2014
DOI: 10.1007/s12205-014-0642-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Removal of chromium (III) from wastewater by electrocoagulation method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4 b y 4c, shows that the best efficiencies were obtained at , where a maximum chromium removal value of was achieved with a current intensity of amperes and a time of minutes. This result is consistent with the values reported by Shahriari, who obtained the highest chromium removal efficiency at an optimum of , who reported that the hydroxide produced formed a gelatinous sediment of iron hydroxide and then a cosediment of iron and chromium was formed [ 30 ]. Chromium at acidic pH, lower than , remains in its ionic form, as OH- radicals increase, they form complexes with chromium, reaching higher pH, this causes the precipitation of chromium hydroxide (Covarrubias, C. et al ,2005; Basaldella, E, 2007).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…4 b y 4c, shows that the best efficiencies were obtained at , where a maximum chromium removal value of was achieved with a current intensity of amperes and a time of minutes. This result is consistent with the values reported by Shahriari, who obtained the highest chromium removal efficiency at an optimum of , who reported that the hydroxide produced formed a gelatinous sediment of iron hydroxide and then a cosediment of iron and chromium was formed [ 30 ]. Chromium at acidic pH, lower than , remains in its ionic form, as OH- radicals increase, they form complexes with chromium, reaching higher pH, this causes the precipitation of chromium hydroxide (Covarrubias, C. et al ,2005; Basaldella, E, 2007).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The maximum permissible limits for Ni(II), Cu(II), and COD in water are 0.2 mg/L, 2 mg/L, and 200 mg/L, respectively (Sponza & Karaoǧlu, 2002). Several methods including coagulation (Shahriari, Bidhendi, Mehrdadi, & Torabian, 2014), advance oxidation processes (Marinho, Cristóvão, Boaventura, & Vilar, 2019), flotation (Deliyanni, Kyzas, & Matis, 2017), ion exchange (Siu, Koong, Saleem, Barford, & McKay, 2016), precipitation (Rabii, Bidhendi, & Mehrdadi, 2012), solvent extraction (Kul & Oskay, 2015), membrane filtration (Yurekli, 2016;Zhu, Sun, Gao, Fu, & Chung, 2014), adsorption (Abbas et al, 2016;Inyang et al, 2016;Jain, Garg, Kadirvelu, & Sillanpää, 2016;Sarma, Gupta, & Bhattacharyya, 2019;Sizirici et al, 2018), and biological processes (Gunatilake, 2015) have been used for the removal of toxic materials from wastewaters. Among them, the adsorption process as an effective economical method has been reported for the removal of heavy metal ions and COD from aqueous solutions (Inyang et al, 2016;Jain et al, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the famous methods of heavy metals removal from wastewaters is electrocoagulation [7][8][9][10]. Due to this method it can be possible to remove the metal ions such as Cu 2+ , Cr 6+ , Cr 3+ , Ni 2+ and Zn 2+ .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%