Traitement des eaux usées par coagulation-floculation avec recirculation des boues chimiques : Évaluation et validation à grande échelle
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
Two sequences of tests were carried out at the Centre d'épuration Rive-Sud wastewater treatment plant (Longueuil, Que.) to evaluate the performances of a coagulation-flocculation process with chemical sludge recycling. The tests consisted in following the evolution of the quality of the treated water when two flowsheets are supplied simultaneously in parallel with the same wastewater, one flowsheet incorporating the sludge recycling process. Results showed that the recycled sludge contributes significantly to water degradation compared with a classical coagulation-flocculation system. These results do not corroborate the previous work done by Monette et al. (F. Monette et al. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 27: 702-718, 719-734, 2000). The problems observed are explained by inadequate plant installations for sludge recycling. High coagulant concentrations also limit the gains in efficiency associated with recyling. The process reacts rapidly to wastewater loading and reagent modifications. The recycled sludge conditioning is slightly more difficult because of the small particles created by recycling pump turbulence. Finally, turbidity measurements in the flocculator water tank could be used as an excellent indicator for sludge recycling load estimation.Key words: recycling, sludge, coagulation-flocculation, treatment, wastewater, full scale.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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