TABLE 2.
Comparison of ESS among four disinfection kinetic models
| Water sample | pH | t-Butanol present | ESS ina:
|
R2b | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CW | MCW | MHM | DCW | ||||
| pH-controlled distilled water | 5.6 | No | 3.56 | 2.74 | 2.58 | 2.36 | 0.96 |
| 7.1 | No | 4.49 | 3.90 | 2.24 | 2.11 | 0.97 | |
| 8.2 | No | 9.92 | 4.87 | 4.17 | 3.48 | 0.98 | |
| 5.6 | Yes | 3.54 | 1.34 | 0.56 | 0.45 | 0.97 | |
| 7.1 | Yes | 3.95 | 2.25 | 0.32 | 0.31 | 0.97 | |
| 8.2 | Yes | 4.12 | 1.85 | 0.38 | 0.48 | 0.97 | |
| Water containing humic acid | 7.1 | No | 0.45 | 0.97 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.98 |
| 8.2 | No | 2.40 | 1.36 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.98 | |
| 7.1 | Yes | 1.92 | 0.97 | 0.29 | 0.06 | 0.99 | |
| 8.2 | Yes | 2.22 | 1.02 | 0.18 | 0.07 | 0.97 | |
| River water | 5.7 | No | 4.10 | 0.97 | 0.21 | 0.13 | 0.98 |
| 7.1 | No | 2.45 | 1.12 | 0.32 | 0.31 | 0.99 | |
| 8.2 | No | 2.44 | 1.44 | 0.34 | 0.17 | 0.99 | |
| 8.2 | Yes | 3.15 | 1.57 | 0.44 | 0.21 | 0.98 | |
a
CW, Chick-Watson model; MCW, modified Chick-Watson model; MHM, modified Hom model; DCW, delayed Chick-Watson model.
b
Model fit of delayed Chick-Watson model.