文章摘要
莫明浩,方少文,宋月君,涂安国.鄱阳湖湖区三站点水质评价及其变化特征研究Journal of Water Resources and Water Engineering[J].,2012,23(4):90-94
鄱阳湖湖区三站点水质评价及其变化特征研究
Water quality assessment and its changing characteristics research for the three stations in Poyang Lake
Received:April 23, 2012  Revised:May 23, 2012
DOI:10.11705/j.issn.1672-643X.2012.04.019
中文关键词: 水质评价  模糊综合定量评价法  变化特征  鄱阳湖
英文关键词: water quality assessment  fuzzy comprehensive quantitative evaluation  change characteristics  Poyang Lake
基金项目:水利部公益性行业科研专项经费项目(201001055); 江西省博士后科研择优资助项目; 江西省水利厅课题(KT201011、KT201009)
Author NameAffiliation
MO Minghao Jiangxi Provincial Institute of Water Science, Nanchang 330029, China 
FANG Shaowen Jiangxi Provincial Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang 330029, China [KH*3D] 
SONG Yuejun Jiangxi Provincial Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang 330029, China [KH*3D] 
TU Anguo Jiangxi Provincial Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang 330029, China [KH*3D] 
Hits: 1750
Download times: 1070
中文摘要:
      应用模糊综合定量评价法对鄱阳湖星子站、都昌站、棠荫站区域的水质进行了评价,以3个指标(氨氮、高锰酸盐指数、总磷)作为评价因子,建立评价矩阵,计算出因子权重,得出特征指数,最后评价出水质级别,该方法能够得到其它方法难以达到的客观性和综合性。水质监测数据和评价结果表明:2003-2008年鄱阳湖3站点水质状况尚属良好,大部分时期在Ⅱ、Ⅲ类水平,但也有部分时段超标;在劣于Ⅱ类水的情况下,3个站点所在区域枯水期水质均比丰水期和平水期差。
英文摘要:
      The water quality assessment of Xingzi, Duchang and Tangyin stations in Poyang Lake has been evaluated by using the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. The three evaluation factors as ammonia nitrogen, permanganate and totoal phosphorus were selected for the evaluating indicators. The paper also set up the assessing matrix, calculated the weights of factors and obtained the characteristics index and finally evaluated the grades of water quality. This method can achieved objectivity and comprehensiveness that other methods can’t. Water quality monitoring data and evaluation results showed that water quality of three stations in Poyang Lake was still good from 2003to 2008. Most of time the water qualtiy was in class Ⅱ, Ⅲ level, but there were excessive in part times. In the case of worse than class Ⅱ, the water quality of three stations was worse during the dry water period than the rich water period and average water period.
View Full Text   View/Add Comment  Download reader
Close
function PdfOpen(url){ var win="toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status=yes,menubar=yes,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes"; window.open(url,"",win); } function openWin(url,w,h){ var win="toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=no,width=" + w + ",height=" + h; controlWindow=window.open(url,"",win); } &et=E5AE6FAF27C740C0C2A1B4B3520CB8C299D9FB497A36C51ED30C044A3C2A84B15346A4C22387C50185E3D339F127FBF1B9A0DCE971696F8B606A06BCC08ADDAE0999EA0E8C51B1D33AB7C051628D97DE429C48F665BA03D1E50B239DED775B80EFE05D6402017E66B098EB419C770890&pcid=5B3AB970F71A803DEACDC0559115BFCF0A068CD97DD29835&cid=3ECA06F115476E3F&jid=BC473CEDCB8CE70D7B12BDD8EA00FF44&yid=99E9153A83D4CB11&aid=A661EDB2734CE1BD4A83D2C1607F2918&vid=&iid=E158A972A605785F&sid=869807E2D7BED9EC&eid=BB0EA31DB1B01173&fileno=20120419&flag=1&is_more=0">