4.7 Article

Species removal from aqueous radioactive waste by deep-bed filtration

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
Volume 241, Issue -, Pages 303-310

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.065

Keywords

Aqueous radioactive waste; Deep-bed filtration; Modeling; Sorption; Wastewater treatment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Performances of aqueous suspension treatment by deep-bed sand filtration were experimentally studied and simulated. A semiempirical deterministic model and a stochastic model were used to predict the removal of clay particles (20 gm) from diluted suspensions. Model parameters, which were fitted based on experimental data, were linked by multiple linear correlations to the process factors, i.e., sand grain size (0.5 and 0.8 mm), bed depth (0.2 and 0.4 m), clay concentration in the feed suspension (1 and 2 kg(p)/m(3)), suspension superficial velocity (0.015 and 0.020 m/s), and operating temperature (25 and 45 degrees C). These relationships were used to predict the bed radioactivity determined by the deposition of radioactive suspended particles (>50 nm) from low and medium level aqueous radioactive waste. A deterministic model based on mass balance, kinetic, and interface equilibrium equations was developed to predict the multicomponent sorption of Co-60,Cs-137, Am-241, and H-3 radionuclides (0.1-0.3 nm). A removal of 98.7% of radioactive particles was attained by filtering a radioactive wastewater volume of 10 m(3) (0.5 mm sand grain size, 0.3 m bed depth, 0.223 kg(p)/m(3) suspended solid concentration in the feed suspension, 0.003 mis suspension superficial velocity, and 25 degrees C operating temperature). Predicted results revealed that the bed radioactivity determined by the sorption of radionuclides (0.01 kBq/kg(b)) was significantly lower than the bed radioactivities caused by the deposition of radioactive particles (0.5-1.8 kBq/kg(b)). (C) 2018 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available