Cited by 16Coagulation and Flocculation StudiesWater and Wastewater TreatmentWastewater Treatment and Reuse

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Technological Conditions for the Coagulation of Wastewater from Cosmetic Industry

Open access

Abstract

Coagulation is often used for the pre-treatment of industry wastewater, with effectiveness strictly dependent on technological conditions.This study aimed at determining what technological parameters of coagulation of cosmetic industry wastewater provide the highest efficiency of clarification.The dosages of reagents, the order of dosing, as well as the one-and two-stage processes were investigated.The samples of raw wastewater were collected from average daily effluent from a cosmetics manufacturing plant.Liquid coagulant PIX 111 (FeCl 3 ) and NaOH as a pH-adjusting agent were used.Jar-test experiments were carried out to determine the optimum conditions for turbidity and total organic carbon (TOC) removal.The efficiency of clarification was high (90-99%) across a wide range of pH values (6-9) and coagulant doses (0.5-1.25 mL/L).What is important is that the coagulant dose of 0.56 mL/L provided 97.6% clarification efficiency without the addition of the alkali.The minimal stoichiometric excess of alkalinity for effective coagulation was 0.5 mmol/L.In all samples, the removal efficiency for TOC was lower than for turbidity, because some of the organic carbon forms were non-coagulating dissolved compounds.The wastewater from tonic and fluid production was very susceptible to coagulation.The addition of the coagulant before the alkali resulted in better wastewater treatment efficiency than the reverse order.Single-stage process with optimal doses of the reagents allowed to clarify wastewater to a level of 10 NTU.On the other hand, the two-stage process brought the turbidity down to 1 NTU level.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.12911/22998993/105333

Cites

16 of 17 references verified1 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kroczak T., Pyrz K., Świderska-Bróż M. 2005. Comparative study of single-stage and two-stage coagulation. Ochrona Środowiska, 27 (4), 49-52. (in Polish)
  2. Porras M., Talens-Alesson F.I. 1999. Removal of 2,4-D from water by adsorptive micellar floccula- tion. Environmental Science and Technology, 33 (18), 3206-3209.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Michel, M., Tytkowska, M., Reczek, L., Trach, Y., & Siwiec, T.
Affiliations
  • Warsaw University of Life Sciences (PL)
  • National University of Water and Environmental Engineering (UA)
Corresponding author
Michel, Magdalena
Venue
Journal of Ecological Engineering
Published
2019-04-01
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
78-85
ISSN
  • 2081-139X (ISSN-L)
  • 2299-8993
OpenAlex
W2928673433
Cited by
16
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Ecological Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Coagulation and Flocculation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water and Wastewater Treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
Keywords
coagulation, iron chloride coagulant, turbidity removal, total organic carbon removal, coagulant dosage, wastewater clarification

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