Photoreactor design and CFD modelling of a UV/H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> process for distillery wastewater treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A pseudo‐kinetic model for the treatment of a distillery wastewater by the ultraviolet irradiation and hydrogen peroxide process in a continuous tubular photoreactor is developed. There is a scarcity of information on modelling of organic degradation rates based on chemical oxygen demand (COD) and total organic carbon (TOC) in advanced oxidation technologies (AOTs). In this study, the COD and TOC are used as surrogate parameters to design a photoreactor instead of individual concentrations of species. The rate constants for the reaction between COD and TOC with hydroxyl radicals were determined to be 4.9 × 109 and 5.0 × 106 M−1 s−1, respectively. A laminar flow model was simulated to estimate the velocity and residence time of the medium in a cylindrical photoreactor. The model was validated by the experimental data published in the open literature for different concentrations of H2O2 (1, 10, and 100 mM), COD (589, 709, and 850 mg O2 L−1), and TOC (190, 200, and 192 mg C L−1). The optimal value of the inlet hydrogen peroxide concentration was predicted to be 400 mg L−1. Axial and radial concentration distributions of species in the photoreactor were also obtained. At different photoreactor radii (from 50 to 200 mm), the values of radial local volumetric rate of energy absorption (LVREA) were estimated. It was found that a higher LVREA was achieved in the photoreactor space at smaller radii. © 2011 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".