ArticleInternational journal of analytical chemistry2022
Comparison Study on Sonodirect and Sonoalternate Current Electrocoagulation Process for Domestic Wastewater Treatment.
Article in International journal of analytical chemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, there is a problem related to wastewater handling which is released from different activities. The electrocoagulation method has been a dominant treatment method for wastewater treatment. There are different forms of electrocoagulation methods for wastewater treatment. Nevertheless, there was no comparison made for the removal efficiency of the sonoalternate current (SAC), alternate current (AC), sonodirect current (SDC), and direct current (DC) electrocoagulation process. The efficiency of electrocoagulation methods was compared for their removal of chemical oxygen demand (COD) from Jimma University domestic wastewater. Batch Reactor DC/AC electrocoagulation cell was used to determine the removal efficiency. During the comparison, the response surface methodology (RSM) was used to analyze and optimize the data taken from the laboratory. Besides, ANOVA was used to analyze the interaction effects of different parameters. The removal of COD from domestic wastewater was achieved with DCE, ACE, SDCE, and SACE which were 82.6%, 86.58%, 88.6%, and 92.5%, respectively, under optimal experimental conditions. From the finding, SACE was more successful at removing % COD than the DCE, ACE, and SDCE methods. For DCE and SDCE, the formation of an impermeable oxide layer at the cathode and the occurrence of corrosion at the anode due to oxidation made the COD removal process less efficient compared with SACE processes. From the experimental results it can be concluded that the SACE has the lowest power consumption and higher process efficiency than the other EC methods and can be a promising solution for removing pollutants from domestic wastewater.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.