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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ye, Yu-Fang, Zhu, Ying, Lu, Na, Wang, Xin, Su, Zhi
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