MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2444087780 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n7p222

Removal of Chromium and Nickel from Electroplating Wastewater Using Magnetite Particulate Adsorbent: (1) Effect of pH, Contact Time and Dosage, (2) Adsorption Isotherms and Kinetics

2016· article· en· W2444087780 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Donatus Dube, Champaklal T. Parekh, Bothwell Nyoni

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdsorptionChromiumWastewaterNickelMetal ions in aqueous solutionMagnetiteFreundlich equationElectroplatingMaterials scienceChemistryMetalEnvironmental scienceMetallurgyEnvironmental engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wastewater discharged into municipal sewer systems from electroplating process plants contains a heavy load of metal ions and often requires pre-discharge treatment. Treatment of wastewater to reduce the concentration of metal ions employing an adsorption process has been studied using a wide range of adsorbents. In this work, the concentrations of chromium and nickel ions in wastewater samples from a local electroplating shop were found to be above the limits set out by the Bulawayo City Council, and the Environmental Management Agency, a statutory agency under the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Government of Zimbabwe. Furthermore, the removal of chromium and nickel ions from the wastewater using magnetite as an adsorbent is studied. Magnetite particulate adsorbent used in this experiment has demonstrated to be an effective adsorbent material. At the optimum process operating pH of 4 – 7 the absorbent was able to achieve removal rates of up to 99% for chromium and 98% for nickel. The adsorption processes for chromium and nickel have been proven to be physical in nature using the Dubinin-Radushkevich isotherm model. Also, the adsorption kinetics data fit well with pseudo second-order kinetic model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removalFrench-language works237,207