Adsorption Efficiency of Flamboyant Pods for Indigo Dye Removal from Textile Industrial Wastewater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates flamboyant pods (FP) and chitosan [extracted from periwinkle shells (PS)] modified flamboyant pods (CMFP) adsorbents for dye removal from textile industrial wastewater, and were compared with commercial activated carbon (CAC). Physicochemical properties with dye concentrations of wastewater were investigated before and after adsorption using standard methods and Ultraviolet-visible Spectrophotometer respectively. Batch adsorption were performed and pH (3.0, 4.0, 6.0, 9.0, 11.5), adsorbent dosage (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 g), contact time (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 minutes) and initial concentration (25, 50, 100, 125, 250 mg/L) were optimized for Indigo dye using the adsorbents. Initial concentration data was used to test conformity with Langmuir and Freundlich adsorption isotherms. Adsorption efficiencies for simulation ranged from 11.33±0.70 to 83.8±0.00. Optimum adsorption conditions of indigo dye were pH 6, 0.1g sorbent dosage, 60 minutes contact time and 250 mg/L dye concentration; gave efficiencies of 83.8%, 79.6% and 89.8% for FP, CMFP, CAC respectively with wastewater. Physicochemical parameters of wastewater decreased except nitrate which increased from 11.53±0.00 to 34.65±1.41mg/L. Data best fit Langmuir than Freundlich adsorption isotherm. The study inferred that FP and PS could be processed as less expensive, environment friendly alternative adsorbent to the costly CAC for treating textile wastewater.
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) | 0.003 | 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".