Removal of arsenic from drinking water using rice husk
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rice husk adsorption column method has proved to be a promising solution for arsenic (As) removal over the other conventional methods. The present work investigates the potential of raw rice husk as an adsorbent for the removal of arsenic [As(V)] from drinking water. Effects of various operating parameters such as diameter of column, bed height, flow rate, initial arsenic feed concentration and particle size were investigated using continuous fixed bed column to check the removal efficiency of arsenic. This method shows maximum removal of As, i.e., 90.7 % under the following conditions: rice husk amount 42.5 g; 7 mL/min flow rate in 5 cm diameter column at the bed height of 28 cm for 15 ppb inlet feed concentration. Removal efficiency was increased from 83.4 to 90.7 % by reducing the particle size from 1.18 mm to 710 µm for 15 ppb concentration. Langmuir and Freundlich isotherm models were employed to discuss the adsorption behavior. The effect of different operating parameters on the column adsorption was determined using breakthrough curves. In the present study, three kinetic models Adam-Bohart, Thomas and Yoon–Nelson were applied to find out the saturated concentration, fixed bed adsorption capacity and time required for 50 % adsorbate breakthrough, respectively. At the end, solidification was done for disposal of rice husk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it