264 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17978434)
1. Benchmark simulation model no 2: general protocol and exploratory case studies.
Jeppsson U; Pons MN; Nopens I; Alex J; Copp JB; Gernaey KV; Rosen C; Steyer JP; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Sci Technol; 2007; 56(8):67-78. PubMed ID: 17978434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. BSM2 Plant-Wide Model construction and comparative analysis with other methodologies for integrated modelling.
Grau P; Vanrolleghem P; Ayesa E
Water Sci Technol; 2007; 56(8):57-65. PubMed ID: 17978433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Interaction between control and design of a SHARON reactor: economic considerations in a plant-wide (BSM2) context.
Volcke EI; van Loosdrecht MC; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Sci Technol; 2007; 56(9):117-25. PubMed ID: 18025739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Including the effects of filamentous bulking sludge during the simulation of wastewater treatment plants using a risk assessment model.
Flores-Alsina X; Comas J; Rodriguez-Roda I; Gernaey KV; Rosen C
Water Res; 2009 Oct; 43(18):4527-38. PubMed ID: 19695661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Benchmark Simulation Model No 2: finalisation of plant layout and default control strategy.
Nopens I; Benedetti L; Jeppsson U; Pons MN; Alex J; Copp JB; Gernaey KV; Rosen C; Steyer JP; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Sci Technol; 2010; 62(9):1967-74. PubMed ID: 21045320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Continuity-based model interfacing for plant-wide simulation: a general approach.
Volcke EI; van Loosdrecht MC; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Res; 2006 Aug; 40(15):2817-28. PubMed ID: 16846629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of plant-wide WWTP control strategies including the effects of filamentous bulking sludge.
Flores-Alsina X; Comas J; Rodríguez Roda I; Poch M; Gernaey KV; Jeppsson U
Water Sci Technol; 2009; 60(8):2093-103. PubMed ID: 19844056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Benchmarking of control strategies for ATAD technology: a first approach to the automatic control of sludge treatment systems.
Zambrano JA; Gil-Martinez M; Garcia-Sanz M; Irizar I
Water Sci Technol; 2009; 60(2):409-17. PubMed ID: 19633383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An ASM/ADM model interface for dynamic plant-wide simulation.
Nopens I; Batstone DJ; Copp JB; Jeppsson U; Volcke E; Alex J; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Res; 2009 Apr; 43(7):1913-23. PubMed ID: 19232670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Multi-criteria evaluation of wastewater treatment plant control strategies under uncertainty.
Flores-Alsina X; Rodríguez-Roda I; Sin G; Gernaey KV
Water Res; 2008 Nov; 42(17):4485-97. PubMed ID: 18804255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A new approach towards modelling of the carbon degradation cycle at two-stage activated sludge plants.
Winkler S; Müller-Rechberger H; Nowak O; Svardal K; Wandl G
Water Sci Technol; 2001; 43(7):19-27. PubMed ID: 11385846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Using bioprocess stoichiometry to build a plant-wide mass balance based steady-state WWTP model.
Ekama GA
Water Res; 2009 May; 43(8):2101-20. PubMed ID: 19345392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Enhanced nitrogen removal in the combined activated sludge-biofilter system of the Southpest Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Jobbágy A; Tardy GM; Literáthy B
Water Sci Technol; 2004; 50(7):1-8. PubMed ID: 15553452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Feedforward-feedback control of an activated sludge process: a simulation study.
Vrecko D; Hvala N; Carlsson B
Water Sci Technol; 2003; 47(12):19-26. PubMed ID: 12926665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance intensification of Prague wastewater treatment plant.
Novák L; Havrlíková D
Water Sci Technol; 2004; 50(7):139-46. PubMed ID: 15553469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Application of the IWA anaerobic digestion model (ADM1) for simulating full-scale anaerobic sewage sludge digestion.
Shang Y; Johnson BR; Sieger R
Water Sci Technol; 2005; 52(1-2):487-92. PubMed ID: 16180468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Towards a common benchmark for long-term process control and monitoring performance evaluation.
Rosen C; Jeppsson U; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Sci Technol; 2004; 50(11):41-9. PubMed ID: 15685978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Plant-wide (BSM2) evaluation of reject water treatment with a SHARON-Anammox process.
Volcke EI; Gernaey KV; Vrecko D; Jeppsson U; van Loosdrecht MC; Vanrolleghem PA
Water Sci Technol; 2006; 54(8):93-100. PubMed ID: 17163017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. WWTP dynamic disturbance modelling--an essential module for long-term benchmarking development.
Gernaey KV; Rosen C; Jeppsson U
Water Sci Technol; 2006; 53(4-5):225-34. PubMed ID: 16722073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of control strategies for nitrogen removal in an activated sludge process in terms of operating costs: a simulation study.
Stare A; Vrecko D; Hvala N; Strmcnik S
Water Res; 2007 May; 41(9):2004-14. PubMed ID: 17346768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
