Effects of organic compounds and recycling on ozone absorption in a portable water purification unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The absorption of ozone gas in a portable bubbling unit was investigated. First, six types of bubblers were tested under identical operating conditions with a gas flow rate of 1 L/min and a water volume of 1.5 L. A simple mass transfer model with the liquid phase assumed to be completely mixed and the axial ozone gas concentration gradient neglected was used to obtain the overall mass transfer coefficient, KLa, by fitting experimental data. The effect of organic compounds in the water on ozone absorption and liquid ozone concentration buildup was investigated experimentally using phenol as a model compound. It was found that the existence of phenol significantly reduced the liquid ozone concentration because absorbed ozone is consumed for the destruction of phenol, leading to the delay in liquid phase ozone concentration buildup. The implication is that the disinfection time was prolonged when water of high organic compounds concentration is to be purified. Using the completely stirred tank reactor model, the gas recycling is simulated and demonstrated to be effective for enhancing ozone utilization efficiency in the small portable water purification unit.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".