【文章內容簡介】 則上升流速V=，停留時間T取2h=vT3600=3600=D/=3(符合要求)（5）校核出水堰負荷q=＜(符合要求)（6）污泥斗高度取=30，=（）tan30/2=2m（7）沉淀池總高H=++++2=式中：h1—超高（）h2—沉淀池有效水深，mh3—縫隙高度，mh4—緩沖層的高度（）h5—污泥斗高度，m（8）出水堰設計采用三角堰，90堰上水頭（即三角堰底至上游水面的高度）取h=每個三角堰流量（）三角堰個數(shù)nn=Q/q=三角堰中心距（單側出水），（10）污泥量V=++=30西安航空學院畢業(yè)設計（論文）結　論本次設計為徐州第二啤酒廠廢水處理工程設計，采用水解酸化與生物接觸氧化法相結合的方法，該工藝采用水解酸化作為生物接觸氧化的預處理，水解酸化菌通過新陳代謝將水中的固體物質水解為溶解性物質，將大分子有機物降解為小分子有機物。水解酸化不僅能去除部分有機污染物，而且提高了廢水的可生化性，有益于后續(xù)的好氧生物接觸氧化處理。該工藝在處理方法、工藝組合及參數(shù)選擇上是比較合理的，充分利用各工序的優(yōu)勢將污染物質轉化、去除。達到國家二級排放標準。謝 辭本次畢業(yè)設計是在*老師的精心指導下完成的。本次畢業(yè)設計是我大學三年所學知識的回顧與總結。同時，通過該次畢業(yè)設計，我亦從指導老師處學到了許多的常規(guī)設計方法，設計思想，并懂得了在做設計中如何去查資料與應用資料。了解了本專業(yè)各方面的設計課題與設計方法，這次使我的知識面更加廣闊與完整，使我收益非淺?？梢赃@樣說：在劉老師的耐心指導和自己的努力下，我完成了畢業(yè)設計應完成的任務，達到了畢業(yè)設計的教學要求。在這里，萬分的感謝各位老師的辛勤栽培和其他同學的熱情的幫助！但由于時間倉促及本人水平有限，本次設計中難免有各種錯誤與不足，還望各位老師批評指正與諒解。我將在以后的學習與工作中不斷改正，不斷吸取經驗教訓，不斷完善自我，以感謝老師們三年的關心與教導。最后，誠摯地感謝*老師以及教研室各位環(huán)境工程老師的關心與指導。祝各位老師萬事如意，工作順利！33參考文獻[1].(第4版).北京:中國建筑工業(yè)出版社，1998年7月.[2].(第4版).北京:中國建筑工業(yè)出版社，2000年6月.[3].任南琪 :中國環(huán)境科學出版社[4].:哈爾濱工業(yè)大學出版社，2002年6月.[5].:科學出版社，2001年7月.[6].:中國建筑工業(yè)出版社，1993年6月.[7].給水排水設計手冊第1冊(常用資料).北京:中國建筑工業(yè)出版社，1986年12月. [11] Clark D W. The memory system of a high performance personal puter. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Tech Rep: CSL811, 1981[12] MC88100 RSIC Microprocessor User’s Manual (Second edition). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1990, 200310[13] DeVale J. Measuring operating system robustness. ~koopman/thesis/, 200403 [14]Patterson D A amp。 Hennessy J L. Computer organization and design: The hardware/software interface. 2nd Edition, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 1994 [15]Carreira J, Madeira H and Silva J G. Xception: A technique for the experimental evaluation of dependability in modern puters. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1998, 24(2): 125136[16]Koopman P and DeVale K. Comparing the robustness of POSIX operating systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 29th International Symposium on FaultTolerant Computing, Madison, IEEE CS Press, June 1999, pp. 3037 51外文翻譯China shoulders the cost of environmental change（摘譯）Ecologists today have at their disposal a great deal of evidence about the processes that degrade our environment, ranging from coastal eutrophication to tropical deforestation. They have e to understand the intricacies of humaninduced changes such as acid deposition and heavy metal accumulation. But they do not have realistic assessments of the economic losses that result from environmental pollution and ecosystem degradation. Possession of these kinds of numbers would strengthen their arguments for environmental management considerably. Persuasive figures could help reorient public policy, environmental law, and investors39。 thinking in favor of effective preventive action.So, why haven39。t these figures been developed? First, there are (as yet) no generally accepted procedures for conducting such methodological uncertainties leave individual researchers with no choice but to use subjective judgments when deciding which variables to include and how to treat them.Suppose, for example, researchers wanted to quantify the health effects of chronically high levels of urban air pollution. They could take the more minimalist approach, limiting the analysisto the value of the labor time lost due to higher they could attempt a more allenpassing evaluation that would put a price on every individual disfort and include the cost of premature death. As these researchers would quickly discover, the former approach is much easier than the latter. While a rich and fascinating literature on the price of personal suffering and the value of life does exist, objective criteria for putting a monetary value on respiratory disfort, physical limitations, and anxiety induced by asthma attacks do not. As far as the value of life is concerned, actuarial practices, economic considerations, and moral imperatives offer estimates that may differ widely sometimes by up to an order of magnitude.Having a standard set of procedures would not really simplify the task, however. The basic problem is that the kinds of specific figures required as basic inputs in such calculations are typically unavailable even in affluent countries, which have long had good statistical makes it impossible for researchers to avoid making subjective choices and simplifying assumptions, even though this weakens the persuasiveness of the eventual bottom line. As it is, the cumulative effect of even small departures from reality can easily halve or double a final figure.The second and perhaps most significant obstacle is the impossibility of putting a meaningful price on lost or reduced environmental services. For example, suppose a peasant living on a treeless plain takes straw from a field to light a fire to cook a meal. How can the loss of that straw be valued? The loss of the plant nutrients in the straw could be expressed rather easily by equating it with the cost of the synthetic fertilizers needed to replace those nutrients. But the straw also improved the soil39。s capacity to retain water and provided food for bacteria, fungi, and numerous invertebrates. Without these life forms, the soil will not be as productive and may be unable to sustain farming. How can these losses be valued?Should these obstacles, daunting as they are, keep us from trying to evaluate economic cost? Absolutely not. It is simply necessary to always keep the limitations of the process in mind when interpreting the results. The evaluations will provide useful ranges of approximations not correct singlefigure answers. They will all be inplete, and even the most prehensive ones will almost certainly undervalue the real impact human actions have on the longterm integrity of environmental quality. However, despite these limitations, these assessments can be va