Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 15 (2008) 903908

www.elsevier.com/locate/ultsonch

A parametrical study of disinfection with hydrodynamic cavitation

S. Arrojo *, Y. Benito, A. Martnez Tarifa
Centro de Investigaciones Energeticas Medioambientales y Tecnologicas, Avda Complutense 22, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Received 2 February 2007; received in revised form 26 October 2007; accepted 3 November 2007
Available online 9 November 2007

Abstract
The physical and chemical conditions generated by cavitation bubbles can be used to destroy microorganisms and disinfect wastewater. The eect of dierent cavitation chamber designs and diverse operational parameters on the inactivation rate of Escherichia coli have
been studied and used to understand the mechanisms involved in cell disruption.
 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Escherichia coli; Hydrodynamic cavitation; Ultrasonic cavitation; Disinfection; Parametrical; Venturi; Orice plates

1. Introduction
Disinfection constitutes an essential step in water treatment for public water supplies. After Pasteur and Koch
formulated the germ theory of disease, in 1881 Koch himself discovered the bactericidal properties of chlorination.
It was the beginning of the disinfection technologies.
The use of alternative technologies for disinfection
intends to overcome the weak points of the conventional
methods. Chemical biocides are usually eective and comparatively cheap, but can generate dangerous or inconvenient organic by-products (especially in chlorination). On
the other hand, physical technologies tend to be more
expensive, and UV-based techniques are inecient when
either turbidity or colorants are present due to a blocking
eect which inactivates or reduces the eciency of the
irradiation.
Cavitation acts as a biocide through chemical (generation of OH radicals [1]) and through physical mechanisms
(shock waves, pressure gradients, shear forces, etc. [2]). The
predominant mechanism depends on the cavitation process. Low frequencies tend to generate more violent collapses, producing strong shock waves and gas phase
reactions, but the low number of collapses per unit time
*

Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sarrojo@gmail.com (S. Arrojo).

1350-4177/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ultsonch.2007.11.001

reduces the speed of chemical reactions and the diusion

of OH radicals, particularly in the liquid phase [3]. On
the other hand, high frequencies generate small and less
energetic bubbles, but also promote OH radical diusion
and produce a higher number of collapses per unit time.
High intensity sonicators are ecient at both low [4] and
medium frequencies [5] but low intensity ultrasonic cavitation (UC) reactors (i.e. cavitation baths) usually work
poorly [6]. Although cavitation has been demonstrated to
be neither cheaper nor more ecient than conventional
technologies [7], there are some interesting applications
which ought to be studied.
Many authors have proposed using cavitation for disinfection as a pre-treatment rather than as a treatment itself.
Phull et al. found that the eectiveness of chlorination signicantly improves in combination with ultrasound [7].
Ozonization, often ruled out due to the comparatively high
price of ozone, also improves its performance (reducing the
required quantities of ozone) when applied in combination
with either ultrasonic [8] or hydrodynamic cavitation [9,10].
The synergic eects only take place when ultrasound is
applied either during or before chlorination [7]. The use
of UC also improves the biocidal performance of UV irradiation [11] as well as that of hypochlorite [12].
Bacteria tend to form agglomerates in which the external microorganisms act as a protective barrier against biocides. Cavitation produces a declumping eect, breaking

904

S. Arrojo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 15 (2008) 903908

the agglomerates through the shock waves and isolating the

individual bacteria. Initially, the declumped agglomerates
give rise to an apparent increase in the bacteria population
during the rst stages of cavitation. Once the bacteria clusters are broken the eciency of biocides increases [13].
1.1. Hydrodynamic cavitation for disinfection
Hydrodynamic cavitation (HC) has also been studied
for disinfection purposes. Save et al. rst observed the disruption of yeast cells using HC. According to some authors
the energy eciency of cell disruption in HC is at least one
order of magnitude above some established physical techniques such as mixerblender methods, high pressure
homogenizers and even UC [14,15]. Nevertheless, the comparative costs of chemical methods such as chlorination or
even ozonization are orders of magnitude lower [16].
In previous works by the author, OH radicals were
detected under similar experimental conditions (designs
and ow-rate) as those used in the present work [17]. These
results were obtained using radical traps of salicylic acid,
and demonstrated that HC works as a very low frequency
ultrasonic reactor, generating big bubbles, large pressure
shock waves and OH radicals. Since gas phase reactions
can be ruled out as a possible cause of disinfection, it is
expected that the inactivation of microorganisms in HC
takes place mainly through the mechanical eects of the
shock waves. However, other authors have observed liquid
phase reactions in HC [18], and therefore the eect of OH
radicals can not be entirely neglected.
Whilst in UC the mechanisms can be easily studied by
changing the applied frequency and intensity, a complete
parametrical study in HC requires changing both the operating conditions and the cavitation chamber design. In the
present work, various designs and operating conditions are
studied in order to gain some understanding of the main
disruption mechanisms which take place around the cavitating bubbles.
1.2. Physical and chemical eects of HC
The physical and chemical eects caused by HC are usually dicult to characterize. The physical eects of cavitation (i.e. cavitation intensity) depend critically on the
inertial forces during the collapse of the bubbles. Theoretical studies reveal that the inertial eects and therefore the
cavitation intensity increase dramatically with the parameter Rmax/R0 (maximum radius reached by the bubble over
initial bubble radius) [19] and with the speed of pressure
recovery [20]. Thus, promoting bubble growth and fast
pressure recovery gives rise to higher cavitation intensity.
On the other hand, in order to evaluate the chemical eects
generated by cavitation in the liquid phase the diusion of

OH radicals has to be taken into account. Diusion is
favored by smaller bubbles and faster collapses (i.e. orice
plates), so the optimum congurations for chemical and
physical eects in HC are not necessarily similar.

By studying the degradation of substances with dierent

volatility in HC [21], it was observed that the diusion of

OH radicals to the liquid phase has a strong dependence
on the time scales of the pressure pulse (i.e. the pressure
recovery rate in HC). Faster pressure recovery rates lead
to faster collapses, allowing some OH radicals to be
released in the liquid phase before recombining or reacting
with other scavengers. In fact, whilst volatile substances
degrade faster with those designs which generated big bubbles and dense cavitation clouds (e.g. Venturi congurations) the degradation of non-volatile substances is
favored by designs which also promote fast pressure recovery rates (e.g. multiorice congurations) [21]. This is consistent with the aforementioned frequency studies in UC
[3].
The physical eects of cavitation can be characterized
through the instantaneous pressure oscillations caused by
the bubble cloud implosion or analogously through the
sound generated by the phenomenon [22]. On the other
hand, as aforementioned, the OH generated in the process
can be estimated using radical traps such as salicylic acid
solutions [17].
1.3. HC versus UC for disinfection purposes
Disinfection processes using UC have shown similar
trends to those of liquid phase sonochemical reactions,
obtaining maximum degradation rates at similar frequencies (around 200 kHz) and being aected by chemical factors such as the gas content of the bubbles [5].
Nevertheless, unlike in liquid phase sonochemical reactions
there seems to be little dierence between low and high frequency experiments. This is consistent with the combined
eect of OH radicals and shock waves in disinfection, as
lower frequencies promote more violent shock waves and
higher frequencies favor the diusion of OH radicals to
the liquid phase.
The few references addressing a direct comparison
between HC and UC indicate that whilst UC-baths and
sonicators give rise to faster disinfection rates, HC shows
better energy eciency and works at larger scales [23,24].
In any case, most of the referenced papers conclude that
the best alternatives in terms of eciency and energy consumption are those based on hybrid methods, using combinations of HC or UC with chemical biocides.
2. Experimental procedure
As shown in Fig. 1, HC is generated by circulating the
liquid in a cavitation loop with the following characteristics: a 60 L tank, a 9 kW centrifugal multistage pump made
of stainless steel, PVC pipes and a cavitation chamber with
exible design. The cavitation chamber, where HC takes
place, has a rectangular cross-section and consists of two
stainless steel beams, 2 methacrylate windows and PVC
proles which act as either Venturi tubes or orice plates.
The instantaneous pressure measurements were performed

S. Arrojo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 15 (2008) 903908

Flow-meter

Tank
Pump

Fig. 1. Scheme of the cavitation loop.

using pressure transducers at a rate of 1 104 data readings

per second.
Escherichia coli (E. coli) were grown in 250 mL of a
nutritive medium (5 g/L peptone + 1 g/L glucose + 2.5 g/
L yeast) at 37 C during a period of 48 h, reaching a nal
concentration of around 1 107 CFU/mL (colony forming
unit per mL of wastewater). The bacteria were diluted in
50 L of saline solution (1 g/L of NaCl in deionized water
to prevent cytolysis) to attain the desired CFU/mL value
for each experiment. All the experiments were run with a
power input (pump) of 5 kW (power density of 0.1 W/
mL). The CFU counting was performed in agar plates after
48 h at 37 C using three dierent dilution rates (1:10, 1:100
and 1:1000), and collecting six samples per experiment (0,
5, 15, 30, 60 and 120 min).
2.1. Cavitation chamber design
The cavitation chamber design has a strong inuence on
the cavitation process. Orice plates, a relatively common
conguration in HC devices [25], are probably the simplest
way to generate HC, and basically consist of a plate with
one or more holes. The three congurations used in this
study have approximately the same overall free cross-section (2.0 10 5 m2) distributed in a dierent number of
holes: one hole with a diameter of 5 mm (1 5), six holes
with a diameter of 2 mm (6 2) and 25 holes with a diameter of 1 mm (25 1). On the other hand, the Venturi congurations are based on a smooth convergence followed by
a throat and a smooth divergence. In general terms, this
means a more energy ecient process, and larger time
scales (bigger bubbles and slower collapses) than the multiorice plates. The three congurations used in this study
have a minimum cross-section (gorge) of 4 10 5 m2 (Venturi 1), 2 10 5 m2 (Venturi 2) and 1 10 5 m2 (Venturi
#3) and a divergence angle of 10.
3. Results and discussion
The inactivation capacity of HC was studied varying
three important parameters: the cavitation chamber design,
the discharge pressure and the concentration of microorganisms. First, the six dierent designs (three orice plates
and three Venturi tubes) described above were tested. In a
second stage, the best orice plate and the best Venturi

tube were operated with dierent discharge pressures.

Finally, the best conguration was studied with three different concentrations of E. coli.
Fig. 2 shows two examples of the evolution of the E. coli
concentration during a HC process. The declumping eect
of bacteria agglomerates was observed in most experiments
through a rst stage of CFU increase which lasted around
30 min for the orice plates and 5 min for the Venturi congurations (unlike the other Venturis, Venturi #3 showed
no apparent increase).
Fig. 3 shows the rate constant of bacterial inactivation
during an experiment of 120 min assuming that the disinfection follows a pseudo-rst order reaction (i.e. considering the disruption process as a reaction between the E.
coli and the disinfectant agent in which only the former
changes its concentration with time). The behavior of Venturi tubes seems to be much better than that of the orice
plates. The rst reason for these observations is that for
a given power input the ow-rate in the Venturi tubes is
higher than that of the orice plates, causing a larger number of cavitation cycles per unit time. Nevertheless, the difference in the ow-rate of each conguration (in the order
of 30% for Venturi 1 and almost negligible for Venturi 3)
does not entirely explain the observed dierences in disinfection rates.
The ow-rate in the orice plates is similar for every case
(around 4 m3/h), so the ow speed and the minimum pressure are also similar. Nevertheless, as the number of holes
increases and their size decreases, the inertia of the generated jets also decreases. As a result, the jets decelerate more
rapidly, and the pressure recovery rate increases. Some
authors have observed a maximum chemical degradation
using smaller holes in multiorice plates [18]. Arguably,
as mentioned above, increasing the pressure recovery rate
(analogous to a frequency increase in UC) accelerates the
collapse of the bubbles promoting diusion of OH radicals
to the liquid phase. Thus, the improved results in the orice

Normalized E.Coli concentration

Cavitation chamber

905

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Time [min]
Fig. 2. Normalized E. coli concentration versus cavitation time for a
25 1 orice plate (triangles) and Venturi #3 (circles).

S. Arrojo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 15 (2008) 903908

0.016

-1

Rate of E.Coli inactivation [min ]

906

0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.000
OP1x5 OP6x2 OP25x1 Vent.1

Vent.2

Vent.3

Cavitation chamber design

Fig. 3. Rate of E. coli inactivation for dierent orice plates and Venturi
tubes (initial concentration of 104 CFU/mL and discharge pressure of
1.5 bar).

SD of instantaneous pressure [Bar]

plates with smaller holes could be explained, at least to

some extent, as a result of the improved OH radicals diusion to the liquid phase.
Apart from increasing the ow-rate for a given power
input, Venturi tubes tend to give rise to denser cavitation
clouds (more cavitation events per unit time and larger
bubbles) due to an increase in the available time for bubble
growth. Under these circumstances, bubblebubble interactions and excessive bubble size might hinder both the formation of OH radicals and their diusion to the liquid
phase [26]. In fact, the few studies made on this subject
indicate that a moderate bubble cloud density combined
with a fast pressure recovery (i.e. multiorice plates) optimize the chemical reactions outside of the bubble [21,27].
Thus, the increase in disinfection rates in Venturi tubes
does not seem to be caused by OH radical mechanisms.

Transducer 1
Transducer 2
Transducer 3

0.18

3.1. Discharge pressure

0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
OP1x5

OP6x2 OP25x1 Vent.1

Vent.2

Fig. 4 shows the mean amplitude of the instantaneous

pressure oscillation measured by three pressure transducers
located in the ow, next to the imploding bubble cloud. As
aforementioned, the instantaneous oscillation of pressure
can be used to measure the intensity of the imploding bubbles during cavitation, and so it can be considered as an
estimation of the shock waves which give rise to the
mechanical cell disruption. The transducer #1 (stripes) is
located immediately after the minimum cross-section (i.e.
the holes in the orice plates and the throat in the Venturi
tubes), the transducer #2 (grey) is located 5 cm downstream and the transducer #3 (dots) is located 10 cm downstream of the rst transducer. Although multiorice plates
show larger localized intensities immediately after the orices, the cavitation is clearly concentrated around the rst
transducer. In the Venturi tubes the mechanical eects of
cavitation are extended up to the third transducer (or even
further away), indicating a dense cavitation cloud or a large
number of cavitation events. The chemical reactions generated by cavitation increase exponentially with the cavitation intensity, and so an intense localized cavitation
would generally be more ecient than an extended lower
intensity cavitation.
The results obtained in Figs. 3 and 4 reveal some
interesting correlations between cell disruption rates
and instantaneous pressure oscillations. Venturi #3 gives
rise to the best results, consistent with the observed large
pressure shock waves in transducers 2 and 3 (i.e. cavitation intensity). On the other hand the comparison of
Venturi #1 and OP 25 1 reveals that E. coli are more
aected by an extended lower intensity cavitation than
by a more intense localized cavitation. Although this
observation seems to contradict the general theory of
sonochemical reactions, it is consistent with a process
in which the mechanical eects of the shock waves are
more important than the chemical mechanisms with

OH radicals.

Vent.3

Cavitation chamber design

Fig. 4. Mean amplitude of the instantaneous pressure oscillation at three
consecutive pressure transducers located next to the imploding bubble
cloud (5 cm separation between transducers).

Previous studies on disinfection with HC and orice

plates reveal an increasing eciency with larger discharge
pressures [23]. As shown in Fig. 5, multiorice plates
depend critically on this parameter, and there is even a
threshold value under which no disinfection takes place.
The behavior of Venturi congurations is quite dierent.
At higher discharge pressures the eect is rather the contrary. It must be pointed out that increasing the discharge
pressure promotes larger and faster pressure recoveries,
and therefore increases the violence of bubble collapse.
Nevertheless, it also causes a higher minimum pressure
hindering bubble growth and decreasing the number of
cavitation events. Moreover, for a given energy input
the ow-rate decreases and so does the number of hydrodynamic cycles per unit time. Pressure recovery in orice
plates is very inecient due to the abrupt divergence after
the holes. Therefore, it is common to compensate this sit-

0.018
0.016
0.014

907
3

Outlet pressure 1 bar

Outlet pressure 1.5 bar
Outlet pressure 2 bar

0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.000
OP 25x1

Venturi 3

Cavitation chamber design

Normalized rate of E.Coli disruption

-1

Rate of E.Coli inactivation [min ]

S. Arrojo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 15 (2008) 903908

10 CFU/mL
4
10 CFU/mL
5
10 CFU/mL

1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0

OP 25x1
Fig. 5. Rate of E. coli inactivation for the orice plate 25 1 and the
Venturi number 3, with a discharge pressure of 1 bar (diagonal stripes),
1.5 bar (grey) and 2 bar (horizontal stripes).

uation by increasing the discharge pressure. On the other

hand, pressure recovery in Venturi tubes is very ecient
and therefore the discharge pressure is just used as a
means for controlling excessive bubble growth. As previously explained, the OH radical diusion to the liquid
phase is almost negligible in Venturi tubes, but not in
multiorice plates. The results presented in Fig. 5 are consistent with this hypothesis. Higher discharge pressures
promote the disinfection through OH radicals in multiorice plates by increasing the violence of bubble collapse,
but it hinders bubble growth and mechanical eects in
Venturi congurations due to the lower number of collapsing bubbles. In other words, the OH radical disinfection is promoted by concentrating the energy (even at the
expense of the overall collapsing volume) whilst the
mechanical eects of cavitation increase with the number
of cavitation events (even at the expense of individual
bubble collapse violence).
3.2. Initial CFU concentration
Three dierent experiments were carried out varying the
concentration of E. coli. Fig. 6 shows the normalized inactivation rate constants (one is equivalent to the maximum
attained rate constant for each conguration). The rate
constant is moderately reduced in the orice plate as the
concentration of E. coli increases, whilst it stays approximately the same for the Venturi #3 conguration. These
results again are consistent with the previous hypothesis.
In orice plates a portion of disinfection is related to the

OH generation and therefore, as the concentration of E.
coli increases, the radical concentration acts as the limiting
factor of the disinfection process. On the other hand, the
behavior of the Venturi conguration remains almost unaffected, indicating that there is no limiting reactant and that
the mechanical disruption of bacteria plays a major role in
the process.

Venturi 3

Cavitation chamber design

Fig. 6. Normalized rate of E. coli inactivation for the orice plate 25 1
and the Venturi number 3, with initial bacteria concentration of 103 CFU/
mL (stripes), 104 CFU/mL (grey) and 105 CFU/mL (points).

4. Conclusions
Disinfection in cavitation is caused by both chemical
and physical cell disruption mechanisms. Whilst in UC
the chemical processes caused by OH radicals seem to play
a major role, theoretical predictions and experimental
observations have indicated that in HC, with comparatively slow pressure oscillations (low frequency), disinfection is mainly caused by mechanical disruption of
bacteria. Thus, the disinfection rates are maximized by
those congurations and operation parameters which promote large bubbles, extended pressure oscillations and a
larger number of cavitation events (i.e. those conditions
found in the Venturi tubes).
The results obtained in HC are competitive against
other physical methods but on the other hand, results are
signicantly worse than those obtained with chemical disinfectants. Nevertheless, there are some advantages, such
as avoiding the problems associated with the use and
manipulation of chemicals, and the independence of the
bacterial concentration and the eciency of the process.
Thus, although the study of disinfection processes in HC
can be interesting from a scientic point of view, the
authors consider that applied research should concentrate
on studying wastewater with very large bacterial concentrations or on the synergic eects of this technology with
chemical biocides.

Acknowledgements
This project has been funded by the Spanish government
and the CIEMAT. The authors would also like to thank
Miguel Angel Crespo Aguirre for his collaboration during
this work.

908

S. Arrojo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 15 (2008) 903908

References
[1] P. Riesz, T. Kondo, Free Radical Biol. Med. 13 (1992) 247270.
[2] C.V. Ei, J. Overbeck, G. Haupt, M. Herrmann, S. Winckler, K.D.
Richter, G. Peters, H.U. Spiegel, J. Med. Microbiol. 49 (2000) 709
712.
[3] C. Petrier, A. Francony, Ultrason. Sonochem. 4 (1997) 295300.
[4] T.J. Mason, E. Joyce, S.S. Phull, J.P. Lorimer, Ultrason. Sonochem.
10 (2003) 319323.
[5] I. Hua, J.E. Thompson, Water Res. 24 (2000) 38883893.
[6] L. Jatzwauk, H. Schone, H. Pietsch, J. Hosp. Infect. 48 (2001) 580
583.
[7] S.S. Phull, A.P. Newman, J.P. Lorimer, B. Pollet, T.J. Mason,
Ultrason. Sonochem. 4 (1997) 157164.
[8] E. Dahl, Water Res. 10 (1976) 677684.
[9] K.K. Jyoti, A.B. Pandit, Biochem. Eng. J. 18 (2004) 919.
[10] R. Chand, D.H. Bremner, K.C. Namkung, P.J. Collier, P.R. Gogate,
Biochem. Eng. J. 35 (2007).
[11] T. Blume, U. Neis, Ultrason. Sonochem. 11 (2004) 333336.
[12] H. Duckhouse, T.J. Mason, S.S. Phull, J.P. Lorimer, Ultrason.
Sonochem. 11 (2004).

[13] E. Joyce, S.S. Phull, J.P. Lorimer, T.J. Mason, Ultrason. Sonochem.
10 (2003) 315318.
[14] S.S. Save, A.B. Pandit, J.B. Joshi, Food Bioprod. Process. 75 (1996)
4149.
[15] B. Balasundaram, A.B. Pandit, Biochem. Eng. J. 8 (2001) 251256.
[16] K.K. Jyoti, A.B. Pandit, Biochem. Eng. J. 7 (2001) 201212.
[17] S. Arrojo, C. Nern, Y. Benito, Ultrason. Sonochem. 14 (2006) 343
349.
[18] P.R. Gogate, I.Z. Shirgaonkar, M. Sivakumar, P. Senthilkumar, N.P.
Vichare, A. Pandit, AIChE J. 47 (2001) 25262538.
[19] T.E. Leighton, The Acoustic Bubble, Academic Press, San Diego,
1997.
[20] S. Arrojo, Y. Benito, Ultrason. Sonochem. 15 (2008) 203211.
[21] S. Arrojo, Y. Benito, in: Cav 2006, Wagenigen, Holland, 2006..
[22] S.D. Sharma, K. Mani, V.H. Arakeri, J. Sound Vib. 138 (1990) 255
283.
[23] K.K. Jyoti, A.B. Pandit, Ultrason. Sonochem. 10 (2003) 255264.
[24] K.K. Jyoti, A.B. Pandit, Biochem. Eng. J. 14 (2003) 917.
[25] P.R. Gogate, A.B. Pandit, AIChE J. 46 (2000) 16411649.
[26] A. Henglein, Ultrason. Sonochem. 2 (1994) 115120.
[27] P.R. Gogate, A.B. Pandit, Ultrason. Sonochem. 12 (2005) 2127.