The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Decoloration system using rotating membrane uf module
Abstract
A wastewater reclamation system using a rotating membrane UF module has been studied by adding a powdered activated carbon to a biological treatment process to remove the organic colored matter. In this system, a powdered activated carbon dosage of 50 mg/l, and retention time of 4.5 hours have been required to stably obtain a treated water with a color of less than 5 degrees. It was found that the activated sludge dewaterability could be improved by adding the powdered activated carbon and the rotating membrane UF module could operate at a set flux of 1.0 m3/m2·d for about one and half years.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“A treatment scheme comprising activated carbon amended anaerobic reactor preceding aerobic MBR realizes stable decoloration along with high TOC removal, with concurrent improvement in activated sludge dewaterability and reduction in filtration resistance.157”
From Hybrid Treatment Systems for Dye Wastewater (2007) · cites this paper as [157]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hybrid Treatment Systems for Dye Wastewater
Hai, F. I., Yamamoto, K., & Fukushi, K. (2007) · Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/10643380601174723 · Cited by 557
Metadata
- Venue
- Water Science and Technology
- Publisher
- IWA Publishing
- Published
- 1998
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 6
- ISSN
- 0273-1223
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
