| Literature DB >> 22909072 |
Yadollah Abdollahi1, Azmi Zakaria, Abdul Halim Abdullah, Hamid Reza Fard Masoumi, Hossein Jahangirian, Kamyar Shameli, Majid Rezayi, Santo Banerjee, Tahereh Abdollahi.
Abstract
The optimization processes of photo degradation are complicated and expensive when it is performed with traditional methods such as one variable at a time. In this research, the condition of ortho-cresol (o-cresol) photo degradation was optimized by using a semi empirical method. First of all, the experiments were designed with four effective factors including irradiation time, pH, photo catalyst's amount, o-cresol concentration and photo degradation % as response by response surface methodology (RSM). The RSM used central composite design (CCD) method consists of 30 runs to obtain the actual responses. The actual responses were fitted with the second order algebraic polynomial equation to select a model (suggested model). The suggested model was validated by a few numbers of excellent statistical evidences in analysis of variance (ANOVA). The used evidences include high F-value (143.12), very low P-value (<0.0001), non-significant lack of fit, the determination coefficient (R2 = 0.99) and the adequate precision (47.067). To visualize the optimum, the validated model simulated the condition of variables and response (photo degradation %) be using a few number of three dimensional plots (3D). To confirm the model, the optimums were performed in laboratory. The results of performed experiments were quite close to the predicted values. In conclusion, the study indicated that the model is successful to simulate the optimum condition of o-cresol photo degradation under visible-light irradiation by manganese doped ZnO nanoparticles.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22909072 PMCID: PMC3489672 DOI: 10.1186/1752-153X-6-88
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
Experimental-Design of -cresol photo degradation
| 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | |
| 3 | 2 | -1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | |
| 28 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 11 | 4 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | |
| 18 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 29 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 19 | 7 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 6 | 8 | 1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | |
| 21 | 9 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | |
| 13 | 10 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 24 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
| 4 | 12 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | |
| 25 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 23 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | |
| 14 | 15 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 5 | 16 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | |
| 8 | 17 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | |
| 22 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| 9 | 19 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | |
| 2 | 20 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | |
| 20 | 21 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 15 | 22 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 17 | 23 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 7 | 24 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | |
| 27 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 | 26 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | |
| 26 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 30 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 10 | 29 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | |
| 16 | 30 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Independent variables and their levels employed in the central composite design
| X1 | Irradiation time | minute | 120 | 360 |
| pH | - | 6.6 | 9.8 | |
| X3 | Photo catalyst amount | g/L | 0.5 | 2.5 |
| X4 | Concentration of | mg/L | 15 | 55 |
Analysis of the variance for photo catalytic degradation of-cresol parameters
| Model | 12227.40 | 14 | 873.39 | 143.12 | < 0.0001 |
| X1 | 3658.07 | 1 | 3658.07 | 599.43 | < 0.0001 |
| 184.26 | 1 | 184.26 | 30.19 | < 0.0001 | |
| X3 | 497.77 | 1 | 497.77 | 81.57 | < 0.0001 |
| X4 | 5701.08 | 1 | 5701.08 | 934.20 | < 0.0001 |
| X12 | 14.25 | 1 | 14.25 | 2.34 | 0.1473 |
| X22 | 10.40 | 1 | 10.40 | 1.70 | 0.2114 |
| X32 | 0.53 | 1 | 0.53 | 0.09 | 0.7732 |
| X42 | 271.43 | 1 | 271.43 | 44.48 | < 0.0001 |
| X1 | 43.89 | 1 | 43.89 | 7.19 | 0.0171 |
| X1 X3 | 0.076 | 1 | 0.076 | 0.01 | 0.9128 |
| X1 X4 | 9.98 | 1 | 9.98 | 1.63 | 0.2205 |
| 491.79 | 1 | 491.79 | 80.59 | < 0.0001 | |
| 1040.58 | 1 | 1040.58 | 170.51 | < 0.0001 | |
| X3 X4 | 182.31 | 1 | 182.31 | 29.87 | < 0.0001 |
| Residual | 91.54 | 15 | 6.10 | | - |
| Lack of Fit | 70.91 | 10 | 7.09 | 1.72 | - |
| Pure Error | 20.63 | 5 | 4.13 | - | - |
| Corrected Total | 12318.93 | 29 | - | - | - |
| R-Squared | 0.9926 | Standard Deviation | 2.47 | ||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.9856 | Coefficient of variation % | 4.90 | ||
| Adequate Precision | 47.067 | PRESS | 438.15 | ||
Figure 1(a) Scatter plot of predicted photo degradation % value versus actual photo degradation % value (b) residual plot of model and (c) histogram of residuals with normal overlay.
Figure 2Response surface 3D plots indicating the effect of interaction between process variables on photo degradation of -cresol (a) Interaction between irradiation time and pH while holding the photo catalyst amount at 1.5 g/L and -cresol concentration at 35 mg/L (b) Interaction between photo catalyst amount and -cresol concentration while holding pH at 8.2 at end of 240 minutes of reaction time (c) Interaction between photo catalyst amount and pH while holding -cresol concentration at 35 mg/L at end of 240 minutes of reaction time (d) Interaction between-cresol concentration and pH while holding photo catalyst at1.5 g/L at end of 240 minutes of reaction time.