4.7 Article

Characterization of re-grown floc size and structure: effect of mixing conditions during floc growth, breakage and re-growth process

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 23, 期 23, 页码 23750-23757

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-7628-7

关键词

Coagulation; Breakage; Re-growth; Floc properties; Mixing speed

资金

  1. National Science and Technology Major Project of Twelfth Five Years [2014ZX07201-012-2, 2013ZX07201007-002]
  2. National Innovation Team - National Natural Science Foundation of China [50821002]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (Harbin Institute of Technology) [2012DX07]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The impact of mixing speed in three stages-before breakage, during breakage, and after breakage-on re-grown floc properties was investigated by using a non-intrusive optical sampling and digital image analysis technique, respectively. And then, on the basis of different influence extent of mixing speed during each stage on size and structure of re-grown flocs, coagulation performance with varying mixing speed was analyzed. The results indicated that the broken flocs could not re-grow to the size before breakage in all cases. Furthermore, increasing mixing intensity contributed to the re-formation of smaller flocs with higher degree of compactness. For slow mixing before breakage, an increase in mixing speed had less influence on re-grown floc properties due to the same breakage strength during breakage, resulting in inconspicuous variation of coagulation efficiency. For rapid mixing during breakage, larger mixing speed markedly decreased the coagulation efficiency. This could be attributed that mixing speed during breakage generated greater influence on re-grown floc size. However, as slow mixing after breakage was elevated, the coagulation efficiency presented significant rise, indicating that slow mixing after breakage had more influence on re-grown floc structure upon re-structuring and re-arrangement mechanism.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据