MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115168056 · doi:10.1002/cjce.70204

Treatment of commercial industrial wastewater using electrocoagulation: Understanding effect of operating conditions

2025· article· en· W7115168056 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced oxidation water treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrocoagulationWastewaterChemical oxygen demandIndustrial wastewater treatmentHazardous wasteAluminiumElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The wastewater generated from various stages in pharmaceutical industries such as production, washing processes, and formulation contains a wide range of hazardous chemicals. The objective of this study is to investigate the application of electrocoagulation (EC) for the treatment of real industrial pharmaceutical wastewater obtained from various processing stages. Aluminium and stainless steel (SS) electrodes were used to conduct the treatment. The effects of important operating conditions for EC such as current density (1.08–3.33A/cm 2 ), electrode spacing (varied from 4 to 7 cm), pH (from 4.0 to 10.0), and poly aluminium chloride (PAC) dose (chemical oxygen demand [COD]: PAC ratio as 1:0.025–1:0.3) on the COD removal efficiency have been studied. TDS and electrical conductivity were also monitored during the treatment. The optimum COD reduction was observed at a current density of 1.33 A/cm 2 , an electrode spacing of 5 cm, a pH of 7, and a COD: PAC dosage ratio of 1:0.2. The maximum COD reduction recorded for samples A, B, C, and D corresponding to various stages were 62%, 71%, 51%, and 86%, respectively. It was also concluded that the COD reduction was improved after the addition of external coagulant as PAC. The research work has clearly confirmed that the EC process can be considered as an effective method of treatment for COD reduction.

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 score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced oxidation water treatmentFrench-language works237,207