http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
하수처리장에서의 암모니아 플럭스 산정을 위한물질전달모형 개발
사재환,전의찬,정재학 한국대기환경학회 2006 한국대기환경학회지 Vol.22 No.5
Sewage treatment plants located near to large cities emit extremely higher concentration of odorous materials.This study evaluated flux profiles of ammonia emitted from the water surface of sewage treatment plants using adynamic flux chamber. Also, an ammonia overall mass transfer coefficient and a mass transfer model wastreatment plants. The developed mass transfer model was evaluated through a tness analysis.Comparison modeled flux applying empirical overall mass transfer coefficients of ammonia and measuredammonia flux show a high linearity with 0.977. The flux ratio of 1.282 demonstrated highly statistical tness, also.Modeled flux using the mass transfer model was compared with measured flux. In result, it indicated thatempirical overall mass transfer coefcients were similar to measured flux.to be an easy and effective method to make accurate and precise predictions for ammonia flux discharged fromsewage treatment plants.
Dynamic Flux Chamber를 이용한 소사육시설의 암모니아 플럭스 및 배출계수 평가
사재환,전의찬,Sa, Jae-Hwan,Jeon, Eui-Chan 한국환경보건학회 2010 한국환경보건학회지 Vol.36 No.1
Atmospheric ammonia is a very important constituent of the environment because it is the dominant alkaline gaseous species present in the atmosphere. Ammonia is known to affect ecosystems at relatively low concentration. In this study flux profiles of ammonia emitted from the cattle housing were evaluated using a dynamic flux chamber (DFC). We have developed the emission factor of $NH_3$ from the cattle housing. Analysis of ammonia flux variation was made with respect to such variables as manure surface temperature, pH, and ammonium concentration. Ammonia flux has been measured up to summer in 2007 at calf and cattle housing. In the fall, average ammonia flux from calf and cattle housing was estimated as 1.406 (${\pm}0.947$) and 1.534 ((${\pm}0.956$) $mg\;m^2\;min^1$, respectively. In the winter, average ammonia flux was estimated 1.060 ((${\pm}0.569$) from the calf housing and 1.216 ((${\pm}0.655$) $mg\;m^2\;min^1$ from the cattle housing. The correlation coefficient (R=0.732) between ammonia flux and manure surface ammonium concentration exhibited stronger relationship than manure surface pH and temperature. In the fall, ammonia emission factor from calf and cattle housing was estimated as 3.94 ((${\pm}2.66$) and 11.41 ((${\pm}5.86$) kg-$NH_3$ animal$^1\;yr^1$, respectively. In the winter, ammonia average flux was estimated as 2.89 ((${\pm}1.59$) from the calf housing and 6.51 ((${\pm}3.67$) kg-$NH_3$ animal$^1\;yr^1$ from the cattle housing.
사재환(Jae-Hwan Sa),윤석경(Seok-Kyung Yoon),노기환(Gi-Hwan Roh),전의찬(Eui-Chan Jeon) 한국대기환경학회 2008 한국대기환경학회지 Vol.24 No.1
Management and control of ammonia at the sources and ambient largely depend on sampling and measurement techniques. Good sampling and measurement techniques provide high quality data. The main purpose of the study is compare the analytical characteristics of the Indolphenol method which is one of the standard method in Korea with automatic analyzers for continued measuring gaseous ammonia. For comparison with other analytical methods, the verification test was designed to evaluate performance parameters; linearity, absorption efficiency, reproducibility and repeatability test, accuracy, and response time test. R² of calibration curve using IPM and CLM was very high (value is 1.000), but for EcSM R² value was estimated to be lower than IPM and CLM (as 0.991). The RSD of the CLM ranged from 0.1 to 2.3% over the nine concentration levels measured, %Ds was 0.1 to 10.7%, and average RA over all the measurements was 3.3%. The RSD of IPM and EcSM was ranged from 1.0 to 8.1, 3.9 to 14.0 respectively, and average RA were 8.71, 4.9% respectively. Rise in response times of EcSM was estimated to be 1 minute. It is found to be more sensitive than response time (which ranged from 2 to 9 minute) of CLM. For ammonia concentration measured using the IPM and the CLM from the same ammonia source, linear regression of IPM versus CLM show a slope of 0.805, an intercept of 637 ppb, and R² of 0.868.