| Literature DB >> 23844384 |
Nurdan Gamze Turan1, Emine Beril Gümüşel, Okan Ozgonenel.
Abstract
An intensive study has been made to see the performance of the different liner materials with bentonite on the removal efficiency of Cu(II) and Zn(II) from industrial leachate. An artificial neural network (ANN) was used to display the significant levels of the analyzed liner materials on the removal efficiency. The statistical analysis proves that the effect of natural zeolite was significant by a cubic spline model with a 99.93% removal efficiency. Optimization of liner materials was achieved by minimizing bentonite mixtures, which were costly, and maximizing Cu(II) and Zn(II) removal efficiency. The removal efficiencies were calculated as 45.07% and 48.19% for Cu(II) and Zn(II), respectively, when only bentonite was used as liner material. However, 60% of natural zeolite with 40% of bentonite combination was found to be the best for Cu(II) removal (95%), and 80% of vermiculite and pumice with 20% of bentonite combination was found to be the best for Zn(II) removal (61.24% and 65.09%). Similarly, 60% of natural zeolite with 40% of bentonite combination was found to be the best for Zn(II) removal (89.19%), and 80% of vermiculite and pumice with 20% of bentonite combination was found to be the best for Zn(II) removal (82.76% and 74.89%).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23844384 PMCID: PMC3691900 DOI: 10.1155/2013/240158
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Chemical compositions of the liner materials.
| Components | B | NZ | EV | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Na2O | 1.80 | 0.40 | 0.05 | 3.65 |
| MgO | 4.00 | 1.40 | 17.75 | 0.03 |
| Al2O3 | 17.00 | 11.80 | 18.45 | 12.27 |
| SiO2 | 61.00 | 71.00 | 41.29 | 73.44 |
| CaO | 2.50 | 3.40 | 0.25 | 0.96 |
| TiO2 | — | 0.10 | 1.21 | 0.10 |
| K2O | 0.50 | 2.40 | 7.21 | 4.37 |
| Fe2O3 | 3.00 | 1.70 | 6.51 | 1.2 |
| MnO | — | — | 0.04 | 0.06 |
| SO3 | — | 0.12 | — | 0.08 |
| LOI | 3.51 | 6.87 | 5.02 | 3.72 |
| CEC (meq/100) | 31.8 | 166.3 | 52.9 | 34.6 |
B: bentonite, NZ: natural zeolite, EV: expanded vermiculite, P: pumice.
Figure 1Proposed ANN structure for modeling adsorption system.
The whole experimental system.
| Liner materials % | Cu(II) removal (%) | Zn(II) removal (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Bentonite | 45.07 | 48.19 |
| 25% natural zeolite + 75% bentonite | 63.27 | 60.47 |
| 50% natural zeolite + 50% bentonite | 89.20 | 80.90 |
| 75% natural zeolite + 25% bentonite | 98.34 | 95.29 |
| 25% vermiculite + 75% bentonite | 47.97 | 50.31 |
| 50% vermiculite + 50% bentonite | 52.73 | 68.98 |
| 75% vermiculite + 25% bentonite | 77.41 | 81.49 |
| 25% pumice + 75% bentonite | 52.38 | 50.00 |
| 50% pumice + 50% bentonite | 57.50 | 67.50 |
| 75% pumice + 25% bentonite | 78.62 | 74.24 |
Training parameters for all ANNs.
| Max. iteration | 20000 |
|---|---|
| Learn rate start control iteration | 1.000 |
| Learn rate | 0.075 |
| Min. learn rate | 0.001 |
| Max. learn rate | 0.075 |
| Momentum | 0.800 |
| Tolerance | 0.000 |
| RMS error | 0.000 |
Figure 2Prediction of Cu(II) removal with different liner materials.
Figure 3Prediction of Zn(II) removal with different liner materials.
Basic statistics for interpolated ANN outputs.
| Descriptive statistics | Cu(II)natural zeolite | Cu(II)vermiculite | Cu(II)pumice | Zn(II)natural zeolite | Zn(II)vermiculite | Zn(II)pumice |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | 58.83 | 47.37 | 51.63 | 57.06 | 46.57 | 46.57 |
| Maximum | 99.93 | 82.05 | 82.77 | 98.15 | 83.89 | 75.52 |
| Mean | 82.74 | 60.60 | 63.86 | 78.69 | 66.68 | 63.38 |
| Median | 89.20 | 52.73 | 57.50 | 80.90 | 68.98 | 67.50 |
| Mod | 58.83 | 47.37 | 51.63 | 57.06 | 46.97 | 46.97 |
| Standard value | 16.62 | 14.35 | 12.74 | 16.38 | 14.64 | 11.46 |
| Range | 41.10 | 34.68 | 31.13 | 41.09 | 36.93 | 28.55 |