Degradation of residual dyes in textile wastewater by ozone: Comparison between mixed and bubble column reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A noticeable amount of dyes may remain in the wastewater downstream of dyeing facilities giving anaesthetic colourations as well as environmental concerns. Conventional biological treatment alone cannot guarantee a sufficient decolouration and tertiary treatments have to be necessarily considered. Two oxidation schemes by ozone were considered in this work. A bubble column reactor (as a benchmark, in agreement with industrial applications) and a recycle well‐mixed reactor were compared to reach the highest decolouration of standard dyes. In addition, hydrodynamic and ultrasonic cavitation were considered in the recycled well‐mixed reactor to intensify its performance. The decolouration analysis was carried out for two dye classes (reactive and disperse), characterized by very different physical and chemical features. It appeared that some benefit was brought by ultrasound cavitation in the case of disperse dye only, while the degradation of the reactive dye was not intensified by the above hydraulic phenomenon. Ozone treatment was protracted to obtain different decolouration degrees of wastewater generated by wool dyeing. The resulting water was tested as a recycled process fluid to prepare fresh dyeing liquors, where devising the minimum decolouration degree became one of the quality specifications for recycling water back to dyeing.
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".