Cargando…
Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation
This paper presents the use of hydrodynamic cavitation and ultrasonic cavitation technologies for treating rhodamine B (RhB) in simulated wastewater. Various parameters of each technology that influence the RhB degradation rate were compared and optimized. The results showed that the optimal conditi...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society of Chemistry
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694663/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35424464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ra07727e |
_version_ | 1784619404758089728 |
---|---|
author | Ye, Yu-Fang Zhu, Ying Lu, Na Wang, Xin Su, Zhi |
author_facet | Ye, Yu-Fang Zhu, Ying Lu, Na Wang, Xin Su, Zhi |
author_sort | Ye, Yu-Fang |
collection | PubMed |
description | This paper presents the use of hydrodynamic cavitation and ultrasonic cavitation technologies for treating rhodamine B (RhB) in simulated wastewater. Various parameters of each technology that influence the RhB degradation rate were compared and optimized. The results showed that the optimal conditions for the hydrodynamic cavitation determined by the single-factor method were as follows: inlet pressure, 0.4 MPa; initial concentration, 10 mg L(−1); reaction temperature, 30 °C; and pH value, 3. The RhB degradation rate was 38.7%. In addition, the optimal conditions for the ultrasonic cavitation determined by the response surface methodology were as follows: initial RhB concentration, 10 mg L(−1); ultrasonic power, 850 W; ultrasonic time, 100 min; addition amount of H(2)O(2), 0.6%; and pH value, 3. The RhB degradation rate was 84.06%. We also found that the degradation of RhB by both cavitation technologies conformed to the first-order kinetic reaction model. The rate constant of UC was 5.22 × 10(−3) min(−1) and that of HC was 4.35 × 10(−3) min(−1). The ultrasonic cavitation has a stronger cavitation effect than hydrodynamic cavitation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8694663 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Royal Society of Chemistry |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86946632022-04-13 Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation Ye, Yu-Fang Zhu, Ying Lu, Na Wang, Xin Su, Zhi RSC Adv Chemistry This paper presents the use of hydrodynamic cavitation and ultrasonic cavitation technologies for treating rhodamine B (RhB) in simulated wastewater. Various parameters of each technology that influence the RhB degradation rate were compared and optimized. The results showed that the optimal conditions for the hydrodynamic cavitation determined by the single-factor method were as follows: inlet pressure, 0.4 MPa; initial concentration, 10 mg L(−1); reaction temperature, 30 °C; and pH value, 3. The RhB degradation rate was 38.7%. In addition, the optimal conditions for the ultrasonic cavitation determined by the response surface methodology were as follows: initial RhB concentration, 10 mg L(−1); ultrasonic power, 850 W; ultrasonic time, 100 min; addition amount of H(2)O(2), 0.6%; and pH value, 3. The RhB degradation rate was 84.06%. We also found that the degradation of RhB by both cavitation technologies conformed to the first-order kinetic reaction model. The rate constant of UC was 5.22 × 10(−3) min(−1) and that of HC was 4.35 × 10(−3) min(−1). The ultrasonic cavitation has a stronger cavitation effect than hydrodynamic cavitation. The Royal Society of Chemistry 2021-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8694663/ /pubmed/35424464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ra07727e Text en This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Chemistry Ye, Yu-Fang Zhu, Ying Lu, Na Wang, Xin Su, Zhi Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
title | Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
title_full | Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
title_fullStr | Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
title_full_unstemmed | Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
title_short | Treatment of rhodamine B with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
title_sort | treatment of rhodamine b with cavitation technology: comparison of hydrodynamic cavitation with ultrasonic cavitation |
topic | Chemistry |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694663/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35424464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d0ra07727e |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yeyufang treatmentofrhodaminebwithcavitationtechnologycomparisonofhydrodynamiccavitationwithultrasoniccavitation AT zhuying treatmentofrhodaminebwithcavitationtechnologycomparisonofhydrodynamiccavitationwithultrasoniccavitation AT luna treatmentofrhodaminebwithcavitationtechnologycomparisonofhydrodynamiccavitationwithultrasoniccavitation AT wangxin treatmentofrhodaminebwithcavitationtechnologycomparisonofhydrodynamiccavitationwithultrasoniccavitation AT suzhi treatmentofrhodaminebwithcavitationtechnologycomparisonofhydrodynamiccavitationwithultrasoniccavitation |