Assessing medicinal qualities of groundwater from the Busko-Zdrój area (Poland) using the probabilistic method

Wątor, Katarzyna; Kmiecik, Ewa; Tomaszewska, Barbara

doi:10.1007/s12665-016-5538-0

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The probabilistic method was applied in three variants with 1) uncertainty declared by the laboratory (U lab ) (Table 1), 2) measurement uncertainty estimated during QA/QC programme (U meas ) (Table 2) and 3) maximum allowable uncertainty (U RMH ) according to RMH (2017) ( Table 1). The decision rule was defined as follows: water can be used for drinking purposes when the determined concentration, plus the uncertainty, are below the parametric value (Ellison & Williams, 2007;Demetriades, 2010;Wątor et al, 2016). Figure 3 presents comparisons of these methods for nickel in selected samples for which concentrations were close to the parametric value.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The assessment of drinking water quality can be performed using either a deterministic or probabil-istic method. In the former approach, every single result is referred directly to the parametric value, while in the latter, uncertainty related to the analytical results is taken into account during the decision-making process (Ellison & Williams, 2007;Demetriades, 2010;Wątor et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The simplest method which probably requires the lowest financial expenses for estimating uncertainty is the duplicate samples method. It can be carried out in accordance with the balanced design or a simplified version of it, the unbalanced design (Garret & Goss, 1980;Ellison &Williams, 2007;ISO, 2016a;Wątor et al, 2016;Kmiecik, 2018). Duplicate samples are collected in parallel with normal samples, using the same sampling procedure by the same sampler.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Samples are further analysed in the same laboratory, using the same analytical methods and by the same analyst. This allows to minimise systematic errors arising from sampling and analysis, the contribution of which are not included in this method of estimating uncertainty (Ellison & Williams, 2007;Kmiecik, 2011;Wątor et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A probabilistic approach to assessment of the quality of drinking water

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge of uncertainty in analytical results is of prime importance in assessments of compliance with requirements set out for the quality of water intended for human consumption. Assessments of drinking water quality can be performed using either a deterministic or a probabilistic method. In the former approach, every single result is referred directly to the parametric value, while in the probabilistic method uncertainty related to analytical results is taken into account during the decision-making process. In the present research, laboratory uncertainty and uncertainty determined on the basis of results of analyses of duplicate samples collected in two Polish cities were compared and used in the probabilistic approach of water quality assessment. Using the probabilistic method, more results were considered to be “above the parametric value”. Most excesses were observed when the maximum allowable uncertainty as set out in the Regulation of the Minister of Health of 7 December 2017 was used, which is due to the highest values of these uncertainties. The lowest values above parametric values in the probabilistic approach were observed when measurement uncertainty was considered.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A probabilistic approach to assessment of the quality of drinking water

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The influence of sampler experience on the total uncertainty may e.g. change the water classification during assessment of curative water potential as it was indicated by Wątor et al [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment the impact of samplers change on the uncertainty related to geothermalwater sampling

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of samplers change on the uncertainty associated with the process of the geothermal water sampling. The study was carried out on geothermal water exploited in Podhale region, southern Poland (Małopolska province). To estimate the uncertainty associated with sampling the results of determinations of metasilicic acid (H 2 SiO 3 ) in normal and duplicate samples collected in two series were used (in each series the samples were collected by qualified sampler). Chemical analyses were performed using ICP-OES method in the certified Hydrogeochemical Laboratory of the Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology Department at the AGH University of Science and Technology in Krakow (Certificate of Polish Centre for Accreditation No. AB 1050). To evaluate the uncertainty arising from sampling the empirical approach was implemented, based on double analysis of normal and duplicate samples taken from the same well in the series of testing. The analyses of the results were done using ROBAN software based on technique of robust statistics analysis of variance (rANOVA). Conducted research proved that in the case of qualified and experienced samplers uncertainty connected with the sampling can be reduced what results in small measurement uncertainty.

show abstract