4.8 Article

Dependence of floc properties on coagulant type, dosing mode and nature of particles

Journal

WATER RESEARCH
Volume 68, Issue -, Pages 119-126

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.09.045

Keywords

Coagulation; Al(III); PACl; Hydroxide precipitate; Turbidity fluctuations

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51108444]
  2. European Commission

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Kaolin suspensions were coagulated with AlCl3 and a high-basicity PACl at pH 7, at dosages that gave zeta potentials close to zero. The actions of the two coagulants were completely different. With AlCl3, the formation of an amorphous hydroxide precipitate played a dominant role. When the coagulant was added to the suspension, flocs grew rapidly and incorporated most of the kaolin particles within the hydroxide precipitate. When the suspension was added some time after the coagulant, the clay particles were found to be mainly on the outer floc surfaces, although the floc size was about the same. The light scattering properties of the flocs were very dependent on the number and location of particles in the precipitate. With PACl, delaying the addition of kaolin had no influence on the final floc properties. In further tests, different suspensions over a range of concentrations were coagulated with alum at pH 7. Monitoring by a 'turbidity fluctuation' technique showed an apparent increase in floc size with increasing particle concentration. However, floc sizes determined from microscope images were very nearly constant, independent of particle nature and concentration. With different particle types, the monitoring results were greatly dependent on the light scattering properties of the particles. Particles incorporated within hydroxide flocs appeared to have no influence on floc properties, such as size and strength. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available