring of Hydrodynamics and Surface Water Quality in the Sulejow Dam Reservoir, Poland. Water, 13(3): 1-19.
