Optimising the Design of Fe0-Based Filtration Systems for Water Treatment: The Suitability of Porous Iron Composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed the functionality of metallic iron (Fe0) filtration systems using porous iron composite (PIC) as an alternative to granular Fe0/aggregate mixtures. The usage of PIC for water treatment has many challenges which are related to the well-drained nature of highly porous filters and the corresponding increase in hydraulic conductivity (shorter contact time). In this article, the extent of (i) iron exhaustion and (ii) porosity loss in four filtration systems are critically discussed. The considered filtration systems are: (i) Fe0 alone, (ii) PIC alone, (iii) Fe0/sand and (iv) Fe0/pumice. In all four systems, mono-sized granular spherical particles are assumed. Sand and Fe0 are compact (f = 0 %) whereas PIC and pumice are porous (e.g. f = 40 %). Results demonstrated that under anoxic conditions (Fe3O4 as major corrosion products) Fe0 depletion is possible in all systems except Fe0 alone. Under oxic conditions (e.g. formation of Fe(OH)3), the PIC system exhibited the highest level of Fe0 depletion (58 %). The increasing order of sustainability was: Fe0 < Fe0/sand < Fe0/PM < PIC. These results suggested that manufacturing PIC with defined porosity and intrinsic reactivity is the key for more efficient usage of Fe0 for environmental remediation and water treatment.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".