TY - JOUR
T1 - Corrigendum to “A comparative optimization and performance analysis of four different electrocoagulation-flotation processes for humic acid removal from aqueous solutions” (Process Safety and Environmental Protection (2019) 121 (103–117), (S0957582018306013), (10.1016/j.psep.2018.10.025))
AU - Hasani, Gona
AU - Maleki, Afshin
AU - Daraei, Hiua
AU - Ghanbari, Reza
AU - Safari, Mahdi
AU - McKay, Gordon
AU - Yetilmezsoy, Kaan
AU - Ilhan, Fatih
AU - Marzban, Nader
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers
PY - 2020/4
Y1 - 2020/4
N2 - The authors regret In Section 3.1 on page 106, it was stated that: “The model obtained from this method is presented in Eq. (5) shows that initial concentration, pH0, pulse time, and process time have a positive effect on the process, and EC0 negatively affects the HA removal.” This sentence should be replaced by: “The model obtained from this method is presented in Eq. (6). It shows that initial concentration, pH0, pulse time, and process time have a positive effect on the process, and EC0 negatively affects the HA removal.” In Section 3.2 on pages 107 and 108, it was stated that: “According to Fig. 3a and b, the optimal values for response optimization were determined as 50 mg/L for initial concentration, 7 for initial pH, 10 min for pulse time, 500 μS/cm for electrical conductivity, and 70 min for operation time.” This sentence should be replaced by: “According to Fig. 3a and b, the optimal values for response optimization were determined as 50 mg/L for initial concentration, 7 for initial pH, 10 min for pulse time, 500 μS/cm for electrical conductivity, and 50 min for operation time.” In Section 3.3.1 on page 108, it was stated that: “According to Fig. 1, the removal of HA occurred mostly in the first 10 min.” This sentence should be replaced by: “According to Fig. 2, the removal of HA occurred mostly in the first 10 min.” In Section 2.3 on page 105, it was stated that: “Two L-shaped aluminium electrodes were embedded in the reactor in unipolar mode with an effective surface area of 100 cm2 at 1 cm distance from each other, and 20 pores with a diameter of 4 mm were created on the surface of each electrode.” This sentence should be replaced by: “Two L-shaped aluminium electrodes were embedded in the reactor in monopolar or unipolar mode with an effective surface area of 100 cm2 at 1 cm distance from each other, and 20 pores with a diameter of 4 mm were created on the surface of each electrode.” In Section 3.3.2 on page 109, it was stated that: “At the beginning of the process, the removal efficiency of HA versus time is increased with a steep slope, so that the highest HA removal rate in experiments shown in Fig. 1 occurs at 10 min; subsequently, the removal efficiency increases with a slight slope.” This sentence should be replaced by: “At the beginning of the process, the removal efficiency of HA versus time is increased with a steep slope, so that the highest HA removal rate in experiments shown in Fig. 2 occurs at 10 min; subsequently, the removal efficiency increases with a slight slope.” In Section 3.3.3 on page 109, it was stated: “Moreover, the increase in the removal of HA by increasing the initial pH (pH0) (from 3 to 7), process time (t) (from 10 to 70 min), and pulse time (Tpls), and pulse time (Tpls) (from 1 to 10 min), although the increase is not as significant as that in the case of initial concentration (C0).” This sentence should be replaced by: “Moreover, the increase in the removal of HA by increasing the initial pH (pH0) (from 3 to 7), process time (t) (from 10 to 70 min), and pulse time (Tpls) (from 1 to 10 min), although the increase is not as significant as that in the case of initial concentration (C0).” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
AB - The authors regret In Section 3.1 on page 106, it was stated that: “The model obtained from this method is presented in Eq. (5) shows that initial concentration, pH0, pulse time, and process time have a positive effect on the process, and EC0 negatively affects the HA removal.” This sentence should be replaced by: “The model obtained from this method is presented in Eq. (6). It shows that initial concentration, pH0, pulse time, and process time have a positive effect on the process, and EC0 negatively affects the HA removal.” In Section 3.2 on pages 107 and 108, it was stated that: “According to Fig. 3a and b, the optimal values for response optimization were determined as 50 mg/L for initial concentration, 7 for initial pH, 10 min for pulse time, 500 μS/cm for electrical conductivity, and 70 min for operation time.” This sentence should be replaced by: “According to Fig. 3a and b, the optimal values for response optimization were determined as 50 mg/L for initial concentration, 7 for initial pH, 10 min for pulse time, 500 μS/cm for electrical conductivity, and 50 min for operation time.” In Section 3.3.1 on page 108, it was stated that: “According to Fig. 1, the removal of HA occurred mostly in the first 10 min.” This sentence should be replaced by: “According to Fig. 2, the removal of HA occurred mostly in the first 10 min.” In Section 2.3 on page 105, it was stated that: “Two L-shaped aluminium electrodes were embedded in the reactor in unipolar mode with an effective surface area of 100 cm2 at 1 cm distance from each other, and 20 pores with a diameter of 4 mm were created on the surface of each electrode.” This sentence should be replaced by: “Two L-shaped aluminium electrodes were embedded in the reactor in monopolar or unipolar mode with an effective surface area of 100 cm2 at 1 cm distance from each other, and 20 pores with a diameter of 4 mm were created on the surface of each electrode.” In Section 3.3.2 on page 109, it was stated that: “At the beginning of the process, the removal efficiency of HA versus time is increased with a steep slope, so that the highest HA removal rate in experiments shown in Fig. 1 occurs at 10 min; subsequently, the removal efficiency increases with a slight slope.” This sentence should be replaced by: “At the beginning of the process, the removal efficiency of HA versus time is increased with a steep slope, so that the highest HA removal rate in experiments shown in Fig. 2 occurs at 10 min; subsequently, the removal efficiency increases with a slight slope.” In Section 3.3.3 on page 109, it was stated: “Moreover, the increase in the removal of HA by increasing the initial pH (pH0) (from 3 to 7), process time (t) (from 10 to 70 min), and pulse time (Tpls), and pulse time (Tpls) (from 1 to 10 min), although the increase is not as significant as that in the case of initial concentration (C0).” This sentence should be replaced by: “Moreover, the increase in the removal of HA by increasing the initial pH (pH0) (from 3 to 7), process time (t) (from 10 to 70 min), and pulse time (Tpls) (from 1 to 10 min), although the increase is not as significant as that in the case of initial concentration (C0).” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078316087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.psep.2020.01.020
DO - 10.1016/j.psep.2020.01.020
M3 - Comment/debate
AN - SCOPUS:85078316087
SN - 0957-5820
VL - 136
SP - 76
EP - 77
JO - Process Safety and Environmental Protection
JF - Process Safety and Environmental Protection
ER -