The Effect of Process Parameters On Electrocoagulation For Paint Effluent Treatment, by Oliyad Lencho

AASTU 2016
ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
THE EFFECT OF PROCESS PARAMETERS ON

ELECTROCOAGULATION FOR PAINT EFFLUENT TREATMENT
BY
OLIYAD LENCHO DESURE
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE
ADVISOR – DR. NURELEGNE TEFERA [PH.D]

CO- ADVISOR – MR. ABEBE WORKU
JUNE, 2016
ADDIS ABABA
i
AASTU 2016
ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
THE EFFECT OF PROCESS PARAMETERS ON

ELECTROCOAGULATION FOR PAINT EFFLUENT TREATMENT
BY
OLIYAD LENCHO DESURE
IUNE, 2016
ADDIS ABABA
i
AASTU 2016
APPROVAL STATEMENT
Submitted by
Oliyad Lencho _______________

Name of Student Signature Date
Approved by the Examining Board
Dr. Nurelegne Tefera (PH.D) _______________

(Advisor) Signature Date
Mr. Abebe Worku _______________

(Co-Advisor) Signature Date
_______________
(Chairman, DGC) Signature Date
_______________
(Internal Examiner) Signature Date
_______________
(External Examiner) Signature Date
i
AASTU 2016
DEDICATION
To my Beloved Mother Fantanesh Abera
ii
AASTU 2016
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Nurelegne Tefera and co-advisor Mr. Abebe Worku for
their supervision, continuous support and encouragement during the conduct of my study.
Without their support this paper would haven’t been possible.
I also extend my thanks and acknowledge the Ethiopian Road Authority (ERA) for their full
sponsor for my education.
I express my deepest sense of gratitude to Mrs. Etsegenet Tassew and Mr. Abraham Birhane
Finally, I would like to thank all my family and friends who provided me with physical and
mental support all through.
Oliyad Lencho Desure
iii
AASTU 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL STATEMENT ........................................................................................................ i
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... viii
ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER ONE ......................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Problem statement ........................................................................................................ 3
1.2. Objectives of the study ................................................................................................. 4
1.2.1. General objectives ................................................................................................. 4
1.2.2. Specific objectives ................................................................................................ 4
1.3. Scope of the study ........................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 5
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 5
2. Wastewater .......................................................................................................................... 5
2.1. Wastewater treatment technologies for paint industry ..................................................... 5
2.2. Electrocoagulation (EC) ................................................................................................... 8
2.2.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 8
2.2.2. Principles of electrocoagulation process ............................................................... 8
2.2.3. Previous studies conducted on electrocoagulation ............................................. 10
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................. 16
MATERIALS AND METHODS .............................................................................................. 16

3.1. Materials ..................................................................................................................... 16
iv
AASTU 2016
3.2. Methods ...................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.1. Sampling and collection of wastewater ...................................................................... 16
3.2.2. Experimental setup ..................................................................................................... 17
3.2.3. Experimental procedure ............................................................................................. 18
3.2.4. Analytical methods ..................................................................................................... 20
CHAPTTER FOUR .................................................................................................................. 23
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 23

4.1. Calibration and determination of maximum absorption wavelength for TiO2............... 23
4.2. Result.............................................................................................................................. 24
4.2.1. Raw wastewater characterization ............................................................................ 25
4.2.2. Treated wastewater characterization ....................................................................... 25
4.2.3. Comparison of treated wastewater with FEPA allowable limit .............................. 31
4.2.4. Determination of best operating parameters ....................................................... 32
4.2.4.1. Determination of best process time and percentage removal. ..................... 32
4.2.4.2. Determination of best operating parameters based on electrode and power

consumption ................................................................................................................... 34
4.2.5. Statistical Approach ................................................................................................. 39
4.3. Discussion .................................................................................................................. 42
4.2.1. Effect of varying process time on percentage removal of TiO2 .............................. 42
4.2.2. Effect of varying number of electrodes on percentage removal of TiO2................. 45
4.2.3. Effect of varying power supply on percentage removal of TiO2 ............................. 47
4.2.4. Effect of process time and number of electrodes on power and anode consumption49
CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................................... 52
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 52

5.1. Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 52
v
AASTU 2016
5.2. Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 54
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 55
ANNEX A - Proportions, Dilution and Temperature Correction tables ................................... 59
ANNEX B - Design exert output values ................................................................................... 62
ANNEX C - Design expert plots for the interactions of Normal probability, residuals, Run
values and Factors ..................................................................................................................... 63
ANNEX D – selected project photos ........................................................................................ 67
DECLARATION ...................................................................................................................... 68
vi
AASTU 2016
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1- A schematic diagram of experimental set-up .......................................................... 18
Figure 2 - Power supply vs concentration for electrocoagulation cell with 6, 12 1nd 18
electrodes ................................................................................................................................ 28
Figure 3 - Treatment time vs concentration at a power supply of 5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5V......... 29
Figure 4 - Comparison of concentration, anode consumed & power consumed for 6
electrodes & 5V ...................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 5– Comparison of concentration, anode consumed & power consumed for 12
electrodes & 5V. ..................................................................................................................... 37
electrodes & 7.5V ................................................................................................................... 38
electrodes & 10V .................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 8 – Comparison of concentration, anode consumed & power consumed for 18
electrodes & 5V ...................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 9 - Standard curve for Concentration vs. Absorbance ................................................. 40
Figure 10 - Design expert output for Ramps that show optimal points of the process ........... 41
Figure 11 - Effect of varying process time on percentage removal of white color pigment
(A = 20, B = 40, C = 60 min) .................................................................................................. 44
Figure 12 - Effect of varying number of electrodes on percentage removal of white color
pigment (A = 6, B = 12, C= 18 plats) ..................................................................................... 46
Figure 13 - Effect of varying power supply on percentage removal of white color pigment
(A = 12.5, B = 10, C = 7.5, D = 5 V) ...................................................................................... 49
Figure 14 -Normal probability plot of the residuals to check for normality of residuals. ...... 63
Figure 15 – Scatter plot for residuals versus predicted values to check for constant error. ... 63
Figure 16 - Scatter plot for residuals versus run to check for constant error. ......................... 64
Figure 17 - Scatter plot for residuals versus Factor to check for constant error. .................... 65
Figure 18 - Plot for Outlier T versus run order to look for outliers, i.e., influential values. .. 66
vii
AASTU 2016
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - UV/VIS spectrophotometer absorbance measurement for determination of
maximum wavelength at different dilutions of 0.2 g/L solutions of TiO2 ............................. 23
Table 2 - Comparison of raw wastewater with FEPA industrial effluent standard ................ 25
Table 3 - Absorbance and concentration of untreated sample after addition of 90mL distilled
water ........................................................................................................................................ 26
Table 4 – Concentration of samples taken at different conditions.......................................... 27
Table 5 - ANOVA for Response Surface Model .................................................................... 30
Table 6 - Summary of parameters analysed for selected five best conditions ........................ 31
Table 7 – Summery on percentage removal of BOD .............................................................. 32
Table 8 – Summery on percentage removal of COD .............................................................. 33
Table 9 – Summery on percentage removal of TSS ............................................................... 33
Table 10 – Summery on percentage removal of white color pigment TiO2 ........................... 34
Table 11- Amounts of anode and energy consumed during treatment using E6 .................... 35
Table 12- Amounts of anode and energy consumed during treatment using E12 .................. 36
Table 13- Amounts of anode and energy consumed during treatment using E18 .................. 36
Table 14 - values of absorbance and concentration at optimal points .................................... 42
Table 15 - Value of [0.0191 x (t-25)+1] for Temperature Correction of E – con Measurement
................................................................................................................................................. 59
Table 16– FEPA of Ethiopia effluents discharged limit to inland waters .............................. 60
Table 17– Summary of percentage removal during the whole operation ............................... 61
Table 18 - Design Summary ................................................................................................... 62
viii
AASTU 2016
ABBREVIATIONS
AAEPA – Addis Ababa Environmental protection Authority

APHA – American Public Health Association
BAF - Biological Aerated Filter
DAF - Dissolved Air Floatation
DC – Direct current
E-Con – Electrical conductivity
EIC - Ethiopian investment commission
FEPA – Federal Environmental Protection Authority of Ethiopian
HRT - hydraulic retention time
IARC - International Agency for Research on Cancer
ISO – International Organization for Standardization
KBS – Kenyan Bureau of Standards
NE – Number of Electrodes
PS – Power Supply
PT – Process Time
S/V – Surface to Volume Ratio
SD – Standard Deviation
UNIDO - The United Nations Industrial Development Organization
ix
AASTU 2016
ABSTRACT
The wastewater from paint industries contains a combination of different concentration of

pigments, resins, extenders, dispersant, antifoaming agents, polyvinyl alcohol emulsion, and
preservatives; and hence it requires appropriate treatment technique before discharge. One
such technique is electrocoagulation. This thesis presents a study which was conducted by
preparing three electrocoagulation cells with 6, 12 and 18 Aluminum electrodes and working
volumes of about 1800 mL each. The results obtained showed that between 20 and 60 min of
process time 78.9 to 99.5 % removal of TiO2 and increase in anode and power consumptions
from 1.54 to 4.32 g/m3 and from 3.07 to 21.61 Wh/m3 respectively as the power supply
increased from 5 to 12.5 V. The result obtained from response surface model it was observed
that process time, power supply and their combined effect was significant on percentage
removal of TiO2, on the other hand the effect of variation in number of electrodes was not
significant. Based on the combined effect of percentage removal, treatment time, anode and
power consumptions, higher percentage removals of 99.44 % is achieved at a lower power
and anode consumption of 3.25 Wh/m3 and 1.63 g/m3 respectively for an electrocoagulation
cell with 12 electrodes, power supply of 5 V and 60 min of process time. Beside the removal
of the white color pigment, the values of COD and TSS removal obtained after treatment
using this method resulted in significant reductions greater than 88 and 94 % respectively;
however, these values are beyond the permissible limit of FEPA and hence it requires further
study to bring these values to the permissible limit.
x
AASTU 2016
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Urbanization and motivated developmental activities boost the construction of housing and
buildings in Addis Ababa (EIC, 2015) and hence necessitate a larger production of paints.
Bright paint factory is one of decorative coatings manufacturer in Ethiopia. They produce
different ranges of paint products that are used for interior and exterior coatings. At the end
of production and filling, for every batch it is required that the tanks and filling lines to be
washed before the next batch of product is produced.
Water is used as the cleaning solvent for the tanks and filling lines because it is the primary
solvent for the water based emulsion paint. Paints generally consist of organic and inorganic
pigments and dyestuffs, extenders, cellulosic and non-cellulosic thickeners, latexes,
emulsifying agents, anti-foaming agents, preservatives, solvents and coalescing agents
(Ibrahim E. Mousa, 2012). And hence, wastewater from paint industries contains large
proportion of them and is generated primarily due to cleaning operations of mixers, reactors,
blenders, packing machines and floors (Bahadir K et al., 2008; Mohsen A et al.; 2010,
Aboulhassan et al., 2014).
Paint classification can be made on many different bases; one convenient method is to
classify paints based on their primary solvent for waste reduction and disposal. Using this
approach, paints can be classified as water based, organic solvent based or powder (dry) and
without solvent (Bahadir K et al., 2008; Mohsen A et al., 2010). Water based emulsion paints
are one of the groupings which consists of different types of products. These paints are
produced through a batch process in a tank or vessel and pumped through the filling lines to
storage containers and distributors (Fasemore, 2004).
Since varying degree of chemicals and solvents are used, the wastewater contains appreciable
concentrations of chemical oxygen demand (COD), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
suspended solids (SS), toxic compounds and colour (Dey et al., 2004; D. Šmídová et al.,
2005; Mohsen A et al., 2010; Aboulhassan et al., 2014). Wastewater is not only one of the
main causes of irreversible damages to the environmental balances but also contributing to
1
AASTU 2016
the depletion of fresh water reserves at this planet, posing threats to the next generation if it is
not managed properly.
Sound water resource management and improved wastewater treatment technologies limit the
extent of environmental pollution. In order to maintain the ecological balance, scientists are
making efforts either to decrease the release of pollutants at the source or undertake measures
for removal of pollutants after discharge (Baral, 2007).
Broader ranges of technological options are available for wastewater treatment today
(Emamjomeh, 2006). However, this study focused on assessment of the effect of process
parameters such as process time, power supply and number of electrodes on
electrocoagulation (EC) process for treatment of paint factory effluents. Electrocoagulation is
a system where multiple electrochemical reactions occurring simultaneously at the anodes
and cathodes resulting to the generation of coagulant metal ions in situ by dissolving
sacrificial anodes (Chen, 2004; Hirzallah, 2011; Vepsalainen, 2012).
Electrocoagulation is a process that does not require the addition of any chemical coagulants;
the coagulation-flocculation process is very similar to chemical coagulation, except that the
coagulant is generated in-situ through the dissolution of sacrificial anodes that are connected
to an electric current (Hirzallah, 2011). Charged ionic species are removed from wastewater
by allowing ions to react with oppositely charged ions, or with flocs of metallic hydroxides
generated within the effluent (Mollah et al., 2001).
EC offers an alternative to the use of chemicals like metal salts or polymers and
polyelectrolyte for breaking stable emulsions and suspensions. In addition, since the
technology is applicable for treatment of wastewater from various industrial and
anthropogenic sources and removes metals, colloidal solids/particles, and soluble inorganic
pollutants from aqueous media,Electrocoagulationprocess become a promising wastewater
treatment technology.
(http www.iwawaterwi i.or wi i bin view rti les le tro oa ulation hursda
eptember 7:55:04 PM)
2
AASTU 2016
1.1. Problem statement
Every day, two million tons of sewage and other effluents drain into the world’s waters. In
developing countries, 70 % of industrial waste is dumped untreated, polluting the usable
water supply (ISO, 2012). Paint factories take their own share for the pollution. Titanium
dioxide (TiO2), a white paint pigment (Pigment White 6) is a major component for all
emulsion paints of Bright paint factory and hence present in larger proportion in the
wastewater.
TiO2 have several advantages when it is applied for intended purpose in definite proportions.
It can be used; as a white paint pigment, to make sunscreen equipments, sunscreen makeup
cosmetics, tooth paste and its photocatalysis has been investigated for destruction of bacteria
and removal of contaminants from water (Chai YS, 2000). Beside these advantages, larger
concentrations of TiO2 in wastewater also have a negative impact on the aquatic biota. This is
because TiO2 is known by its larger value of refractive index, which determines how much
light is bent, or refracted. And hence, larger concentrations of TiO2 in wastewater obscure the
passage of light. Scattering of light by TiO2 is maximized in particles that are 0.2– .3 μm in
diameter, and most commercial products that are used as pigments have modal primary
particle sizes within this range (IARC Working Group, 2010).
So, TiO2 based paint pigments pose treat to the aquatic photosynthetic plant which indirectly
impart a negative impact on other microorganisms, since the amount of DO decreases with
the decrease of photosynthetic plants in the aquatic environment. According to the report by
(IARC Working Group 2010) there is sufficient evidence in experimental animals for the
carcinogenicity of titanium dioxide. However, there is inadequate evidence on
carcinogenicity of TiO2 in humans, but in large concentration it is possibly carcinogenic to
humans (Group 2B).
On the other hand, wastewater from paint industries are causing higher rate of water
pollution mainly due to higher dosage of COD, BOD and SS, which results to depletion of
DO in receiving water body and threatening the aquatic biota, likewise, color and toxic heavy
metals degrade the quality of the receiving environment (Mohsen A et al., 2010,
Shivayogimath et al., 2013).
3
AASTU 2016
Currently, many wastewater treatment methods and processes are employed all over the
world, each having its advantages and disadvantages. This study aims to explore the use of
electrocoagulation and study process parameters with aluminum electrodes (i.e. power
supply, number of electrodes and process time) for removal of white paint color pigment
TiO2 which is a base material for almost all other color paints, BOD, COD and TSS.
1.2.Objectives of the study
1.2.1. General objectives
The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of process parameters of on the removal of
color as TiO2, BOD, COD and TSS from paint industry wastewater.
1.2.2. Specific objectives
a. To characterize raw and treated waste water samples.
b. To investigate the effects of process parameters such as, power supply, number of
electrodes and process time.
c. To study the removal efficiency and evaluate the suitability of electrocoagulation process
for removal of color as TiO2, BOD, COD and TSS from paint industry wastewater.
1.3.Scope of the study
The scope of this study comprises developing electrocoagulation cells having an effective
volume of about 1800 mL, collecting and characterizing samples of real paint industry
wastewater, conducting a series of lab – scale batch process experiments using the developed
electrocoagulation cell with a supply of 5, 7.5, 10.0 and 12.5V DC power. Characterization
of the treated samples that are taken at 20, 40 and 60 min and study the effects of process
parameters (power supply, process time and number of electrodes) mainly on removal of
white color pigment TiO2 and Chemical oxygen demand (COD), Biological oxygen demand
(BOD) and Total suspended solids (TSS) at selected best color removal values, finally,
determining the best operating conditions for the treatment process.
4
AASTU 2016
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2. Wastewater
Wastewater is used up water that is generated and released from residential, industrial, and
institutional activities. To safe guard the environment, the wastewater generated from any
activities should be collected and treated before being discharged (Hirzallah, 2011). Water-
based paints are typically composed of water, pigments, resins, extenders, ammonia,
dispersant, antifoaming agents, polyvinyl alcohol emulsion, and preservatives. So,
wastewater from paint industries contains part of these substances that resulted from cleaning
of equipments and rinse water for accidental spills (Gregory A. Lorton, 1988; Fasemore et al.
2004). This section of the paper presents a review of studies conducted on technologies for
treatment of wastewater from paint industries, their advantages and disadvantages,
technological developments of electrocoagulation and researches conducted on the
applications of electrocoagulation process and gap identified from literature survey.
2.1. Wastewater treatment technologies for paint industry
Different methods were employed to treat wastewater from paint industries these include
biological, physicochemical, advanced oxidation, electrochemical and/or combination of
these methods.
A study on biological aerated filter (BAF) was conducted by (Ibrahim E. Mousa, 2012) to
evaluate an existing treatment technology for wastewater treatment unit from a paint factory
which was set up under ground in Alexandria chemical and paints company (VELVET).
Assessments of chemical and biological loads of treated effluent were made to evaluate the
performance of the wastewater treatment plant. The main system was composed of two
filtration units with two sedimentation tanks equipped with aeration units and two
submersible pumps at the end of primary sedimentation and in between the two filters for
aerobic treatment and sediments removal. The researchers found a decrease in the outlet pH
down to pH 7.88 ± 0.14 from 8.73 ± 0.67. The COD, BOD5 and TSS, total viable count, total
5
AASTU 2016
coliform and fecal coliform removal were 96.09, 93.26, 97.61, 99.82, 84.37 and 99.66%,
respectively that were within the limits. As can be seen from the percentage removal BAF
method was effective for the treatment of paint industry wastewater furthermore, the method
completely removed color without addition of any chemical. Although high removal
efficiencies were achieved by the proposed method; the investigations conducted by (Ibrahim
E. Mousa, 2012) did not show the performance of BAF fully. The requirement for pumps for
aeration and sludge removal, cleaning, regeneration and replacement of filter medium
requires higher operational costs, in addition the larger retention time 6 hours requirement
only for primary sedimentation requires to install a larger or multiple treatment plants in
order to handle the average quantity of 70 m3/day wastewater generated. These drawbacks of
the method force to look for other technology.
Experimental program which include physical/chemical treatment followed by filtration

process through palm hems as filtration media with aeration for 1 hr and Dissolved Air
Floatation (DAF) unit was developed by (Mohsen A et al., 2010) for treatment of highly
polluted industrial wastewater of paint industry using prototype model for continuous
operation.
For their experiment two prototype models were designed and manufactured. The first one
was for palm hemps filter while the second was for continuous operation which includes
chemical mixing compartment, flocculation zone, and lamella clarification zone, Dissolved
Air Floatation (DAF) with all necessary pump, air compressor and skimmer, followed by
palm hemp filter model. Their results showed that, the best sequence of treatment processes
for wastewater of paint industry consists of physicochemical treatment using sodium
hydroxide and alum as coagulant agents followed by lamella clarification process, aeration
process for 1 to 2 hrs and finally palm hemps filtration process. The result shows that the
percentage of the total COD, TSS and BOD5 percentages of removals after applying the
proposed treatment process was 94.9%, 96.5% and 85% respectively.
Even if, this integrated wastewater treatment process which was conducted by (Mohsen A et
al. 2010) showed a promising removal efficiencies for COD, TSS and BOD5 it seems that the
method is not economical from the points of view with regard to the parameters that are
6
AASTU 2016
aimed to be removed and the treatment methods employed. Meaning the best sequence for
this integrated treatment system requires chemicals for the physicochemical treatment like
sodium hydroxide and alum as coagulant agents, lamella clarification process, aeration pump
and palm hemps filtration process. The chemicals added for coagulation increase the volume
of sludge that would be formed and hence necessitate sludge removal mechanisms and
increase the chemical load in the receiving disposal site. In addition, most frequent cleaning
or replacement of filter medium to overcome the decrease in removal efficiency is the other
factor.
Another study which was conducted to investigate the effect of ferric chloride (FeCl3.6H2O)
concentration on the flocculation achieved, a jar tests were conducted by (Fasemore et al.,
2004) in order to determine the optimum coagulant dosage for the wastewater. Six beakers
are used in an experiment, each containing 400 ml of wastewater. 20, 40, 60, 80, 100 or 120
ml of flocculent solution is added to the beaker. They found that, the pH and metal ion
content of the water recovered are within the effluent limits, however the turbidity is not and
the sludge produced in the experiment contains the bulk of the flocculent. Therefore,
additional treatment mechanisms shall be employed in order to bring the turbidity of the
treated wastewater to the desired effluent discharge limit, on the other hand, since the sludge
produced contain larger concentrations of Ferric chloride which is toxic in higher
concentrations due to Fe3+ demanding a careful study of the sludge is essential before the
sludge can be recycled.
In comparison, experiments which were conducted by (Aboulhassan et al., 2014) under

controlled laboratory conditions using a standard jar test apparatus by using integrated
treatment method which combines coagulation, flocculation and biological treatment. To
achieve best result, Iron chloride and anionic polyelectrolyte Chemic5161 followed by
biological treatment of aerobic feed batch operation were used and results of their
experiments shows that, 97% of colour, 96% of COD and 92.5% of BOD removal
efficiencies. These removal efficiencies seems to be promising for treatment of paint industry
effluents, but most frequent adjustments for coagulant and flocculent dosage and
requirements of pump for aeration are the short comings of the process.
7
AASTU 2016
But, using electrocoagulation comparable or higher removal efficiencies will be obtained

with a simple and easy operational process, no pump requirement for aeration, mixing and
membrane filtration, since no chemical is used lesser amount of sludge would be produced
and the chemical load in the receiving sludge disposal sites would be minimal.
2.2. Electrocoagulation (EC)
2.2.1. Introduction
The first electrocoagulation plant was built in London in 1889 for the treatment of sewage
(Vepsalainen 2012). Electrocoagulation with aluminum and iron electrodes was patented in
the US in 1909. The electrocoagulation of drinking water was first applied on a large scale in
the US in 1946 (Chen, 2004). In the electrocoagulation system there are multiple
electrochemical reactions occurring simultaneously at the electrodes which result to a
complex and interdependent process where the generation of coagulants takes place (Chen,
2004; Hirzallah, 2011; Vepsalainen, 2012). Electrocoagulation is a process that does not
require the addition of any chemical coagulants; the coagulation - flocculation process is very
similar to chemical coagulation, except that the coagulant is generated in-situ through the
dissolution of sacrificial anodes that are connected to an electric current (Hirzallah, 2011).
Elimination of contaminants by the electrocoagulation process takes place through several

steps: first, electro-oxidation of the anode and release of metallic cations in solution takes
place, then electro-migration and electrophoresis, which are the movements of charged ions
and colloids, respectively, in the direction of electrodes of opposite charge resulting in
destabilization of charges in solution, next to this collisions and interactions between moving
particles causing coagulation, which results to adsorption of the solids, colloids and other
contaminants on the coagulated particles, forming bigger aggregates, finally, separation of
aggregates by settling (Hirzallah, 2011).
2.2.2. Principles of electrocoagulation process
In the conventional chemical coagulation, coagulants that are water-soluble inorganic salts
containing hydrolysable metal cations usually aluminum sulfate or ferric chloride are added.
8
AASTU 2016
In the electrocoagulation process these cations are generated in situ through the electrolytic
dissolution of sacrificial anodes, usually iron or aluminum plates are used (Juan et al., 2014).
In the electrocoagulation system there are multiple electrochemical reactions occurring

simultaneously at the anodes and cathodes. The most important reactions mechanisms for
aluminum electrode are summarized below.
At the anode
Dissolution Aluminum metal plate at the anode
Al (s) Al 3+ (aq) + 3e- [1]

Al3+ (aq) + 3H2O Al(OH)3 + 3H+ [2]
If the oxygen evolution potential is reached then:
2H2O O2 (g) + 4H+ (aq) + 4e- [3]
At the cathode
Hydrogen and hydroxide formation ion at the cathode
2H2O + 2e- H2 (g) + 2OH- (aq) [4]

2H+ + 2e- H2 (g) [5]
Reduction of Aluminum ion on the cathode
Al 3+ (aq) + 3e- Al (s) [6]
For pH between 4 and 7 approximately the electro-generated metallic cations undertake

chemical reactions of hydrolysis. Then, aluminum hydroxides flocs are precipitated with a
white color, these complexes reach their lower solubility with a pH between 6.0 and 6.5
(Juan et al., 2014). The electrocoagulation process eliminates contaminants through several
steps, which include;
 Electro-oxidation of the anode and release of metallic cations in solution due to the
passage of DC,
9
AASTU 2016
 Electro-migration and electrophoresis, which are the movements of charged ions and
colloids, respectively, in the direction of electrodes of opposite charge resulting in
destabilization of charges in solution,
 Collisions and interactions between moving particles causing compression of the double
layer, hence coagulation,
 Due to cathodic reaction small bubbles of hydrogen are produced and in some cases,
oxygen bubbles are produced by water electrolysis. It is possible that these bubbles are
adhered to the coagulated particles due to superficial phenomena and, through natural
buoyancy, rise to the surface along with the foam by floatation.
 Adsorption of the solids, colloids and other contaminants on the coagulated particles,
2.2.3. Previous studies conducted on electrocoagulation
An investigation was made by (Kumar et al., 2013) on removal of dye (reactive scarlet) by
electrocoagulation using tubular iron electrodes from a simulate textile wastewater at the
department of Chemical Engineering, Wollo University, Ethiopia. Experiments were
conducted using iron cylindrical reactor with a height of 40 cm and diameter of 3.5 cm as
cathode and three pairs of iron roads with outer diameter of 1.25cm and height of 3.4cm as
anode and placed in the center of the reactor to examine the effects of the operating
parameters, such as pH, current density and flow rate on dye and COD removal and energy
consumptions in the electrocoagulation process.
They found that, the COD of the wastewater was reduced from 620.4 to 21.5 mg/L with the
removal efficiency of 96.5 % at the current density of 30 mA/cm2, supporting electrolyte
concentration of 0.1 M Na2SO4, and flow rate of 200 mL/min. High dye removal efficiencies
were obtained at all experiments. The initial dye concentration of 200 mg/L was reduced to
1.08 mg/L with the removal efficiency of 99.4 % at 30mA/cm2 after 90 min EC.
A study was conducted by (Tabash, 2013) on the removal of nitrate from solution by
electrocoagulation process at The Islamic University of Gaza using mild steel as an electrode.
During the study a continuous flow electrocoagulation reactor was designed to investigate the
effect of different parameters like initial nitrate concentration, hydraulic retention time,
10
AASTU 2016
distance between electrodes, applied voltage and effective area of anode on the removal of
nitrate from aqueous solution.
The researcher found that, the best operating conditions for nitrate removal for the original
groundwater sample from the northern of Gaza water distribution system were found to be at
HRT 2, 2.5 and 2.5 hrs, applied voltage 40V, distance of 3cm between electrodes and 47.1 54
and 61.4 cm2 effective area of electrode, when initial nitrate concentration were 100, 150 and
200 mg-NO3/L, respectively and the nitrate removal efficiency was reached to 80 % at the
best conditions.
Study conducted on the electrochemical method that utilizes two steel electrodes for reducing
the colour of tea effluent from Chemomi tea factory, Kenya by (Maghanga et al., 2009).
Experiments were conducted to treat 400mL effluent using two steel plate electrodes; 137.5
mm height by 3.13 mm thickness by 50 mm width that are placed in a 500mL beaker were
used as both anode and cathode to examine the effects of potential difference, inter-electrode
distance, surface area of electrodes to effluent volume ratio, effluent pH, temperature and
effluent dilution on power consumption.
They found that, the method was effective at a potential difference of 24 volts, inter-electrode
distance of 5 mm, S/V of 18.2 m2/m3 and effluent pH of 6. At this condition effluent dilution
led to increase in power consumption while raising temperatures led to a reduction in power
consumption. Electrochemical method reduced COD, BOD and electrical conductivity by
96.6 %, 84.0 % and 31.5 % respectively but increased pH by 10.32 %. The final pH, EC,
COD and BOD values were below KBS maximum contaminant levels.
Study was made to investigate the decolourisation efficiency of the textile wastewater by
(Vinodha et al., 2012) from one of the textile industry in Tirupur, Tamil Nadu by the
electrocoagulation process for a CLB Red Reactive dye using iron electrodes. Multiple
experiments were conducted to treat 300 mL test solution with addition of 3% of sodium
sulfate using 500mL electro coagulation cell that consists two iron electrode materials. The
iron cathodes and anodes were made from plates with dimensions of 9cm × 3.2cm × 0.5cm.
The total effective electrode area was 28.16 cm2 and the spacing between electrodes was
11
AASTU 2016
3cm. The results showed that the colour removal is dependent on current density and the
process time.
An investigation on two important groups of factors for removal of polyaromatic

hydrocarbons from wastewater by electrocoagulation was conducted by (Reda, 2014). His
first study focuses on factors corresponding to the electrocoagulation process parameters like
current density, pH, electrolysis time and electrolyte concentration in relation to their effect
on the removal efficiencies of polyaromatic hydrocarbons, especially β – naphthols. In his
second study they conduct experiment on the effect of three different anode arrangements on
the per enta e removal of β – naphthols.
He designed and constructed three experimental set – ups that are mainly consisted of
rectangular plexi glass vessel and perforated aluminum electrodes. The geometrical
dimensions for the first electrolytic cell 10 x 10cm2 base and 20cm height glass vessel and
two perforated aluminum electrode plates (10x20cm) that are placed vertically and the anode
– cathode distance was kept 4cm apart. The other cell was made of the same rectangular
vessel, dimensions and the anode – cathode distance, but with different anode geometry
which consists of two smooth rods of aluminum sheets. On the other hand, the third cell was
made from cylindrical vessel of plexi glass with a diameter of 6cm and a height of 10cm. a
perforated aluminum sheet with a diameter of 5.5cm that are separated from each other by
epoxy from its back was used as a cathode and placed in a cylindrical plexi glass and the
anode was made from aluminum rod and connected together in the bottom with a thin wire of
aluminum. The anode cathode - distance was kept 2cm.
He found that, the best conditions for the removal of β – naphthols for cell 1 and 2 were
achieved at current density of 20mA/cm2, initial pH 7, and with 1 g/L of NaCl concentration
for 1.5 L of wastewater at 25oC. On the other hand, the optimum conditions for cell 3 were
achieved at current density of 106 mA/cm2, initial pH of 7 and 1g/L of NaCl concentration to
treat 0.5 L wastewater at 25oC. Finally, concluded that maximum separation efficiency was
achieved for cell 2 with perforated aluminum electrodes.
A study was conducted by (Umran Tezcan Un and Sadettin Eren Ocal, 2014) on the removal
of heavy metals like cadmium (Cd), copper (Cu) and nickel (Ni) from a simulated
12
AASTU 2016
wastewater by electrocoagulation using batch cylindrical iron reactor. They investigated the
influences of various operational parameters such as initial pH, current density and initial
heavy metal concentration on removal efficiency. In the experimental study they uniquely
designed batch electrocoagulation reactor using cylindrical iron operated as a cathode with a
height of 10cm and an internal diameter of 10.3 cm to treat 0.5 L of simulated wastewater
solution.
The experimental results indicated that after 90 minutes of electrocoagulation process the
highest Cd, Ni, Cu removal of 99.78%, 99.98%, 98.90% were achieved at the current density
of 30 mA/cm2 and pH of 7 using supporting electrolyte (0.05 M Na2SO4) respectively. They
concluded that the results of removal efficiencies were significantly affected by the applied
current density and pH and the removal of heavy metal ions by their design can be
successfully achieved.
A study on electrocoagulation using aluminum electrodes for treatment of distillery

wastewater was conducted by (Sasane et al. 2015). For their experimental work electrolyte
cell (20cm x 10cm x 15cm) which is made up of Plexiglas acrylic material having 1.5L net
capacity to treat the electrolyte, the electrode, pH meter, thermometer and the magnetic
stirrer with hot plate was utilized. The anode and cathode with surface area of 0.2cm2 were
made up from the aluminum alloy with Zinc (2-5%). The inter electrode distance between
plate electrode was kept constant for all the arrangements. Two electrodes of aluminum that
are made up of locally perched aluminum sheet of 3mm thickness and having dimension of
20cm x 7.5 cmx2 mm were used. The inter electrode distance is maintained between 15 mm-
30mm.
From their experiment, they proposed that the optimum removal of COD, turbidity, sulfate,
chlorides and total hardness at a pH range about 3.5-5 with constant potential of 30V for 40
min. The concluded that, the COD, Chlorides, Sulfates, Total hardness and Turbidity
removal efficiency were increased by maintain the optimum voltage supplied to the
electrode, HRT and the maintaining optimum charge density within the volume of electrolyte
and from the removal efficiency obtained electrocoagulation is a sustainable treatment
process for treatment of distillery wastewater.
13
AASTU 2016
Experiment was conducted by (Wei Wan, 2010) on Arsenic (As) removal from drinking
water by batch electrocoagulation using iron electrodes. He investigated the effects of pH,
initial arsenic concentration and oxidization state, and concentrations of dissolved phosphate,
silica and sulfate on the rate and extent of arsenic removal. For his experimental work iron
plates of size 10cm by 15cm with a submerged depth of 10cm and the electrodes are
separated by a distance of 0.5cm and are connected to the support by a non conducting PVC
screw.
He summarized his findings as follows, although As removal was slower at higher pH, the
final removal efficiency was independent of pH from 5 to 8. The increase in As (V) when
treating As (III) solutions indicated that at least 25% As (III) was oxidized to As (V) during
EC. The final As removal efficiencies were independent of the initial As (III) concentration
and were over 99%. The inhibitory effect of phosphate on As removal by electrocoagulation
may also be caused by the slower oxidization of Fe (II) to Fe (III) in the presence of
phosphate, which can decrease the rate at which the sorbent is formed. In this study, since
silica did not have as strong an affinity to the iron oxides as phosphate or arsenic did, it did
not significantly inhibit as removal. Sulfate did not affect the performance of the
electrocoagulation process.
A study was carried out by (Aji, 2012) to investigate the performance of batch
electrocoagulation treatment using iron electrodes with monopolar configuration for removal
of trivalent chromium (Cr3+) from a synthetic wastewater. He conducted his experiments
using a cylindrical glass cell of 500 mL on a magnetic stirrer and six plates of iron used as
electrodes in monopolar mode were installed vertically at a fixed distance of 0.3 cm and
immersed to a 4 cm depth with an effective area of 100 cm2 each, in the experiments.
He prepared a stock solution of 1 L containing 1000 mg/L of Cr+3 from basic chrome sulfate
(Merck) for his analysis. He investigated the effects of initial Cr+3 concentrations and
different current densities on the system performance. He concluded that, with a total energy
consumption of 38 Wh/m3, less than the discharge limit was obtained at the current density of
25 mA/cm2 for the initial Cr3+ concentration of 250 mg/L more than 99% removal value was
14
AASTU 2016
achieved and hence electrocoagulation treatment using iron sacrificial electrodes for removal
of Cr3+ from aqueous solution is a feasible process.
The ability of electrocoagulation process with iron and aluminum electrodes was assessed by
(Bazrafshan et al., 2012) for removal of fluoride from aqueous solutions. For their
experiments a bipolar batch reactor, with four Aluminum and Iron electrode which is
connected in parallel were used. The internal size of the cell was 10 cm × 13 cm × 12 cm
with an effective volume of 1000 cm3. The volume of the solution of each batch was 1.0 L.
The active area of each electrode was 10 × 10 cm and the distance between electrodes was
1.5 cm. During their study several working parameters, such as fluoride concentration, pH,
applied voltage and reaction time were studied. For their analysis they prepared variable
concentrations (1, 5 and 10 mg/L) of fluoride solutions by mixing proper amount of sodium
fluoride with deionized water.
Based on their result they conclude that, the increase of reaction time, in the range of 0-60
min, enhanced the treatment rate for both iron and aluminum electrodes and the maximum
efficiency of fluoride removal for various initial concentration of fluoride was obtained in
constant electrolysis voltage of 40 V and reaction time of 60 min, and hence,
electrocoagulation process with iron and aluminum electrodes is technically feasible and
reliable for removal of fluoride from aqueous environments.
The literature surveys indicated that electrocoagulation is an effective method for treatment
of wastewater from various sources. This paper is intended to assess the effect of process
parameters on pollutant removal and adopt the technology in to our context.
15
AASTU 2016
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1. Materials
The following materials were used for the experimental process and for taking of samples
 Three electrocoagulation cells with effective volume of 1800 mL
 Hot plate Magnetic stirrer
 DC power supply
 Multimeter
 100 and 1000 mL beaker
 10 mL pipette
 Stopwatch
 Three support stands
 Refrigerator
3.2. Methods
3.2.1. Sampling and collection of wastewater
For this study real paint industry wastewater samples taken from Bright paint factory were
used. The factory was established by the year 2008 G.C. and is located in Addis Ababa, at
9o ’ .79’’ N 38o 8’ 8. ’’ levation 7744 ft, Eye altitude 7978 ft in Bole sub-city
around Anbessa Garage Gerji Mebrathail. The information gathered from the factory
indicated that the current daily paint production capacity of the factory is about 5,000 – 6,500
kg/day of quartz, 3,500 – 4,200 lit/day of interior and exterior purpose paints and 1,170 –
1,400 lit/day enamel paints. For cleaning and washing of equipments the factory consumes
about 20 - 40 lit of water per batch of barrel. The factory’s treatment plant handles 3.33 m3 of
wastewater per day and uses aluminum sulfate as a chemical coagulant for the treatment of
its wastewater.
16
AASTU 2016
Composite wastewater sample about 70 lit were collected by mixing discrete samples of 5 lit
from each batch of production four times a day. Since the factory operates a batch process to
produce paint, individual samples were collected after each successive batch of production
from the factory effluent outlet discharging pipe. A plastic barrel was used for collection and
transport of the sample to Addis Ababa Science and Technology University laboratory in
which the analysis was conducted. The samples collected were preserved below 4oC to
avoid/minimize any biological degradation before analysis.
3.2.2. Experimental setup
Since there is no standard method for arranging the electrocoagulation setup various
information were gathered from literatures for setting up the experimental setup and
procedure, mainly from the study which was conducted by (Emamjomeh, 2006; Ozyonar et
al., 2011). The dimensions of the electrodes and the electrocoagulation vessel were
determined based on the volume of wastewater and amount of samples required for analysis
after treatment. A rectangular glass vessel with dimensions of 16cm × 10cm × 13cm and with
working volume of about 1800 mL were used to conduct the experiments. Aluminum plate
with dimensions of 8cm, 9cm and 2mm of width, height and thickness respectively were used
as electrodes for electrocoagulation process. The electrodes were connected to each other by
plastic pipe support and heating stove wire in a monopolar parallel connection mode. By
arranging the electrode distance between each plate of the anode and cathode to 0.8 cm, 1.6
cm and 2.4 cm three cells with 6, 12 and 18 electrodes were constructed. The gaps between
the electrodes were maintained by distributing the electrodes throughout the
electrocoagulation tank keeping the distance between each electrode and from each side
equal. The entire electrode assembly were inserted in the glass vessel and fitted on non-
conducting plastic supporting material and hanged from the top of the electrocoagulation
glass vessel. The assemblies were connected to DC power source to constitute an
electrochemical cell for constant current supply. Magnetic stirrer was used to mix and
uniformly distribute the wastewater sample throughout the electrode with a constant stirring
speed of 100 rpm.
17
AASTU 2016
+ -
2
3 3 3 3
1
1- EC Reactor
5
4 2- DC Power supply
3- Electrodes
4- Magnetic effect supplier
5- Magnetic stirrer (rod)
Figure 1- A schematic diagram of experimental set-up
3.2.3. Experimental procedure
 Initially the wastewater sample was placed in a refrigerator and allowed to stand for 24
hours to allow all settleable materials settle.
 The pH of the untreated wastewater samples was measured using a HANNA HI 207
digital pH meter and it was 6.04 (5.95 AAEPA result) which is in the desired range for
electrocoagulation process and hence no pH adjustment was required. The theoretical
pH range for coagulation with Al3+ is 5.5 – 7.8 (Moreno et al., 2007; Engelhardt, 2014)
 The conductivity of the untreated wastewater samples was measured using a digital
BANTE instrument 950 conductivity, TDS, salinity meter and it was 302 µS which is
not in the desired range and hence it was adjusted using Sodium chloride (1g/L).
18
AASTU 2016
This is because when conductivity is low, the current passing at the fixed voltage applied was
very low. This causes the solid/liquid separation, or floc settling process, to slow down
considerably, which in turn increased the retention time needed in the settling tanks (Demirci
Y, 2014). To increase the amount of current passing through the system, several screening
tests were conducted to observe the effect of adding sodium chloride salt on conductivity.
 The electrode assemblies were placed in each cell and connected to the respective
anode and cathode leads to the DC voltage supply.
 Measured quantities of 1,800, 1,700 and 1,600 mL wastewater samples at a pH of 6.04
were taken and introduced in to the electrocoagulation cells with 6, 12 and 18
electrodes respectively for each run.
 The cells were energized for a required power supply of 5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5 V and the
treated wastewater samples were collected at different time intervals of 20, 40 and 60
minutes for the analysis of desired parameters.
 All the runs were performed at room temperature and stirring speed of 100 rpm.
 After each experiment, the power was switched off and the electrodes were dismantled.
 The concentration of the color bearing pigment of the samples (TiO2) was determined
using UV/VIS spectrophotometer.
 COD, BOD and TSS of the untreated/treated samples were analyzed using standard
methods of tests and equipments.
 After each run, the electrodes were washed with water and were dipped for 5 min in
10% acetone solution to clean the surface and remove impurities on the aluminum
electrode and were made ready for the next run.
 After each experiment the used anode and cathode plate were interchanged for effective
electrode utilization.
The extent of treatment was mainly controlled by some selected process parameters like,
treatment time, power supply (voltage) and number of electrodes (distance between
electrodes). During each treatment, samples were taken for the analysis of COD, BOD, TDS,
TSS, conductivity and absorbance.
19
AASTU 2016
3.2.4. Analytical methods
To study the best operating parameters in which best removal efficiency, treatment time,
power and electrode consumptions are achieved, 100mL of samples were taken at an
intervals of 20 min in a beaker using a 10 mL pipette. 100mL of sample was taken by
considering the amount of sample required for the analysis of desired parameters. The
determination of water quality properties is important because there are industrial effluent
discharge standards in Ethiopia in order to check environmental pollution as well as ensure
quality and safe working conditions for citizens in general. And hence, all samples were
analyzed following the procedures outlined in the Standard Methods.
* Analysis of Total solids (TS), Total suspended solids (TSS) and Total dissolved solids
(TDS) were conducted by gravimetric method
* Determination of pH and electrical conductivity were conducted by using standard

method and equipments HANNA HI 270 pH meter and BANTE instrument 950
conductivity, TDS, salinity meter respectively.
* Determination of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Chemical oxygen demand

COD were conducted using standard methods of analysis
* Absorbance measurement using colorimeter/spectrophotometer
Principle
Colorimeter is the determination of the concentration of a substance by measuring the
relative absorption/transmission of light with respect to a known concentration. Colorimetric
analysis is based on the measurement of intensity of radiant energy after it passes through a
sample solution. Thus, colorimetry can be considered as the absorption spectrophotometry in
the visible range. (Singh et al. 2005)
First the necessary equipments, apparatuses and reagents for the analysis were made ready
and then the experimental analysis were conducted according to the procedure given below.
a. 0.2 g/L TiO2 suspension solution was prepared by taking 20 mg of TiO2 powder and
dissolving it in 100mL of distilled water.
20
AASTU 2016
b. The absorption cells (cuvettes) were cleaned by rinsing with distilled water and dried by
soft tissue.
c. The UV/VIS spectrophotometer (Optizen POP UV/VIS spectrophotometer) was powered
on and started, then the desired input variables like, wavelength, concentration unit and
cell number were fed to the instrument and adjusted.
d. The maximum wavelength was determined and the calibration curve (standard curve) of
the UV/VIS spectrometer was made by preparing TiO2 solution with different dilutions
and measuring them at different wavelengths between 320 and 380nm.
e. The absorbance/transmittance of the samples were measured at 345nm wavelength and
recorded. After each run the cuvettes were cleaned as described above in b.
For the measurement of absorbance/transmittance of samples Optizen POP UV/VIS

spectrophotometer with 10 mm open - topped rectangular cell (cuvette) that are made of
plastic (Acrylic) were used. Plastic/acrylic cells absorb strongly below 300nm, making them
unsuitable for measurement in this region and hence the determination of the maximum
absorbance wavelength was made by preparing different dilutions of 0.2 g/L of TiO2 (5 to 90
mL dilution water was added) and wavelengths of 320 - 380nm were used. By doing so,
345nm was found the maximum absorbance wavelength and used in all the rest analyses.
Calculations
Colorimetry and/or absorbtitivity are based on Beer’s law. ordin to Beer’s law when
the absorbing substance is present in a solution, the absorption of light depends also upon the
concentration. This law states that, the rate of decrease of intensity of radiation observed with
the thickness of the medium is proportional to the intensity of the radiation and concentration
of the solute. Consider a thin layer of the medium thickness dl and the intensity of radiation
entering I, and concentration C, then
dI
l [11]
dl
Integrating and rearranging between Io and I for intensity and 0 and l for thickness will give
us, the transmittance T,
21
AASTU 2016
I l I l
T=I e or e [12]
I
From the relationship between absorbance and transmittance,
l
A = - log (T) = - log (e ) [13]
A= l [14]
Where;
A - Absorbance
l – Absorbing cell (cuvette) length
or the absorptivit oeffi ient
C – Concentration
For equal cell length, l is always the same, and hence, in order to calculate the concentration
of the sample depending on the transmittance/absorbance displayed on the instrument. First
calculate (find) the value of or by using known concentration sample (standard reagent,
in my case TiO2) from the equation;
I
ln
I
or [15]
l
Then once the value of or is determined, the concentration of the ith sample calculate by
the same equation as above.
I
ln
I i
i [16]
l
22
AASTU 2016
CHAPTTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Calibration and determination of maximum absorption wavelength for TiO2
Initially 20 mg of pure reagent grade TiO2 was taken and dissolved with 100 mL of distilled
water to make a dispersion solution with 0.2g/L concentration. Then the 0.2 g/L sample was
diluted in to 11 different samples by adding successively 5 to 90 mL of distilled water in
different containers. Absorbance measurement for all diluted samples were made by UV/VIS
spectrophotometer at different wavelengths between 320 and 380 and the maximum
absorption wavelength were determined and found to be 345nm (see table 1). At this
wavelength the absorption measurements of the diluted samples were made and using excel
standard curve was plotted for concentration vs. absorbance the check the linearity of the
results obtained. The values of absorbance of the samples that are prepared at different
on entrations and wavelen th (λ) are given in table 1 below.
Table 1 - UV/VIS spectrophotometer absorbance measurement for determination of

maximum wavelength at different dilutions of 0.2 g/L solutions of TiO2
mL of distilled water Wavelength in (nm)

added to 10 mL of
sample 320 330 340 345 350 360 370 380
0
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
5
2.983 2.991 3.00 3.00 2.952 2.870 2.771 2.701
10
2.659 2.702 2.855 2.862 2.811 2.647 2.754 2.659
15
2.213 2.259 2.356 2.410 2.443 2.255 2.177 2.114
20
1.877 1.834 1.596 2.095 1.960 1.861 2.071 1.861
30 1.466 1.660 1.659 1.861 1.264 1.301 1.439 1.259
23
AASTU 2016
40 1.191 1.177 1.276 1.227 1.201 1.145 1.103 1.113
50 1.173 1.202 1.200 1.213 1.205 1.150 1.149 1.101
60 0.933 0.876 0.913 0.889 0.852 0.818 0.824 0.801
70 0.721 0.770 0.791 0.820 0.796 0.713 0.705 0.701
80 0.516 0.527 0.546 0.557 0.563 0.514 0.502 0.511
90 0.402 0.410 0.425 0.433 0.431 0.419 0.421 0.416
From the above table the maximum absorptions were obtained between the values of 340 –
350 nm wavelengths, of which most of these values were observed at a wavelength of 345
nm, and hence, this value was taken as a maximum absorption wavelength. As discussed
above (section 4.1) for TiO2 dispersion prepared at different dilution the concentrations of
each samples were calculated by using eqn. 22 below. And absorbance measurements were
made to determine the absorptivity coefficient at a wavelength of 345 nm.
4.2. Result
This section of the paper outlines the results of the experimental process. For this study 24
experimental trials were conducted at AASTU industrial chemistry laboratory and 72
samples were taken for the analysis of desired parameters at 20, 40 and 60 min of treatment
process. During the first 10 to 15 min no change in the appearance of the sample was
observed and hence the first sample was taken at 20 min. The characterization of untreated
wastewater sample and treated samples for pH, COD, BOD, TSS, TDS and conductivity at
selected maximum removal values were made at P ’s laborator after absorbance
measurement of all samples using UV/VIS spectrophotometer. In this chapter, the results of
the experiments and discussions on the results of the experiments are given.
24
AASTU 2016
4.2.1. Raw wastewater characterization
For the characterization of the raw wastewater analysis for parameters such as pH, TS, TDS,
TSS, BOD, COD, Absorbance of TiO2 and electrical conductivity were made. And the
average values are summarized in table 2 below
Table 2 - Comparison of raw wastewater with FEPA industrial effluent standard
Parameters Raw Wastewater * FEPA maximum Remark

characteristics allowable
Analysed
concentration
pH 6 6– 9 In range
TDS in (mg/L) 155.0 3000 In range
TSS in (mg/L) 4,880.0 100 Not in range
BOD5 in (mg/L) 132 80 mg/l Not in range
COD in mg/L 10,400 250 mg/l Not in range
Absorbance of TiO2 0.541 - -
E-Con in (µS) 302 - -
* Source: (FEPA and UNIDO 2003)
As can be seen from the above table except the value of TDS all other parameters are beyond
the F P ’s industrial effluent discharge limit and hence, proper treatment
method/technology that reduces these values to the standard limit with a reasonable operating
cost, simple operation and minimal treatment time like electrocoagulation is mandatory.
4.2.2. Treated wastewater characterization
Then the concentrations of TiO2 (white paint pigment) for each samples of wastewater that
are taken at different time intervals were determined from the results of UV/VIS
spectrophotometer absorbance measurement and by cal ulatin it usin Beer’s – Lambert
equations (eqn. 14 - 16). Once the concentrations of TiO2 in each sample determined, best
25
AASTU 2016
values with regard to the values of percentage removal were identified. At these best
operating values COD, BOD, TS, TSS, TDS, pH and electrical conductivity were measured
and all the values obtained are compared with FEPA industrial effluent standard.
For known values
C1 = 0.2 g/L V1 = 10 Ml V2 = Volume of sample after dilution
The concentration of the samples after dilution is calculated by
[22]
Where;
C1 = initial concentration (g/L)

V1 = initial volume of sample taken
V2 = volume of sample after dilution
C2 = concentration of sample after dilution
Table 3 - Absorbance and concentration of untreated sample after addition of 90mL distilled
water
Volume of DW for 10mL sample, in mL Absorbance Concentration, in g/L
90 0.541 0.032
The initial concentrations was calculated using eqn. 22
= 0. 32g/L
26
AASTU 2016
The values obtained after absorbance measurement of the samples at different treatment time
using UV/VIS spectrophotometer are summarized in table 4 below and figure 2 and 3.
Table 4 – Concentration of samples taken at different conditions
Voltage No. of Absorbance of sample at Concentration of sample at

electrodes time t, time t, in g/L
supply,
(V)
20min 40min 60min 20min 40min 60min
E6
0.637 0.193 0.156 0.0298 0.0041 0.0020
5.0 E12
0.197 0.173 0.152 0.0044 0.0030 0.0018
E18
0.742 0.167 0.150 0.0359 0.0027 0.0017
E6
0.634 0.387 0.200 0.0297 0.0154 0.0046
7.5 E12
0.737 0.204 0.154 0.0356 0.0048 0.0019
E18
0.517 0.375 0.360 0.0229 0.0145 0.0138
E6
0.578 0.240 0.222 0.0264 0.0069 0.0058
10.0 E12
0.653 0.302 0.148 0.0308 0.0105 0.0016
E18
0.359 0.353 0.223 0.0138 0.0134 0.0059
E6
1.290 0.831 0.374 0.0676 0.0411 0.0146
12.5 E12
1.099 0.466 0.240 0.0566 0.0200 0.0069
E18 1.077 0.760 0.297 0.0553 0.0370 0.0102
27
AASTU 2016
0.08
20min
Concentration g/L
0.06 40min
60min
0.04
0.02
0
5 7.5 10 12.5
Power supply (V) 6E
0.08
20min
Concentration g/L
0.06 40min
60min
0.04
0.02
0
5 7.5 10 12.5
Power supply (V) 12E
0.08
20min
Concentration g/L
0.06 40min
60min
0.04
0.02
0
5 7.5 10 12.5
Power supply (V) 18E
Figure 2 - Power supply vs concentration for electrocoagulation cell with 6, 12 1nd 18 electrodes
28
AASTU 2016
0.04
E6
Concentration g/L
0.03 E12
E18
0.02
0.01
0
1 2 3
Time 5V
0.04
E6
0.03 E12
Concentration g/L
E18
0.02
0.01
0
1 2 3
Time 7.5V
0.04
E6
Concentration g/L
0.03 E12
E18
0.02
0.01
0
1 2 3
Time 10.0V
0.08
E6
Concentration g/L
0.06 E12
E18
0.04
0.02
0
1 2 3
Time 12.5V
Figure 3 - Treatment time vs concentration at a power supply of 5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5V

(1 = 20 min, 2 = 40 min and 3 = 60min)
29
AASTU 2016
From the values obtained after absorbance measurement, five conditions with minimum
concentrations selected and they were at E6/5V/3, E12/5V/3, E18/5V/3, E12/7.5V/3 and
E12/10V/3.
On the other hand, the significance of the factors that contributes to the overall removal of
the white color pigment TiO2 was analyzed using Response Surface Method by Design
Expert 6.0.8 portable software the results obtained are summarized below in table 5 and 6.
Table 5 - ANOVA for Response Surface Model
Response: %R
Analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares]
Sum of Mean F
Source Squares DF Square Value Prob > F
Model 749.20 6 124.87 12.44 < 0.0001 significant
A 1.78 1 1.78 0.18 0.6766
B 224.72 1 224.72 22.38 < 0.0001
C 464.90 1 464.90 46.31 < 0.0001
AB 5.61 1 5.61 0.56 0.4609
AC 5.55 1 5.55 0.55 0.4633
BC 46.64 1 46.64 4.65 0.0396
The Model F-value of 12.44 implies the model is significant. Values of "Prob > F" less than
0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case B, C, BC are significant model
terms. Values greater than 0.1000 indicate the model terms are not significant.
SD 3.17 R-Squared 0.7201

Mean 94.33 Adj R-Squared 0.6622
C.V. 3.36 Adeq Precision 12.869
A ratio fo Adeq Precision greater than 4 is desirable. In my case a ratio of 12.869 indicates
an adequate signal.
30
AASTU 2016
4.2.3. Comparison of treated wastewater with FEPA allowable limit
Analysis was made on the selected 5 samples for COD, BOD, TSS, pH and conductivity to
study the removal efficiency and to compare the values obtained with FEPA industrial
effluent standards. Table 6 below provide description of the results of comparison of the data
olle ted from the anal sis of the sele ted five samples with F P ’s industrial effluent
standards.
Table 6 - Summary of parameters analysed for selected five best conditions
Parameters E6/5V/3 E12/5V/3 E12/7.5V/3 E12/10V/3 E18/5V/3
Analysed
pH 6.21* 6.82* 6.14* 6.98* 5.85
TDS in (mg/L) 2251* 2657* 2319* 2197* 2250*
TSS in (mg/L) 550 310 403 211 247
BOD5 in (mg/L) 4* 8.4* 10.8* 12.4* 9.2*
COD in mg/L 342 579 367 207* 360
Absorbance of TiO2 0.156 0.152 0.154 0.148 0.150
E-Con in (µS) 419.2 422.5 439.4 416.0 444.0
* Represents values that are in a permissible limit of FEPA
As can be seen from table 6 after treatment of the wastewater for 60 min with 5V and 7.5V
power supply in an electrocoagulation cells with 6, 12 and 18 electrodes the values of pH,
TDS and BOD5 were in the allowable F P ’s industrial effluent dis har e limit but and
COD are beyond the limit. On the other hand, from the table it can be seen that in an
electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrodes after treating the wastewater with 10V power
supply the value of pH, TDS, COD and BOD5 were in the allowable F P ’s industrial
effluent discharge limit but TSS is beyond the limit.
31
AASTU 2016
4.2.4. Determination of best operating parameters
Assessment of the efficiency of electrocoagulation treatment and determination of best

operating conditions for this study were based on three main parameters 1) Percentage
removal of color as TiO2, COD, BOD, and TSS at different operating conditions, 2)
Treatment time and 3) Power and electrode consumption at different operating conditions.
4.2.4.1. Determination of best process time and percentage removal.
As mentioned above in section 4.1.6, best operating conditions for treatment were
determined based on three parameters namely, percentage removal, treatment time and power
consumption. Best process time was chosen based on the relative amount of TiO2
concentration after absorbance measurement. From the absorbance measurement and results
of concentration (table 4) it has been found that 60 min is the best operating time. From
visual observation it has been seen that further treatment beyond 60 min resulted in
destabilization and breaking of flocks formed. Table 7 – 10 provide a summery on
percentage removal of BOD, COD, TSS and color as TiO2. Percentage Removal was
calculated using the following equation:
Initial on entration –Final on entration

emoval [24]
Initial on entration
Table 7 – Summery on percentage removal of BOD
Sample code BOD of untreated BOD of treated % Removal

wastewater in mg/L wastewater in mg/L
E6/5V/3 132 4 96.97
E12/5V/3 132 8.4 93.64
E12/7.5V/3 132 10.8 91.82
E12/10V/3 132 12.4 90.61
E18/5V/3 132 9.2 93.03
As can be seen from the above table after treatment of the wastewater significant amount of
reduction of BOD5 were achieved for all samples but, maximum removal of 96.97% were
32
AASTU 2016
obtained for sample code E6/5V/3 i.e. an electrocoagulation cell with 6 electrode plates, 5V
voltage supply and after treatment for 60 min.
Table 8 – Summery on percentage removal of COD
Sample code COD of untreated COD of treated % Removal

E6/5V/3 10,400 342 96.71
E12/5V/3 10,400 579 94.43
E12/7.5V/3 10,400 367 96.47
E12/10V/3 10,400 207 98.01
E18/5V/3 10,400 360 96.54
reduction of COD were achieved for all samples but, maximum removal of 98.01% were
obtained for sample code E12/10V/3 i.e. an electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrode plates,
10V voltage supply and after treatment for 60 min.
Table 9 – Summery on percentage removal of TSS
Sample code TSS of untreated TSS of treated % Removal

E6/5V/3 4,880.0 550 88.73
E12/5V/3 4,880.0 310 93.65
E12/7.5V/3 4,880.0 403 91.74
E12/10V/3 4,880.0 211 95.68
E18/5V/3 4,880.0 247 94.94
reduction of TSS were achieved for all samples but, maximum removal of 95.68% were
obtained for sample code E12/10V/3 i.e. an electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrode plates,
10V voltage supply and after treatment for 60 min.
33
AASTU 2016
Table 10 – Summery on percentage removal of white color pigment TiO2
Concentration Concentration of Concentration of % Removal

(mg/L) TiO2 in untreated TiO2 in treated
wastewater in g/L wastewater in g/L
E6/5V/3 0.32 0.002 99.38
E12/5V/3 0.32 0.0018 99.44
E12/7.5V/3 0.32 0.0019 99.40
E12/10V/3 0.32 0.0016 99.5
E18/5V/3 0.32 0.0017 99.47
reduction in concentration of TiO2 were achieved for all samples but, maximum removal of
99.5% were obtained for sample code E12/10V/3 i.e. an electrocoagulation cell with 12
electrode plates, 10V voltage supply and after treatment for 60 min.
4.2.4.2. Determination of best operating parameters based on electrode and power

consumption
The choice of material plays an important role in determining the overall cost. Aluminum
and Iron electrodes or combination of thereof were used in most studies. Aluminum electrode
was used for this study as an electrode for both sacrificial anode and for the cathode, because,
if iron electrode is used pH control and adjustment is required to prevent the electrode from
corrosion otherwise most frequent replacement of the electrode is required; using aluminum
as an electrode can avoid this problem and interchanging the terminals of the anode and
cathode enables effective electrode utilization. The theoretical electrode and energy
consumptions are calculated using (eqn. 25) (Umran et al., 2009; Drouiche et al, 2012; Juan
et al., 2014).
It W
Celectrode = Fv
[25]
34
AASTU 2016
Energy consumption is calculated using equation 25,
It
Cenergy= [26]
v
Where
Celectrode - mass of the anode consumed (g/m3)
Cenergy - Energy consumed (Wh/m3)
U - Voltage applied (V)
I - current passing through (A)
Mw - molecular weight of the electrode material (27 g/mol for Aluminum),
z - Valence number of electrons transferred by the anode (3 for Al+3)
t - Operating time (seconds),
v - Volume of water treated (m3), and
F - Farada ’s onstant (C/mole)
C – Coulomb (C = Q/U = It/U)
The descriptions of electrode and power consumptions for all electrocoagulation cells are
summarized in tables 11 – 13 below.
Table 11- Amounts of anode and energy consumed during treatment using E6
Operating time Anode consumed at different Energy consumed at different

min power supply in g/m3 power supply in Wh/m3
5V 7.5V 10V 12.5V 5V 7.5V 10V 12.5V
20 0.576 0.864 1.153 1.441 1.024 2.304 4.097 6.401
40 1.153 1.729 2.305 2.882 2.048 4.609 8.194 12.803
60 1.729 2.593 3.458 4.322 3.072 6.913 12.291 19.204
35
AASTU 2016

min power supply in g/m3 power supply in Wh/m3
5V 7.5V 10V 12.5V 5V 7.5V 10V 12.5V
20 0.544 0.816 1.089 1.361 1.085 2.44 4.338 6.778
40 1.089 1.633 2.177 2.722 2.169 4.88 8.676 13.556
60 1.632 2.449 3.266 4.082 3.254 7.32 13.014 20.334

3
min power supply in g/m power supply in Wh/m3
5V 7.5V 10V 12.5V 5V 7.5V 10V 12.5V
20 0.512 0.768 1.025 1.281 1.152 2.593 4.609 7.202
40 1.025 1.537 2.049 2.562 2.304 5.185 9.218 14.404
60 1.537 2.305 3.073 3.842 3.457 7.778 13.828 21.605
36
AASTU 2016
35
29.9
30 Anode
consumed
25
Measured values
20 Power
consumed
15
10
Concentration
4.2 of TiO2
5
2
0
20 40 60
Process time, min
Figure 4 - Comparison of concentration, anode consumed & power consumed for 6

electrodes & 5V
5
4.5
4
3.5
Anode
Measured values
3 consumed
2.5
Power
2 consumed
1.5
Concentration
1 of TiO2
0.5
0
20 40 60
Process time, min

electrodes & 5V.
37
AASTU 2016
40
35
30
Anode
Measured values
25 consumed
20 Power
consumed
15
Concentration
10 of TiO2
5
0
20 40 60
Process time, min

electrodes & 7.5V
35
30
25
Measured values
Anode
consumed
20
Power
15 consumed
10 Concentration
of TiO2
5
0
20 40 60
Process time, min

electrodes & 10V
38
AASTU 2016
40
35
30 Anode
Measured values
consumed
25
Power
20 consumed
15 Concentration
of TiO2
10
0
20 40 60
Process time, min
Figure 8 – Comparison of concentration, anode consumed & power consumed for 18

electrodes & 5V
4.2.5. Statistical Approach
In all stages, after the treatment of wastewater, a total of 36 samples from all
electrocoagulation cells were taken at different operating conditions i.e. 20, 40 and 60 min
process time and 5.0, 7.5, 10.0 and 12.5 V power supply for a single run. 72 samples were
collected from the first and second experimental processes. Analysis of these samples were
made for determination of removals of white color pigment (TiO2), COD, BOD, TDS, TSS,
pH and conductivity. Initially, absorbance measurement for determination of TiO2 removal
were made three times and average values were taken and from the average values, five
samples with a maximum removal were selected and then analysis of COD, BOD, TSS, pH
and conductivity were made for the selected five samples.
Triplicate analyses were made for pH, conductivity, COD, BOD and TDS. TSS was analyzed
twice; therefore more than 300 analyses were made. Analysis for the entire sample would
have required an excessive number of samples, storage space (refrigerator) and budget, so,
analysis for selected samples were required. Excel regression method were used to determine
39
AASTU 2016
the concentration of each sample by plotting a standard curve (Figure 9) from known
concentration of TiO2 suspension. Using this standard curve the concentrations of unknown
samples were determined by the relation;
Concentration = TREND([known_y’s],[known_x’s],[new_x’s],[const]) [23]
Where;
known_y’s – the concentrations of TiO2 suspension prepared to plot the curve
known_x’s – measured absorbance of TiO2 suspension prepared
new_x’s – measure absorbance of treated samples
const – the value of the slope of the curve
standard curve for Concentration vs. Absorbance

3
y = 18.786x + 0.001
2.5 R² = 0.9766
2
Absorbance
1.5
0.5
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Concentration, g/L
Figure 9 - Standard curve for Concentration vs. Absorbance
From the equation that relates absorbance and concentration (eqn. 14)
A = ɛlC
So, A = 18.786 C
Since ɛl = 18.786
40
AASTU 2016
The value of this slop was used for subsequent absorbance measurements to determine the
concentration of the untreated raw sample and treated samples and the values are summarizes
in table 3 and 4. It was difficult to calculate the initial concentration of the untreated raw
sample by making direct absorbance measurement since the concentration of the wastewater
was beyond the detection range of the equipment and hence absorbance measurement was
made after dilution as given in table 3.
In addition, the effects of treatment time, power supply and number of electrodes and their
combined effects on percentage removal, electrode and power consumptions were analyzed
using Design expert 6.0.8 portable software response surface model and best operating
condition were determined and compared. The optimal conditions that the software generated
are given below.
6.00 18.00 5.00 12.50
NE = 12.13 PS = 5.85
20.00 60.00 78.88 99.5
PT = 59.78 %R = 99.8307
Desirability = 1.000
Figure 10 - Design expert output for Ramps that show optimal points of the process
Depending on the optimal points suggested by the design expert software, synthetic
wastewater sample were prepared by dissolving 0.32 g/L of TiO2 in water and treatment has
been conducted to verify that the electrocoagulation cell works effectively at the proposed
conditions the values obtained are summarized in table 14 below..
41
AASTU 2016
Table 14 - values of absorbance and concentration at optimal points
No. of Abs Conc Abs Conc Abs Conc Ave.

electrodes run 2 run 1 run 2 run 2 run 3 run 3 Conc
6 0.153 0.00183 0.153 0.00183 0.155 0.0019 0.0019
12 0.148 0.00155 0.148 0.00155 0.149 0.0016 0.0016
18 0.15 0.0017 0.152 0.0018 0.154 0.00189 0.0018
Untreated
sample 1.872 0.101 1.972 0.107 1.938 0.105 0.1043
4.3. Discussion
4.2.1. Effect of varying process time on percentage removal of TiO2
Process time is a significant factor for electrocoagulation process. From the graphs above
(Figure 2 and 3) it can be seen that the concentrations of the samples are inversely
proportional with treatment time. The concentrations of the color bearing pigment TiO2
decreased with an increase in process time in all electrocoagulation cells with a supply of
different voltage. To compare the results of the samples taken at different process time,
classification was made as the first, second and third session of treatment to represent the
results of the samples taken at 20, 40 and 60 min respectively. Based on this classification,
the best reduction of the color bearing pigment during the first session was observed by an
electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrodes and power supply of 5V from 0.32g/L to 0.0044
g/L about 98.23% reduction and this value decreased further to 0.003 and 0.0018 g/L about
99.06 and 99.44% removal at the second and third session of treatment respectively. The
values obtained during the second session of treatment showed that larger change in
concentrations. An increase in process time further to 60 min in the third session, reduction
in concentration was observed, but the change in concentration was not larger as it was
observed in the second session.
42
AASTU 2016
Keeping the number of electrodes and power supply constant, the removal efficiency was
increased with an increase in process time. From the experimental process and graph of
design expert plot (Figure 11 A, B, C) it was observed that the percentage removal during the
first session shows no significant variation among all electrocoagulation cell with application
of 5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5V power supply. An increase in the percentage removal for all
electrocoagulation cells was observed during the second and third session of treatment
process. Increasing process time further to 70 and 80 min resulted in a breakdown of flocs in
an electrocoagulation cells with 6 and 12 electrodes for a power supply of 5 and 7.5 V. On
the other hand an electrocoagulation cell with 18 electrodes showed no significant change.
This phenomenon was taken as an indication to the completion of the process and 60 min
was taken as a best operating process time.
From the % R result of ANOVA for Response surface model it was found that the effect of
factors like PT, PS and their combination on the percentage removal were significant. Figure
15, 16 and 18 showed that influential values of the outliers (extreme values) obtained at the
25th and 27th runs and with SD which is 3.17 and a Z score value of 1.612 at a selected best
value 99.44 percentage removal provides information that the measured values lie in the
Proportion within 90% confidence interval except for the two outlying values.
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = B: PS
Actual Factor
C: PT = 20.00
100.0
94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
78.0
A
18.00
12.50
12.00
10.00
A: NE
7.50
B: PS 5.00 6.00
43
AASTU 2016
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = B: PS
Actual Factor
C: PT = 40.00
100.0
94.5
%R 0.89
83.5
B 78.0
18.00
12.50
12.00
10.00
A: NE
7.50
B: PS 5.00 6.00
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = B: PS
Actual Factor
C: PT = 60.00
100.0
94.5
%R 0.89
83.5
78.0
C
18.00
12.50
12.00
10.00
A: NE
7.50
B: PS 5.00 6.00
Figure 11 - Effect of varying process time on percentage removal of white color pigment
(A = 20, B = 40, C = 60 min)
44
AASTU 2016
4.2.2. Effect of varying number of electrodes on percentage removal of TiO2
From Figure 12 - A, B and C change in removal efficiencies were observed as the number of
electrodes varies, keeping process time and power supply constant. At 60 min of process time
removals of the colour bearing pigment for 6, 12 and 18 electrode were found to be 99.38,
99.44 and 99.47% for 5V power supply, 98.56, 99.41 and 95.69% for 7.5V power supply,
98.19, 96.81 and 98.16 % for 10V power supply and 95.44, 97.84 and 96.81% for 12.5V
power supply respectively. From these values it was observed that the effect of variation in
NE is not significant.
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = B: PS
Y = C: PT
100.0
Actual Factor
A: NE = 6.00 94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
78.0
60.00
40.00
C: PT 12.50
10.00
7.50
20.00
5.00
B: PS
45
AASTU 2016
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = B: PS
Y = C: PT
100.0
Actual Factor
A: NE = 12.00 94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
78.0
60.00
40.00
C: PT
12.50
10.00
7.50
20.00
5.00
B: PS
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = B: PS
Y = C: PT
100.0
Actual Factor
A: NE = 18.00 94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
78.0
60.00
40.00
C: PT
12.50
10.00
7.50
20.00
5.00
B: PS
Figure 12 - Effect of varying number of electrodes on percentage removal of white color

pigment (A = 6, B = 12, C= 18 plats)
46
AASTU 2016
4.2.3. Effect of varying power supply on percentage removal of TiO2
Figure 13 - A, B, C and D shows that a decrease in removal efficiencies were observed as

power supply increases keeping the number of electrodes and process time the same. For an
electrocoagulation cells with 6 and 18 electrodes more than 99% removal were obtained with
a power supply of 5V and decrease to 95% as the power supply increases. An
electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrodes showed that more than 99% removal for 5, 7.5 and
10 V power supply. But in general as the power supply increases a decrease in removal
efficiency was observed. Depending up on the above observation 5V power supply was taken
as the best operating condition.
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = C: PT
Actual Factor
B: PS = 5.00 100.0
94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
A 78.0
18.00
60.00
12.00
40.00 A: NE
C: PT 20.00 6.00
47
AASTU 2016
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = C: PT
Actual Factor
B: PS = 7.50 100.0
94.5
89.0
%R
B 83.5
78.0
18.00
60.00
12.00
40.00 A: NE
C: PT 20.00 6.00
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = C: PT
Actual Factor
B: PS = 10.00 100.0
94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
C 78.0
18.00
60.00
12.00
40.00 A: NE
C: PT 20.00 6.00
48
AASTU 2016
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
%R
X = A: NE
Y = C: PT
Actual Factor
B: PS = 12.50 100.0
94.5
89.0
%R
83.5
D
78.0
18.00
60.00
12.00
40.00 A: NE
C: PT 20.00 6.00
Figure 13 - Effect of varying power supply on percentage removal of white color pigment
(A = 12.5, B = 10, C = 7.5, D = 5 V)
4.2.4. Effect of process time and number of electrodes on power and anode consumption
The study on the effect of process time and number of electrodes on power and anode
consumption is based on the best operating power supply obtained in section 4.2.3. As can be
seen from the graph (Figure 4 - 8) minimum power and electrode consumptions were
achieved for samples at 20 min of process time. However, the removal efficiencies at these
points were minimal.
For an electrocoagulation cell with 6 electrodes and 5 V, at a process time of 20 min reduced
concentration of 29.9 mg/L was achieved with a power consumption of 1.024 Wh/m3 and
anode consumption of 0.576 g/m3 and further reduction to 4.2 mg/L was achieved with a
power consumption of 2.048 Wh/m3 and anode consumption of 1.153 g/m3 as the process
time increase to 40 min. Furthermore, the concentration reduced to 2 mg/L when the
treatment time increases to 60 min with 3.072 Wh/m3 and 1.729 g/m3 of power and anode
consumptions respectively.
49
AASTU 2016
Likewise, for an electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrodes and 5 V, at process time of 20 min
significant reduction in concentration 4.4 mg/L was achieved with a power consumption of
1.085 Wh/m3 and anode consumption of 0.544 g/m3 and further reduction to 3 mg/L was
achieved with a power consumption of 2.169 Wh/m3 and anode consumption of 1.089 g/m3
as the process time increase to 40 min and the concentration reduced to 1.8 mg/L when the
On the other hand, for an electrocoagulation cell with 18 electrodes and 5 V, at process time
of 20 min reduction in concentration 35.9 mg/L was achieved with a power consumption of
1.152 Wh/m3 and anode consumption of 0.512 g/m3 and further reduction to 2.7 mg/L was
achieved with a power consumption of 2.304 Wh/m3 and anode consumption of 1.025 g/m3
as the process time increase to 40 min and the concentration reduced to 1.7 mg/L when the
Table 4 and figure 4 – 8 showed that by increasing the process time to 60 min the removals
were increased by double in most cases, but anode and power consumptions were increased
only by half. During the 60 min of process time and 5V applied power an electrocoagulation
cell with 18 electrodes showed lower value of anode consumption but larger power
consumption whereas an electrocoagulation cell with 6 electrodes showed larger value of
anode consumption but lower power consumption. And hence, electrocoagulation cell with
18 electrodes is best in terms of anode consumption and electrocoagulation cell with 6
electrodes is best in terms of power consumption but, an electrocoagulation cell with 12
electrodes resulted to a higher removal value with optimal values of anode and power
consumptions.
As the number of electrodes increases from 6 to 18 a regular increase in percentage removals

were observed only by a supply of 5V. But for a power supply of 7.5, 10 and 12.5V larger
removal values were obtained for an electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrodes. For
electrocoagulation cells with 6 electrodes with a power supply of 5V it was found that
50
AASTU 2016
maximum value of 99.37% removal of the white colour pigment at 60 min of process time
with a power and anode consumption of 3.072 Wh/m3 and 1.729 g/m3 respectively.
Likewise, for an electrocoagulation cell with 12 electrodes and 60 min of process time
comparably higher removal values i.e. 99.44, 99.41 and 99.5% were obtained with the
applications of 5, 7.5 and 10V power supply and 1.632, 2.449 and 3.266 g/m3 and 3.254, 7.32
and 13.014 Wh/m3 anode and power consumption respectively.
On the other hand for an electrocoagulation cell with 18 electrodes and 60 min of process
time larger removal efficiency of 99.47% was obtained with minimal anode consumption of
1.537 g/ m3 and larger power consumption of 3.457 Wh/m3 at a power supply of 5V. From
these values it can be clearly seen that as the number of electrodes increase the power that
would be used will increase but the anode consumed will decrease and vise versa. And
hence, higher removal values with a minimum value of power consumption were achieved at
a power supply of 5V.
On the best operating conditions the result obtained (table 14) after treating the synthetic
wastewater sample prepared justified that at the proposed optimal points higher values of
percentage removals were obtained.
51
AASTU 2016
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions
Paint industry effluent treatment by electrocoagulation results to a significant reduction in a

pollutant load. From the characterization of the raw wastewater it was found that the BOD,
COD and TSS are beyond the permissible effluent discharge limit. The results after the
experimental trials of the thesis work revealed that significant reduction of the white colour
pigment (TiO2) was achieved in all electrocoagulation cells. The percentage removal of TiO2
obtained between 20 and 60 min of treatment time was 78.9 % for electrocoagulation cell
with 6 electrodes and application of 12.5 V power supply and 99.5 % for electrocoagulation
cell with 12 electrode with power supply of 5 V which were the minimum and maximum
values respectively. On the other hand, 90.6 to 96.9 % BOD, 94.4 to 98 % COD and 88.7 to
95.7 % TSS removals were achieved without addition of chemical coagulants.
In general, by increasing the process time from 20 to 60 min the percentage removal of TiO2
increased from 88.78 to 99.47 %, 88.88 to 99.41 %, 90.4 to 99.5 % and 78.87 to 98.2% and
the anode consumed was increased from 0.512 to 1.729 g/m3, 0.768 to 2.593 g/m3, 1.025 to
3.458 g/m3 and 1.281 to 4.322 g/m3, likewise, power consumption also increased from 1.024
to 3.457 Wh/m3, 2.304 to 7.778 Wh/m3, 4.097 to 13.828 Wh/m3 and 6.401 to 21.605 Wh/m3
by applying 5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5V power respectively. Some of the anode oxidized and
released as cation (Al3+) to the solution during the process will be reduced at adsorbed on the
cathode and the remaining join with the colloidal particles and settle with the sludge. The
sludge which contains larger proportion of TiO2 and Al3+ can be used as an additive for
making of bricks to improve its appearance.
Higher removal values were obtained for all electrocoagulation cells with a power supply of
5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5 V. However, the power consumptions increase significantly with increase
in power supply and increasing number of electrodes, and hence it incurs higher operating
cost. On the other hand using less number of electrodes result to larger values of anode
consumption and hence requiring most frequent replacement of electrodes and maintenance
52
AASTU 2016
cost. But, at lower power supply and optimal numbers of electrodes comparably higher
reduction are obtained with optimal values of anode and power consumptions and hence the
electrocoagulation process operates well at lower power supply and moderate numbers of
electrodes.
Keeping process time and power supply constant an increase in the number of electrodes
increased slight the percentage removal and power consumed but, anode consumed
decreased. Percentage removal, anode and power consumptions were increased with process
time. Likewise keeping process time and numbers of electrode constant as the power supply
increases both anode and power consumptions increase but the percentage removal
decreases. From the response surface model based on the combined effect of percentage
removal, power supply, treatment time, anode and power consumption, a relatively higher
value of percentage removals of 99.44 % were achieved at an optimal values of power and
anode consumptions of 3.254 Wh/m3 and 1.632 g/m3 respectively for an electrocoagulation
cell with 12 electrodes, power supply of 5 V and 60 min of process time and this value was
taken as the best operating condition.
53
AASTU 2016
5.2. Recommendations
Using electrocoagulation process for treatment of paint industry effluent yields a high quality
effluent with a short process time without adding coagulating chemicals. The main
constraints for the application of electrocoagulation technology are the electric power
consumption and anode depletion, however, since Ethiopia is striving to become the power
tower of Africa and also there are mega projects for generation of hydroelectric and other
renewable energy sources, and hence, with regard to these facts applying electrocoagulation
technology is an economical approach for wastewater treatment.
Different studies conducted on electrocoagulation also showed that in addition to its higher
removal efficiency, the simplicity of the process, ease of maintenance, shorter treatment time
requirement and minimization of the sludge formed and secondary pollutant dose to the
environment which arise from addition of chemical coagulants and the ability to use
electrocoagulation to treat wastewater with different initial characteristics while easily
modifying operating parameters proved the flexibility of the system and make
electrocoagulation process advantageous over other biological an physicochemical treatment
processes in terms of treatment time ease of operation and removal efficiency.
By comparing the values from the experimental analysis of the treated samples with the
F P ’s industrial dis har e limits satisfa tor results were obtained. he values of D and
TSS removal obtained after treatment using this method resulted in significant reductions
greater than 88 and 94 % respectively; however, the values are beyond the permissible limit
of FEPA and hence it requires further study to bring these values to the permissible limit.
The effect of current density on removal efficiency and cost effectiveness of the treatment
process are not covered in this study. Beside these, at this stage the study showed that
electrocoagulation process has a potential for the treatment of water based paints and
removal of white paint pigment TiO2 and hence these can serve as starting point for further
study for anyone interested in this area.
54
AASTU 2016
REFERENCES
1. M.A. Aboulhassan, S. Souabi, A. Yaacoubi3 and M. Baudu, (2014). "Treatment of Paint

Manufacturing Wastewater by the Combination of Chemical and Biological Processes."
International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology 3(5).
2. Dr. Bassam Al Aji (2012). "Electrocoagulation of chromium containing synthetic
wastewater using monopolar iron electrodes." Damascus University Journal 28(2).
3. Bahadır . örbahti and bdurrahman an ola ¸ (2008). "Electrochemical treatment of
simulated industrial paint wastewater in a continuous tubular reactor." Chemical
Engineering Journal 148 (2009): 444–451.
4. Saroj Sundar Baral, (2007). "Adsorption of Hexavalent Chromium from Aqueous
Solution using Various Adsorbents." National Inistitute of Technology Rourkela 769 008,
India Thesis Collection.
5. Edris Bazrafshan, Kamal Aldin Ownagh, and Amir Hossein Mahvi (2012). "Application
of Electrocoagulation Process Using Iron and Aluminum Electrodes for Fluoride
Removal from Aqueous Environment." E-Journal of Chemistry: 2297-2308.
6. Chai YS, Lee JC. and Kim BW. (2000). "Photocatalytic disinfection of E. coli in a
suspended TiO 2/UV reactor." Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering 17(6): 633-637.
7. Guohua Chen, (2004). "Electrochemical technologies in wastewater treatment."
Separation and Purification Technology 38(1): 11-41.
8. D G Š ÍD Á P I LÁŠ J N PIL (2005). "Treatment of
wastewater from water-based paints industry." Environment Protection Engineering,
31(3-4): 136 - 143.
9. Demirci Y (2014). "Textile wastewater conductivity control of electrocoagulation process
using Matlab / Simulink." Global NEST Journal 16(2): 348-353
10. B.K. Dey, M.A. Hashim, S. Hasanb, B. Sen Gupta (2004). "Microfiltration of water-
based paint effluents." Elsevier Advances in Environmental Research 8 455-466.
11. Nadjib Drouiche, Saleh Aoudj, Hakim Lounici, ,M.Drouiche,Tarik Ouslimane, Norredine
Ghaffour,e (2012). "Fluoride Removal from pretreated Photovoltaic Wastewater by
Electrocoagulation: An Investigation of The Effect of Operational Parameters." Procedia
Engineering 33 385 - 391.
55
AASTU 2016
12. Ethiopian investment Commision, EIC., (2015). "Invest in Ethiopia; An Investment

Guide to Ethiopia ".
13. Mohammad Mahdi Emamjomeh, (2006). "Electrocoagulation technology as a process for
defluoridation in water treatment " Research Online University of Wollongong Thesis
Collection.
14. Terry L. Engelhardt, (2014). "Coagulation, flocculation and clarification of drinking
water." Hach Company,.
15. Claudio Escobar, Cesar Soto-Salazar, M. Ines Toral, (2006). "Optimization of the
electrocoagulation process for the removal of copper, lead and cadmium in natural waters
and simulated wastewater.
16. OA Fasemore, LL Jewell, D Glasser, D Hildebrandt, L Heron, N van Wyk and B Cooray,
(2004). "Toward zero waste production in the paint industry." 1School of Process and
Material Engineering, University of the Witwatersrand Private Bag 3, WITS 2050, South
Africa 2Barloworld Plascon South Africa (Pty) Limited, South Africa 30 (5).
17. Fasemore, O. A. (2004). "The Flocculation of Paint Wastewater Using Inorganic Salts."
A MSc dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment,
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg,.
18. FEPA and UNIDO (2003). "Standards for Industrial Pollution Control in Ethiopia."
19. Gregory A. Lorton (1988). "HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION: PART III -
Waste Minimization in the Paint and Allied Products Industry. ." Jacobs Engineering
Group Pasadena, California 38(4).
20. Walaa Hirzallah, (2011). "Effectiveness of Electrochemical Treatment of Municipal
Sewage." Thesis for Degree of Master of Applied Science (Civil Engineering) at
Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
21. http://www.iwawaterwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Articles/Electrocoagulation ( hursda
eptember 7:55:04 PM). "Electrocoagulation." IWA WATER WIKIinformation
resource and hub for the global water community.
22. IARC Working Group (2010). "IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic
Risks to Humans - Carbon Black, Titanium Dioxide, and Talc." WORLD HEALTH
ORGANIZATION INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER 93.
56
AASTU 2016
23. Ibrahim E. Mousa (2012). "A full-scale biological aerated filtration system application in
the treatment of paints industry wastewater." African Journal of Biotechnology 11(77),.
24. ISO (2012). "Global solutions to global challenges " ISO and water.
25. Juan M. Peralta-Hernández, Manuel A. Rodrigo-Rodrigo and Carlos A. Martínez-Huitle,
(2014). "Evaluation of Electrochemical Reactors as a New Way to Environmental
Protection, ." Research Signpost 37/661 (2), Fort P.O.Trivandrum-695 023 Kerala, India:
1-16.
26. Krishna Kumar, Omprakash Sahu, (2013). "Removal of Dye by Electrocoagulation
Method." Hydrology. 1(1): 8-11.
27. Mohsen A. EL Shazly, Ezzat A. Hasanin and M.M. Kamel (2010). "Appropriate
Technology for Industrial Wastewater Treatment of Paint Industry." American-Eurasian
J. Agric. & Environ. Sci., 8 (5): 597-601, 2010.
28. M. Yousuf A. Mollah, Robert Schennach, Jose R. Parga, David L. Cocke (2001).
"Electrocoagulation (EC) — science and applications." Journal of Hazardous Materials
B84 29-41.
29. H. A. Moreno C., D. L. Cocke, J. A. G. Gomes, P. Morkovsky, J. R. Parga, E.
30. Peterson and C. Garcia (2007). "Electrochemistry behind Electrocoagulation using Iron
Electrodes." ECS Transactions, 6(9): 1-15.
31. Fuat Ozyonar and Bunyamin Karagozoglu, (2011). "Operating cost analysis and
treatment of domestic waste by electocoagulation using aluminum electrode." Polish
journal of environmental study 20(1): 173 - 179.
32. Ehssan Mohammed Reda Nassef, (2014). "Removal of polyaromatic hydrocarbons
fromwstewter by electrocoagulation." Journal of petroleum and gas engineering 5(3).
33. Kaustubh S Sasane, Sandip R Korke, (2015). "Treatment of distillery wastewater by
electrocoagulation using Aluminum electrodes." International Journal of Modern Trends
in Engineering and Research.
34. Savarovsky, L. (2000). "Solid-Liquid separation." s.l.:Butterworth-Heinemann. 4th ed. .
35. C.B. Shivayogimath, Rashmi Jahagirdar, (2013). "Treatment of Sugar Industry
Wastewater Using Electrocoagulation Technique." IJRET: International Journal of
Research in Engineering and Technology.
57
AASTU 2016
36. Sincero A and Sincero G (2003). "Physical-Chemical Treatment of Water and

Wastewater,." IWA Pub.; Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press: London.
37. Dhyan Singh, P.K. Chhonkar and B.S. Dwivedi (2005). "Manual on Soil, Plant and
Water Analysis." Westville publishing house, New Delhi(1): 200p.
38. Tamer M. S. Tabash, (2013). "Nitrate removal from groundwater using continuous flow
electrocoagulation reactor."
39. Tridib Tripathy and Bhudeb Ranjan De, (2006). "Flocculation : A New Way to Treat the
Waste Water." Journal of Physical Sciences, 10: 93 -127.
40. Ümran Tezcan Ün, A. Savas Koparal and Ülker Bakir Ögütveren (2009).
"Electrochemical process for the treatment of drinking water." Thirteenth International
Water Technology Conference, IWTC 13 2009, Hurghada, Egypt.
41. Mikko Vepsalainen, M. (2012). "Electrocoagulation in the treatment of industrial waters
and wastewaters." VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.
42. Ville Kuokkanen, Toivo Kuokkanen, Jaakko Rämö, Ulla Lassi, (2013). "Recent
Applications of Electrocoagulation in Treatment of Water and Wastewater-A Review."
Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 2013, 3, 89-121.
43. Vinodha S., Babithesh S., Jegathambal P., (2012). "An Experimental Investigation on the
Effect of The Operating Parameters For The Decolourisation Of Textile Waste Water By
Electro Coagulation Process." International Journal of Engineering Research and
Development 5(3): 45 -54.
44. Wei Wan, (2010). "Arsenic removal from drinking water by electrocoagulation."
Washington University in St. Louis.
58
AASTU 2016
ANNEX A - Proportions, Dilution and Temperature Correction tables
Table 15 - Value of [0.0191 x (t-25)+1] for Temperature Correction of E – con Measurement
T (°C) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
15 0.810 0.812 0.814 0.816 0.818 0.820 0.821 0.823 0.825 0.827
16 0.829 0.831 0.833 0.835 0.837 0.839 0.840 0.842 0.844 0.846
17 0.848 0.850 0.852 0.854 0.856 0.858 0.859 0.861 0.863 0.865
18 0.867 0.869 0.871 0.873 0.875 0.877 0.878 0.880 0.882 0.884
19 0.886 0.888 0.890 0.892 0.894 0.896 0.897 0.899 0.901 0.903
20 0.905 0.907 0.909 0.911 0.913 0.915 0.916 0.918 0.920 0.922
21 0.924 0.926 0.928 0.930 0.932 0.934 0.935 0.937 0.939 0.941
22 0.943 0.945 0.947 0.949 0.951 0.953 0.954 0.956 0.958 0.960
23 0.962 0.964 0.966 0.968 0.970 0.972 0.973 0.975 0.977 0.979
24 0.981 0.983 0.985 0.987 0.989 0.991 0.992 0.994 0.996 0.998
25 1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 1.010 1.011 1.013 1.015 1.017
26 1.019 1.021 1.023 1.025 1.027 1.029 1.030 1.032 1.034 1.036
27 1.038 1.040 1.042 1.044 1.046 1.048 1.049 1.051 1.053 1.055
28 1.057 1.059 1.061 1.063 1.065 1.067 1.068 1.070 1.072 1.074
29 1.076 1.078 1.080 1.082 1.084 1.086 1.087 1.089 1.091 1.093
30 1.095 1.097 1.099 1.101 1.103 1.105 1.106 1.108 1.110 1.112
31 1.114 1.116 1.118 1.120 1.122 1.124 1.125 1.127 1.129 1.131
32 1.133 1.135 1.137 1.139 1.141 1.143 1.144 1.146 1.148 1.150
33 1.152 1.154 1.156 1.158 1.160 1.162 1.163 1.165 1.167 1.169
34 1.171 1.173 1.175 1.177 1.179 1.181 1.182 1.184 1.186 1.188
35 1.190 1.192 1.194 1.196 1.198 1.200 1.201 1.203 1.205 1.207
59
AASTU 2016
Table 16– FEPA of Ethiopia effluents discharged limit to inland waters
Parameter Emission Limit Value (mg/l)
pH 6–9
Temperature 40°C
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) at 20°C 80
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) 250
Suspended solids (SS) 100
Total dissolved solids (TDS) 3000
Total kjeldahl nitrogen (as N) 80
Total ammonia (as N) 30
Ammonia (as free ammonia) 5
Nitrate (as N) 20
Dissolved phosphorus (as P) 5
Total phosphate (as P) 10
Fats, oils and grease 20
Aluminium (as Al) 0.2
Arsenic (as As) 0.25
Barium (as Ba) 10
Boron (as B) 5
Cadmium (as CD) 1
Chromium (as total Cr) 2
Chromium (as Cr Vi) 0.5
Cobalt (as Co) 1
Copper (as Cu) 2
Cyanide (as CN) 0.5
Iron (as Fe) 10
60
AASTU 2016
Lead (as Pb) 0.5
Magnesium (as Mg) 100
Manganese (as Mn) 5
Mercury (as Hg) 0.001
Nickel (as Ni) 3
Selenium (as Se) 1
Silver (as Ag) 1
Tin (as Sn) 5
Zinc (as Zn) 5
Total heavy metals (combined) 15
Table 17– Summary of percentage removal during the whole operation
Voltage No. of electrodes Concentration of sample

supply, at time t, in mg/L % Removal
(V) 20 min 40 min 60 min 20 min 40 min 60 min
5 E - 06 29.8 4.1 2.0 90.69 98.72 99.37
7.5 E - 06 29.7 15.4 4.6 90.72 95.19 98.56
10 E – 06 26.4 6.9 5.8 91.75 97.84 98.19
12.5 E – 06 67.6 41.1 14.6 78.88 87.16 95.44
5 E - 12 4.4 3.0 1.8 98.63 99.06 99.44
7.5 E - 12 35.6 4.8 1.9 88.87 98.50 99.41
10 E – 12 30.8 10.5 1.6 90.37 96.72 99.5
12.5 E – 12 56.6 20.0 6.9 82.31 93.75 97.84
5 E - 18 35.9 2.7 1.7 88.78 99.16 99.47
7.5 E - 18 22.9 14.5 13.8 92.84 95.47 95.69
10 E – 18 13.8 13.4 5.9 95.69 95.82 98.16
12.5 E – 18 55.3 37.0 10.2 82.72 88.44 96.81
61
AASTU 2016
ANNEX B - Design exert output values
Table 18 - Design Summary
Coefficient Standard 95% CI 95%CI

Factor Estimate DF Error Low High VIF
Intercept 94.33 6 0.53 93.25 95.41
A – NE 0.27 1 0.65 -1.05 -5.24 27.42
B – PT -3.35 1 0.71 -4.80 5.79 1.05
C – PS 4.40 1 0.65 3.08 -2.07 1.01
AB 0.65 1 0.87 -1.13 1.09 1.00
AC -0.59 1 0.79 -2.21 2.48 1.00
BC 1.87 1 0.87 0.096 3.71 1.01
Final Equation in Terms of Coded Factors:
%R = + 94.33 – 0.27 *A - 3.35*B +4.40* C + 0.65*A*B-0.59*A*C + 1.87*B*C
Final Equation in Terms of Actual Factors:
%R = +102.20522 - 0.010528*NE - 2.23720* PS + 0.060742*PT + 0.028822*NE*PS -
4.90625E-003 * NE * PT+0.024937 * PS * PT
62
AASTU 2016
ANNEX C - Design expert plots for the interactions of Normal probability, residuals, Run
values and Factors
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot Normal Plot of Residuals
%R
99
95
90
Normal % Probability
80
70
50
30
20
10
5
-2.47 -1.25 -0.03 1.19 2.41
Residuals
Figure 14 -Normal probability plot of the residuals to check for normality of residuals.
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot
Residuals vs. Predicted
%R 3.00
2.00
Studentized Residuals
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
74.94 78.64 82.35 86.05 89.76 93.46 97.17 100.87
Predicted
Figure 15 – Scatter plot for residuals versus predicted values to check for constant error.
63
AASTU 2016
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot Residuals vs. Run

%R
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36
Run Number
Figure 16 - Scatter plot for residuals versus run to check for constant error.
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot Residuals vs. PS

%R
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50
PS
64
AASTU 2016
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot Residuals vs. PT

%R
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
20 27 33 40 47 53 60
PT
DESIGN-EXPERT Plot Residuals vs. NE

%R
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
-3.00
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
NE
Figure 17 - Scatter plot for residuals versus Factor to check for constant error.
65
AASTU 2016
Outlier t
3
0
Oulier t
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
Outlier t
-1
-2
-3
-4
Run order
Figure 18 - Plot for Outlier T versus run order to look for outliers, i.e., influential values.
66
AASTU 2016
ANNEX D – selected project photos
67
AASTU 2016
DECLARATION
I declared that this thesis entitled The Effect of Process Parameters on Electrocoagulation for
Paint Effluent Treatment submitted in fulfillment of the requirement for the masters degree in
environmental engineering to Addis Ababa Science and Technology University School of
Graduate Studies is wholly my work unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged and to the
best of my knowledge, it has not been submitted at any other university or institute for the
award of any academic degree or diploma.
Oliyad Lencho Desure
AASTU
Date Signature
68

The Effect of Process Parameters On Electrocoagulation For Paint Effluent Treatment, by Oliyad Lencho

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Effect of Process Parameters On Electrocoagulation For Paint Effluent Treatment, by Oliyad Lencho

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AASTU 2016

ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

THE EFFECT OF PROCESS PARAMETERS ON

OLIYAD LENCHO DESURE

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

ADVISOR – DR. NURELEGNE TEFERA [PH.D]

ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

THE EFFECT OF PROCESS PARAMETERS ON

OLIYAD LENCHO DESURE

Oliyad Lencho _______________

Approved by the Examining Board

Dr. Nurelegne Tefera (PH.D) _______________

Mr. Abebe Worku _______________

(Internal Examiner) Signature Date

To my Beloved Mother Fantanesh Abera

Oliyad Lencho Desure

APPROVAL STATEMENT ........................................................................................................ i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................................... iii

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. vii

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... viii

CHAPTER ONE ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Objectives of the study ................................................................................................. 4

1.2.1. General objectives ................................................................................................. 4

1.2.2. Specific objectives ................................................................................................ 4

1.3. Scope of the study ........................................................................................................ 4

CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 5

LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 5

2.2. Electrocoagulation (EC) ................................................................................................... 8

2.2.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 8

2.2.2. Principles of electrocoagulation process ............................................................... 8

2.2.3. Previous studies conducted on electrocoagulation ............................................. 10

CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................. 16

MATERIALS AND METHODS .............................................................................................. 16

3.2. Methods ...................................................................................................................... 16

3.2.1. Sampling and collection of wastewater ...................................................................... 16

3.2.2. Experimental setup ..................................................................................................... 17

3.2.3. Experimental procedure ............................................................................................. 18

3.2.4. Analytical methods ..................................................................................................... 20

CHAPTTER FOUR .................................................................................................................. 23

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 23

4.2.1. Raw wastewater characterization ............................................................................ 25

4.2.2. Treated wastewater characterization ....................................................................... 25

4.2.3. Comparison of treated wastewater with FEPA allowable limit .............................. 31

4.2.4. Determination of best operating parameters ....................................................... 32

4.2.4.1. Determination of best process time and percentage removal. ..................... 32

4.2.4.2. Determination of best operating parameters based on electrode and power

4.2.5. Statistical Approach ................................................................................................. 39

4.3. Discussion .................................................................................................................. 42

4.2.1. Effect of varying process time on percentage removal of TiO2 .............................. 42

4.2.2. Effect of varying number of electrodes on percentage removal of TiO2................. 45

4.2.3. Effect of varying power supply on percentage removal of TiO2 ............................. 47

CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................................... 52

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 52

5.2. Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 54

ANNEX A - Proportions, Dilution and Temperature Correction tables ................................... 59

ANNEX B - Design exert output values ................................................................................... 62

ANNEX D – selected project photos ........................................................................................ 67

AAEPA – Addis Ababa Environmental protection Authority

The wastewater from paint industries contains a combination of different concentration of

1.1. Problem statement

1.2.Objectives of the study