| Literature DB >> 35492645 |
N Jegan Durai1, G V T Gopalakrishna2, V C Padmanaban3, N Selvaraju4.
Abstract
In this study, the stabilized landfill leachate which has a BOD : COD ratio of 0.045 was treated using Fenton's process. The effect of process parameters like reaction time, pH, dose of FeSO4 and dose of H2O2 was estimated using One Factor At a Time (OFAT) and the linear, interactive and quadratic effects between the factors were studied using Face Centered Central Composite Design (CCF). In the OFAT approach, reaction time: 5 minutes, pH: 3.0, dose of FeSO4: 30 mM, and dose of H2O2: 30 mM were optimized. In CCF, the statistically optimized model shows maximum removal of organic substances at an FeSO4 concentration of 14.44 mM, pH 3.0 and 29.12 mM of H2O2. The regression co-efficient R 2 = 0.9079, adj R 2 = 0.854 and adequate precision = 14.676. The degradation of organic substances was assessed by measuring the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD). Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy (GC-MS) were investigated for the sample corresponding to the maximum COD reduction. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35492645 PMCID: PMC9048778 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra09415f
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 3.361
Characteristics of leachate
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| pH | 8.8 |
| Alkalinity | 2000 mg L−1 |
| Total solids | 19 000 mg L−1 |
| Total volatile solids | 8500 mg L−1 |
| Total fixed solids | 10 500 mg L−1 |
| Total suspended solids | 1600 mg L−1 |
| Turbidity | 400 NTU |
| Colour | Dark brown |
| TOC | 826 mg L−1 |
| COD | 2990 mg L−1 |
| BOD(5,20) | 135 mg L−1 |
| BOD(5,20)/COD | 0.045 |
Fig. 1Residual COD after Fenton process: effect of reaction time (pH: 3; H2O2 dosage: 20 mM; Fe2+ dosage: 20 mM).
Fig. 2Residual COD after Fenton process: influence of pH (H2O2 dosage: 20 mM; Fe2+ dosage: 20 mM).
Fig. 3Residual COD after Fenton process: influence of H2O2 dosage (pH: 3, Fe2+ dosage: 20 mM).
Fig. 4Residual COD after Fenton process: influence of Fe2+ dosage (pH = 3, H2O2 dosage = 30 mM).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the degradation of landfill leachate by oxidative Fenton's processa
| Source | Sum of squares | Df | Mean square |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 2.88 | 7 | 0.41 | 16.90 | <0.0001 |
|
| 1.22 | 1 | 1.22 | 50.03 | <0.0001 |
|
| 0.48 | 1 | 0.48 | 19.88 | 0.0008 |
|
| 0.13 | 1 | 0.13 | 5.28 | 0.0403 |
|
| 0.37 | 1 | 0.37 | 15.29 | 0.0021 |
|
| 0.19 | 1 | 0.19 | 7.91 | 0.0157 |
|
| 0.47 | 1 | 0.47 | 19.18 | 0.0009 |
|
| 0.091 | 1 | 0.091 | 3.75 | 0.0765 |
| Residual | 0.29 | 12 | 0.024 | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.29 | 7 | 0.042 | 387.12 | <0.0001 |
| Pure error | 0.00054 | 5 | 0.000107 | ||
| Cor total | 3.17 | 19 |
R 2: 0.9079; adj R2: 0.8542; adeq precision: 14.676; CV%: 5.63.
Significance of the model – parameter terms of RSM–CCF
| Parameters | Terms & values | Significance with respect to process |
|---|---|---|
| Positive effects | Linear effect of | Increase in the value of |
| Interactive effect of | ||
| Quadratic effect of | ||
| Negative effects | Linear effect of | Increase in the value of |
| Linear effect of | ||
| Interactive effect of | ||
| Quadratic effect of | ||
|
| <0.0001 | Model is significant to explain the process |
|
| 16.90 | |
| Regression coefficient |
| The closeness of adjusted |
| Adjusted | ||
| Coefficient of variation | 5.63% | The variability of data in sample with respect to the mean of the population is 5.63% and 94.37% of the model prediction is similar and replicable |
| Adequate precision | 14.674 | The predicted response by the mathematical equation is developed by the actual appropriate signals |
Fig. 5BOX–COX Plots (a) before transformation (b) after log10 transformation.
Fig. 6Degradation of the landfill leachate by oxidative Fenton's process; plot of the experimental vs. predicted values and its relative residual plots.
Fig. 7The contour plot and the 3D response surface plot of the degradation of landfill leachate by oxidative Fenton's process as the function of pH and dose of H2O2. Dose of FeSO4 = 10 mM.
Fig. 8The contour plot and the 3D response surface plot of the degradation of landfill leachate by oxidative Fenton's process as the function of pH and dose of FeSO4. Dose of H2O2 = 10 mM.
Solutions for the degradation of landfill leachate by oxidative Fenton's process – optimised through RSM CCD
| Number | pH | Dose of H2O2 | Dose of FeSO4 | log10 (residual COD) transformed scale | Residual COD (mg L−1) original scale |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.00 | 30.00 | 10.00 | 1.838 | 68.86 |
| 2 | 3.00 | 30.00 | 10.21 | 1.835 | 68.39 |
| 3 | 3.00 | 30.00 | 10.77 | 1.827 | 67.14 |
| 4 | 3.00 | 29.77 | 12.52 | 1.812 | 64.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparison of predicted response from RSM at original and transformed scale with experimental response
| Response | log10 (COD) transformed scale | COD (mg L−1) original scale |
|---|---|---|
| Predicted | 1.812 | 64.86 |
| Experimental confirmation | 1.810 | 64.56 |
Reduction in organic, inorganic and total carbon: before and after treatment
| Parameter | Before treatment | After treatment | Removal efficiency% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total organic carbon (TOC) (mg L−1) | 826 | 212.7 | 74.24% |
| Inorganic carbon (IC) (mg L−1) | 1059 | 0.3349 | 99.96% |
| Total carbon (TC) (mg L−1) | 1885 | 213 | 88.7% |
Fig. 9(a) GC-MS spectra of landfill leachate: before treatment. (b) GC-MS spectra of landfill leachate: after treatment.
Trace organic compound in landfill leachatea
| Organic compound | Peak Area% | |
|---|---|---|
| Before | After | |
| 3-Carene | 1.619 | 0.596 |
| Cyclohexene, 1-methyl-5-(1-methylethenyl)- | 0.523 | ND |
| 4-Methylcatechol | 0.435 | ND |
| Benzene, 1,3-bis(1-methylethyl)- | 0.59 | ND |
| Benzene, 1,4-bis(1-methylethyl) | 0.835 | 0.385 |
| Tridecane | 0.434 | ND |
| Benzene, 1,3-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl) | 0.584 | 0.312 |
|
| 0.658 | 0.348 |
| Tetradecane | 1.143 | 0.532 |
| Butylated hydroxytoluene | 1.872 | 0.833 |
| 2,4-Di- | 2.08 | 1.439 |
| Benzoic acid, 4-ethoxy-, ethyl ester | 0.555 | ND |
| Hexadecane | 0.718 | 0.547 |
| Dodecaethylene glycol monomethyl ether, TBDMS derivative | 0.703 | ND |
| Butanedial, bis[(3-hydroxy-4-methoxyphenyl)methylene]- | 0.471 | ND |
| 8,14- | 0.515 | ND |
| 4-Acetyloxyimino-6,6-dimethyl-3-methylsulfanyl-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-benzo[ | 0.6 | ND |
| 14-Methyl-14-(3-oxobutyryloxy)-hexadec-15-enoic acid, methyl ester | 0.454 | ND |
| Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | ND | 0.497 |
| Heptaethylene glycol | 11.566 | 0.561 |
| Hexaethylene glycol, TBDMS derivative | 1.499 | 5.440 |
| Chromone, 5-hydroxy-6,7,8-trimethoxy-2,3-dimethyl- | 1.293 | ND |
| 4-[4-(2-Methoxyphenyl)-1 | 0.41 | ND |
| Prost-13-en-1-oicacid,9-(methoxyimino)-11,15-bis[(trimethylsilyl)oxy]-,trimethylsilyl ester, | 0.754 | ND |
| Cyclononasiloxane, octadecamethyl- | 3.876 | ND |
| 3,6,9,12-Tetraoxatetradecan-1-ol, 14-[4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenoxy]- | 0.733 | ND |
| 2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(2-Hydroxyethoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]eth oxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol | 1.417 | ND |
| 3,9-Epoxypregnane-11,14,18-triol-20-one, 16- cyano-3-methoxy-, 11-acetate | 1.218 | ND |
|
| 0.853 | ND |
| Glycine, | 0.66 | ND |
| 1-Monooleoylglycerol, 2TMS derivative | 0.649 | ND |
| (2 | 1.1 | ND |
| 4-( | 2.164 | ND |
| Corynan-17-ol,18,19-didehydro-10-methoxy- | 0.597 | ND |
| Glafenin | 0.423 | ND |
ND – not deducted.
| Factor | Unit | Low actual | High actual | Mean | Std Dev. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| — | 3.00 | 11.00 | 7 | 2.828 |
|
| mM | 5.00 | 30.00 | 17.5 | 8.839 |
|
| mM | 10.00 | 50.00 | 30.0 | 14.142 |
| Response | Unit | Model | Transformation | Mean | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| mg L−1 | Quadratic | Base 10 log | 812.04 | 36.2670 |