Simulation of hexavalent chromium removal by

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

• chromium removal using electrocoagulation by iron electrode to treat Cr(VI) in range of 10–50
• solubility in pH range of 6–12 and is considered an essential nutrient in low concentrations
• 0.1mg/L (5). Chemical and physical treatment methods for Cr (VI) include adsorption (6–8),
• be assumed 100 % efficient at initial stages of the remediation process (27,29). However,
• power consumption (30,31,25). Therefore, operational parameters are essential means in
• the ability to assess the cell’s performance under a wide range of operating conditions (32).
• the concentration of Cr(VI) ranges between 0.2 and 2 μg/L (49). The secondary removal
• model considers 100 % current efficiency (CE) for iron anode dissolution and assumes water
• setup, the reader is directed to the experimental study (44). Table 1 shows the simulated
• to the experimental study (20). The initial condition consists of 25 mg/L Cr(VI) equivalent
• as a function of pH, solution ionic strength, and temperature presented in Table 2 (51–
• efficiency of 85 % for solution containing 20 mM sulphate operated at 6.45 mA/cm2. Fig.
• final electrolyte pH. The current efficiency is assumed 100 %, which is consistent with
• experimental studies in sulphate containing electrolytes where it is reported 80–110 % for
• lower iron dissolution efficiencies in systems containing carbonate or nitrate (0–20 %)
• setup. Additionally, presence of chloride in the system has resulted in 66 % iron electrode
• empirical studies for Cr(VI)–Fe(II) systems, presented in Table 2, under 0.6mA/cm2 with
• 100 % iron anode dissolution efficiency. The empirical kinetic rate model developed by
• 0.062mA/cm2 current densities for 20mg/L initial concentration of Cr(VI) in the anolyte
• removal efficiency of Cr(VI) using electrocoagulation technique (20). Assuming 100 %
• condition consists of 25mg/L Cr(VI) equivalent to 0.24 mM K2Cr2O7 with initial pH of
• the range of 10–50 mg/L. The operational parameters are considered 3.2 mA and Q =
• as 1750 mg/L with applied current density of 0.3mA/cm2 and flowrate of 6.5 mL/min,
• Normalized dissolved chromium concentration with 100 % iron dissolution current
• = 10mg/L, Q = 50mL/min, I = 3.2mA (b) Cr(VI)0 = 50mg/L, Q = 10mL/min, I = 3.2mA.

Methods (brief)

• (59). Heidmann I, Calmano W, 2008. Removal of Cr(VI) from model wastewaters

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

• Fish — marine, non-predatory (sardines, anchovies, salmon, cod)
• Aluminum
• Chromium

Verification notes

• Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
• Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
• Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
• Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
• HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.