Design and evaluation of a UV LED Photocatalytic Reactor Using Anodized TiO<sub>2</sub> Nanotubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bench-scale flow-through photocatalytic reactor using light emitting diodes (LED) as light source and a TiO2 nanotube array (TN) as immobilized catalyst has been designed, fabricated and tested on commonly studied contaminants. The photoreactor is comprised of 144, 365-nm UV-LED lamps mounted along the inner periphery of an annular cylinder. An ordered array of TN, as catalyst, was immobilized by electrochemical anodization of a titanium cylinder and placed in the center of the reactor. Synthesized TN was characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). Laboratory investigations were conducted on the photoreactor to treat 4-chlorophenol (4-CP), atrazine and methylene blue. The performance of the photoreactor at different flow rates and at varying distances of photocatalyst from the light source was monitored. The photocatalytic reaction rates increased with bubbling oxygen into the reservoir. Significant improvement was observed when H2O2 was added and degradation to detection limits was observed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".