Effects of alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC) in electrocoagulation process for the removal of iron from water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In practice, direct current (DC) is used in an electrocoagulation processes. In this case, an impermeable oxide layer may form on the cathode as well as corrosion formation on the anode due to oxidation. This prevents the effective current transfer between the anode and cathode, so the efficiency of electrocoagulation processes declines. These disadvantages of DC have been diminished by adopting alternating current (AC) in electrocoagulation processes. The main objective of this study is to investigate the effects of AC and DC on the removal of iron from water using zinc as anode and cathode. The results showed that the optimum removal efficiency of 99.6% and 99.1% with the energy consumption of 0.625 and 0.991 kWh kL −1 was achieved at a current density of 0.06 A dm −2 , at pH of 7.0 using AC and DC, respectively. For both AC and DC, the adsorption of iron was preferably fitting Langmuir adsorption isotherm, the adsorption process follows second order kinetics and the temperature studies showed that adsorption was exothermic and spontaneous in nature. © 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".