See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/269771375

Disinfection of bore well water with chlorine dioxide/sodium hypochlorite and

hydrodynamic cavitation

Article  in  Environmental Technology · February 2015

DOI: 10.1080/09593330.2014.952345 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

32 2,049

5 authors, including:

Chunde Wu
South China University of Technology
38 PUBLICATIONS   1,018 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Chunde Wu on 29 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [South China University of Technology]
On: 16 November 2014, At: 00:47
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environmental Technology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tent20

Disinfection of bore well water with chlorine dioxide/

sodium hypochlorite and hydrodynamic cavitation
ab ab ab ab b
Yifei Wang , Aiyin Jia , Yue Wu , Chunde Wu & Lijun Chen
a
College of Environment and Energy, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou
510006, People's Republic of China
b
The Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Ecosystem Restoration in Industry Clusters,
Ministry of Education, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
Accepted author version posted online: 07 Aug 2014.Published online: 28 Aug 2014.

To cite this article: Yifei Wang, Aiyin Jia, Yue Wu, Chunde Wu & Lijun Chen (2014): Disinfection of bore well
water with chlorine dioxide/sodium hypochlorite and hydrodynamic cavitation, Environmental Technology, DOI:
10.1080/09593330.2014.952345

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.952345

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Environmental Technology, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.952345

Disinfection of bore well water with chlorine dioxide/sodium hypochlorite and

hydrodynamic cavitation
Yifei Wanga,b , Aiyin Jiaa,b , Yue Wua,b , Chunde Wua,b∗ and Lijun Chenb
a College of Environment and Energy, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, People’s Republic of China;
b The Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Ecosystem Restoration in Industry Clusters, Ministry of Education, Guangzhou 510006,
People’s Republic of China
(Received 20 May 2014; final version received 1 August 2014 )
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014

The effect of hydrodynamic cavitation (HC) on potable water disinfection of chemicals was investigated. The bore well water
was introduced into HC set-up to examine the effect of HC alone and combination of HC and chemicals such as chlorine
dioxide and sodium hypochlorite. The effect of inlet pressure and geometrical parameters on disinfection was studied using
HC alone and the results showed that increasing inlet pressure and using more and bigger holes of orifice plates can result in a
higher disinfection rates. When HC was combined with chemicals, HC can reduce the doses of the chemicals and shorten the
time of disinfection. It was also found that the decrease in bacteria concentration followed a first-order kinetic model. As for
the experiment of combination of HC and sodium hypochlorite for disinfection, HC not only improves the disinfection rate
but also degrades natural organic matter and chloroform. Compared with only sodium hypochlorite disinfection, combined
processes get higher disinfection rate and lower production of chloroform, particularly the pretreatment with HC enhances
the disinfection rate by 32% and there is a simultaneous reduction in production of chloroform by 39%.
Keywords: hydrodynamic cavitation; water disinfection; chlorine dioxide; sodium hypochlorite; chloroform; pretreatment

1. Introduction and turbulence associated with liquid circulation, which

Water disinfection technologies can protect people from
waterborne pathogens. As a chemical disinfectant, chlo-
rine has been applied to treat potable water widely because
it is relatively cheap and effective. However, its disad-
vantage is the potential production of the undesired dis-
infection by-products (DBPs). It reacts with the natural
organic matter (NOM) in water to produce mutagenic
and carcinogenic agents which contain trihalomethanes
(THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs).[1–3] The United
States Environmental Protection Agency suggests 80 μg/L
of chloroform as the maximum contamination levels for
drinking water.[4] Comparing to chlorine, other chlorine-
containing disinfectants such as chlorine dioxide and
sodium hypochlorite have more advantages. Chlorine diox-
ide has more powerful bactericidal effects at pH 7–8
and produce less DBPs especially chloroform and sodium
hypochlorite can be stored and transported more easily
and safely than chlorine. However, chlorine-containing
disinfectants can always form carcinogenic DBPs and can-
not destroy the innermost bacteria which are hidden in
agglomerates effectively.[5] Therefore, developing addi-
tional disinfection processes will be imperative, which
could eliminate or reduce the doses of disinfectants.
Cavitation is a phenomenon of transient generation and
collapse of microbubbles, releasing large magnitudes of
energy, generating hot spots, highly reactive free radicals
provides great potential for water treatment.[6–12] Cavi-
tation gives rise to physical effects, including shear force,
high temperature, water hammer effect [13] and radial bub-
ble motion [14] and chemical effects due to generation
of free radicals.[15,16] It is called as ‘a green process’.
Cavitation can improve the effectiveness of disinfectants
through the dispersal of bacterial clumps making individ-
ual bacteria more available to biocide attack and by the
temporary weakening of cell walls making them more per-
meable to the biocide. Previous studies have indicated
that ultrasonic cavitation [17] and hydrodynamic cavita-
tion (HC) [5] can inactivate the microorganisms, which
are essentially different means of generating cavitation,
i.e. using ultrasonic irradiations and flow energies, respec-
tively. Ultrasonic cavitation is difficult to scale up to indus-
trial application while HC is relatively easy and has higher
energy efficiency. Consequently, more and more reports
concentrate on the HC.
HC can simply be generated by the passage of the liq-
uid through a constriction such as an orifice plate, a venturi
tube or a throttling valve. Recently, liquid whistle reactor
was also used to generate HC. It is an inline, homogeniz-
ing device and can generate high pressure.[18,19] But this
set-up cannot control the cavitational activity effectively.
Compared with liquid whistle reactor, the set-up using
a constriction has more flexibility and can be relatively

*Corresponding author. Email: ppchdwu@scut.edu.cn

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

 2 Y. Wang et al.
easier to scale up.[16] Six different designs containing
three orifice plates and three venturi tubes were tested in
order to investigate the effect of different chamber designs
by Arrojo et al. [20] So far, parameters including water
temperature, inlet pressure, cavitation number and initial
bacteria concentration was also tested.[5,20,21]
Previous studies have shown that combination of two
or more disinfection techniques leads to higher disinfec-
tion rates. Hybrid techniques such as HC combined with
chlorine dioxide, hydrogen peroxide, ozone or both per-
oxide and ozone for disinfection of potable water have
been investigated.[6,22–25] But there are few reports about
combination of HC and chlorine-containing disinfectants.
Duckhouse et al. [26] studied the effect of sonication on
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014
microbial disinfection using sodium hypochlorite. Maslak
and Weuster-Botz [24] studied the effect of combination
of HC and chlorine dioxide on microbial disinfection and
compared a newly developed cavitation reactor and a tra-
ditional cavitation reactor and concentrated on their com-
bined effect with chlorine dioxide and kinetic analysis.
However, there are no reports about combination of HC
and sodium hypochlorite for disinfecting potable water,
especially understanding the effect on the formation of
DBPs. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the
effects of combination of HC and chlorine dioxide/sodium
hypochlorite on disinfection of bore well water. In addi-
tion, the DBPs during sodium hypochlorite disinfection
experiments were observed and measured.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
The disinfection study was carried out on the bore well
water which was collected from a bore well in a residen-
tial area in Guangzhou. The bore well water had a bacterial
population 2500–3000 colony forming units (CFU)/ml and
total organic carbon (TOC) 4.25–4.75 mg/L, respectively.
Chlorine dioxide and sodium hypochlorite are chemically
pure, while N, N -diethyl-p-phenylenediamine (DPD) and
other chemicals are analytically pure. All chemicals were
purchased from Tianjin Chemical Reagent Research Insti-
tute.
2.2. HC reactor
The experimental set-up is shown in Figure 1. The set-
up consists of a holding tank of 70 L volume, a coil of
copper pipe (length 30 m, diameter 10 mm), a centrifugal
pump (2900 rpm, 5 kW, Zhejiang, China), control valves
(V1, V2 and V3), flanges to accommodate the orifice plate,
a mainline and a bypass line. The copper pipe acts as the
cooling tube to control the temperature of the reactive sys-
tem. The temperature is within the range of 26–30°C. The
mainline consists of a flange which houses the orifice plate.
The bypass line is provided for controlling the liquid flow
Figure 1. HC set-up.
through the mainline. Both the mainline and the bypass
line terminate well inside the tank below the liquid level in
order to avoid any induction of air into the liquid. The con-
trol valves (V1, V2 and V3) are provided for controlling the
flow rate through the mainline. The inside diameter of the
import and the export of the centrifugal pump is 50 and 40
mm, respectively. Four multiple-hole orifice plates (with
different diameter and number of holes) have been studied.
The diameter of each plate is 40 mm. Detailed information
on the plates and the arrangement of the holes on the plates
are shown in Figure 2. In the set-up, the holding tank was
made of PVC (polyvinyl chloride polymer), whereas all
the pipe and multi-hole orifice plates were made of stain-
less steel. The set-up is a close cycle system designed to
draw the solution from a holding tank, and then take it
into the cavitations region, and finally discharge the treated
solution again back to the tank.
2.3. Methods of experiment
During the experiment, V1 and V2 were always kept full
open while V3 was kept open till the pump functioned
normally. Except the inlet pressure experiment, V3 was
throttled to obtain the required pressure 4.5 × 105 Pa.
Twenty-five litre of bore well water was fed into HC
reactor. Temperature was maintained at 28 ± 2°C. Every
experiment lasted 60 min and was studied twice in order to
avoid the errors. The samples were withdrawn at regular
intervals from the top of the tank and taken for bacte-
rial enumeration. When chemicals were used, two samples
were withdrawn. The first sample was added 1% solution
of sodium hyposulphite to restrain from the effects of chlo-
rine dioxide or sodium hypochlorite and also taken for
bacterial enumeration. The second sample was used for
the analysis of concentration of total chlorine. If sodium
hypochlorite was used, the concentration of chloroform
was also analysed. And TOC was also measured during
the process of pretreatment with HC in the first 30 min.
 Environmental Technology
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014
Figure 2. Arrangement of holes on orifice plates.
2.3.1. Disinfection with HC and chlorine dioxide
Four disinfectant processes including only HC, only 1
mg/L of chlorine dioxide, simultaneous use of HC with 0.5
mg/L of chlorine dioxide, simultaneous use of HC with 1
mg/L of chlorine dioxide were investigated.
2.3.2. Disinfection with HC and sodium hypochlorite
The concentration of total chlorine in the sodium
hypochlorite solution was 2 mg/L. Five disinfectant pro-
cesses including only HC, only 2 mg/L of sodium
hypochlorite, simultaneous use of HC with sodium
hypochlorite, pretreatment with HC and pretreatment with
sodium hypochlorite were investigated.
(1) Pretreatment with HC: 25 L of bore well water was
subjected to HC for 30 min. Then, 2 mg/L of sodium
hypochlorite was added into bore well water and
continued to cavitate 30 min.
(2) Pretreatment with sodium hypochlorite: About 2
mg/L of sodium hypochlorite was added to 25 L of
bore well water in HC set-up but getting rid of ori-
fice plate. After 30 min, the orifice plate was fixed in
the set-up and the solution was cavitated another 30
min.
3
2.4. Methods of analysis
The disinfection efficacy of techniques described above
was assessed by the percentage of microorganisms killed.
Enumeration of bacteria was done by the plate count
method as recommended by the American Public Health
Association.[27] This method of analysis has also been
used for the estimation of the overall reduction in the
CFU. The concentration of total chlorine was determined
by the DPD titration method. TOC was measured from
the filtered sample using the TOC analyzer (OI Analytical
model 1020A). And the concentration of chloroform was
measured by the gas chromatography with electron cap-
ture detector (series 6890 Agilent with AB011 column).
The temperature programme was injector 250°C, detec-
tor 280°C, column 40°C for 5 min then increased by 10°C
min−1 to 150°C, hold 2 min.
3. Results and discussions
3.1. Effect of inlet pressure
The effect of different initial pressures on disinfection in
the HC set-up for Plate 2 was investigated over the range
of 0.35–0.45 MPa and the results are shown in Figure 3.
It can be observed that when the pressure increases, and
 4 Y. Wang et al.
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014
Figure 3. Effect of inlet pressure on disinfection efficacy.
the disinfection efficacy also increases. The extent of
disinfection was only 57.3% at 0.35 MPa, while 67.3% at
0.45 MPa at 60 min. Furthermore, at high inlet pressure,
the time required to achieve a certain level of disinfec-
tion is less than that at low inlet pressure. This is because
an increase in inlet pressure increases cavitational activity
and produces more hydroxyl radical. Previous studies on
disinfection with HC also confirms these results.[20,28,29]
There are two reasons to explain it. On the one hand, the
increase in the upstream pressure increases the downstream
pressure and it can lead to larger pressure drop across the
orifice in cavitation nascent stage to increase the violence
of bubble collapse. Moreover, the more violent collapse of
cavitation bubble results in the larger pressures and high
temperature and promoting more production of hydroxyl
radicals.[30,31] On the other hand, with the increase in
inlet pressure, the mainline flow rate also increases, which
subsequently results in an increase in the number of passes
of the liquid through the cavitational zone, which leads to
the increase in cavitation yield.
The maximum disinfection (%) was obtained for the
inlet pressures 0.45 MPa. Hence for further experiments,
the inlet pressure was fixed at 0.45 MPa.
3.2. Effect of multi-hole orifice plates
Different multi-hole orifice plates result in different intensi-
ties of cavitation and hence generated different magnitude
of pressures due to collapse of cavities.[32,33] In order to
evaluate the effect of multi-hole orifice plates, four differ-
ent plates were studied in HC. Figure 4 shows the variation
in the disinfection efficacy at a fixed inlet pressure (0.45
MPa) with operating time for all plates.
The disinfection efficacy has been found to be dif-
ferent. The disinfection efficiency with Plate 2 is 67.3%,
whereas it is only 41.1% with Plate 4. This difference can
Figure 4. Effect of geometrical parameters of orifice plates on
disinfection efficacy.
be attributed to different number and diameter of the holes
on the respective plates.
Sivakumar and Pandit [32] and Vichare et al. [34]
reported that for the plates having almost similar flow area,
plates with a smaller hole size were found to be more effec-
tive. In our experiment, for Plates 2 and 4, which almost
have the same flow areas, it can be seen that Plate 2 has a
higher disinfection rate with a smaller hole size comparing
to Plate 4. This is because the plates with a smaller hole
size and a same flow area have a higher shear layer area
and turbulence frequency which result in a more violent
collapse of cavitation bubble.
For the same diameter plates (Plates 2 and 3), the disin-
fection rate increases as the number of holes increases due
to a bigger total perimeter of the holes and then improving
the exposure chance of bacteria.
It can also be seen from Figure 4 that the bigger diam-
eter is more advantageous than the smaller diameter when
the plates have the same number of holes. Plate 2 (67.3%)
is more advantageous than Plate 1 (63.1%). This can be
attributed to the fact that the system acts as the multiple ori-
fices resulting in a greater number of cavitation events and
hence the overall cavitational intensity is greater resulting
in enhanced disinfection.
Further experiments using Plate 2 showed that the
maximum disinfection (%) was obtained.
3.3. Effect of HC on disinfection using chlorine dioxide
Figure 5 indicates the disinfection efficacy for four differ-
ent disinfectant processes. It shows that the percentage of
disinfection obtained was higher for the combination of
HC with chlorine dioxide as compared with the individ-
ual operations. The disinfection efficiency is 78.2% only
using 1 mg/L of chlorine dioxide at 60 min comparing to
81.8% using HC and 0.5 mg/L of chlorine dioxide at 30
 Environmental Technology
min. The results indicate that HC can shorten 50% disin-
fection time and decrease 50% doses of chlorine dioxide
for almost same disinfection rate.
In order to compare the consumptions rates of chlo-
rine dioxide in the two representative processes 1 mg/L
of chlorine dioxide with/without HC, Figure 6 shows the
consumption changes of concentrations of the total chlo-
rine. Only using chlorine dioxide, the total chlorine is 0.25
mg/L at 60 min while the total chlorine is used up at 40
min when it was combined with HC. From Figures 5 and
6, there was a positive correlation between the efficacies
of disinfection and the consumption of total chlorine. It
can be concluded that HC can accelerate the disinfection
rate of chlorine dioxide. This could be explained that HC
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014
weaken the cell walls and make them more permeable to
the chlorine dioxide.[24]
Figure 5. Effect of HC on disinfection efficacy using chlorine
dioxide.
Figure 6. Variation of concentration of total chlorine with time
using chlorine dioxide.
5
3.4. Effect of HC on disinfection using sodium
hypochlorite
The disinfection efficacy of the techniques described ear-
lier in text is plotted at Figure 7. When HC was combined
with sodium hypochlorite, the percentage of disinfection
obtained higher than that using either of them. And the per-
centage of disinfection in simultaneous treatment at 20 min
is equal to that with hypochlorite alone at 60 min. It can be
concluded that HC can shorten the time of disinfection and
decrease the doses of hypochlorite.
Figure 8 depicts the consumption of concentrations of
total chlorine. From Figures 7 and 8, there was a sim-
ilar tendency for sodium hypochlorite which shows that
HC can accelerate the disinfection rate. But pretreatment
with HC excelled simultaneous treatment in the disinfec-
tion efficacy. The reason may be that the pretreatment with
Figure 7. Effect of HC on disinfection efficacy using sodium
hypochlorite.
Figure 8. Variation of concentration of total chlorine with time
using sodium hypochlorite.
 6 Y. Wang et al.

HC can weaken the cell walls stronger than simultaneous

treatment in the same total chlorine concentration, which
let the hypochlorite work more effectively.

3.5. Kinetics of disinfection

In order to better compare and estimate the rate of disinfec-
tion discussed above, plots of CFU/ml vs. time were con-
structed. It was observed that the microbial count deceased
exponentially with reaction time and it could be nicely
fitted by a first-order kinetic model
c1
ln = kt, (1)
c2
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014

where c1 is the initial bacteria concentration, c2 represents

the residual bacteria concentration, t is the time and k is the
first-order rate constant. Table 1 gives the disinfection rate
constants for all the methods employed in this study except
the pretreatment process which has no comparability.
From Table 1, it can be observed that when chlorine
dioxide or sodium hypochlorite is added to water before
subjecting it to HC, the rate constant obtained is higher
as compared with the individual operations. This can be
explained as follows:
(1) HC can facilitate water disinfection through increas-
ing the mass transfer rates and it can weaken the cell
walls and make them more permeable to the chemi-
cal substances such as chlorine dioxide and sodium
hypochlorite.[23]
(2) HC generates the effects such as heat, free radical to
make a contribution to disinfection.
(3) There was a possibility that HC can result in for-
mation of free chlorine through producing chlo-
rine directly from the chlorine-containing solution,
which will enhance the disinfection.[26,35]
It can also be observed that the rate constant increased
with an increase in the dose of chlorine dioxide when it
was combined with HC. In our study, maximum rate of
disinfection was obtained with HC and 1 mg/L of chlorine
dioxide.
3.6. Effect of HC on chloroform generation using
sodium hypochlorite
Chlorine dioxide does not produce THMs and THAAs
to a significant extent but for sodium hypochlorite, there
can be significant formation.[2] In order to investigate
the production of DBPs during sodium hypochlorite dis-
infection with/without HC, the production of chloroform
Figure 9. Effect of HC on chloroform generation using sodium
hypochlorite.
was measured. Figure 9 clearly exhibits the distributions
of the chloroform generated in different processes. At
the beginning of 45 min, the concentration of chloroform
in the simultaneous treatment was higher than that with
hypochlorite alone. It can be inferred that HC can boost the
reaction between hypochlorite and NOM. Using hypochlo-
rite alone, the concentration of chloroform of the DBPs
increased at all time. While using the processes both simul-
taneous treatment and pretreatment with sodium hypochlo-
rite, there was a diminishing tendency after 45 min. The
reason is that the hypochlorite was used up (Figure 8) and
HC can degrade the chloroform.[36,37]
Figure 9 also shows that the concentration of chloro-
form in the pretreatment with HC was much less as com-
pared with other processes. For example, comparing with
hypochlorite alone, the production of chloroform in the
pretreatment with HC decreases 39% at 60 min, while the
simultaneous treatment decreases only 15% and the pre-
treatment with sodium hypochlorite decreases 24% at the
same time. The concentrations of TOC during the pretreat-
ment with HC were 4.55 mg/L and 4.12 mg/L at 5 min,
3.12 mg/L at 15 min and 2.13 mg/L at 30 min, respectively
(data not shown). Before the addition of hypochlorite, TOC
of the solution was only about 50% of the original solu-
tion. It indicated that HC could greatly degrade NOM
and reduce the chance of reaction between hypochlorite
and NOM, which decreased the formation of chloroform
obviously. Thus, HC can decrease the production of chlo-
roform through reducing the precursors. In addition, HC
can degrade the chloroform directly. In the presence of HC,
the chloroform can be degraded by the high temperature

Table 1. Disinfection rate constants for different methods.

Process HC 1.0 mg/L ClO2 2 mg/L NaClO HC + 0.5 mg/L ClO2 HC + 1.0 mg/L ClO2 HC + 2 mg/L NaClO

k (min−1 ) 0.0176 0.0263 0.0106 0.0616 0.0890 0.0272

 Environmental Technology
and pressures created by cavitation bubbles and oxidized
by free radicals.[38] Another hypothesis is that the degra-
dation of chloroform can release Cl· radicals and other
additional oxidizing agents, such as Cl2 and HOCl in the
presence of cavitation and they can take part in the desired
reactions and intensify the oxidation rates.[19]
4. Conclusions
The disinfection effect of HC alone and combination of
HC and chemicals were investigated. It was found that HC
is able to inactivate the microorganisms. The higher inlet
pressure is beneficial to disinfection and more and bigger
holes of orifice plates are effective for the disinfection.
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014
Combination of HC and chlorine dioxide/sodium
hypochlorite results in a remarkable improvement on dis-
infection. They can reduce the doses of these disinfecting
chemicals and shorten the time of disinfection. The kinetic
analysis indicates that the bacteria concentration during
disinfection follows a first-order kinetic model and that the
rate constants are higher with combined methods.
HC can also degrade NOM and chloroform. During HC
and sodium hypochlorite for disinfection, disinfection rates
are higher and the production of chloroform is lower as
compared with only sodium hypochlorite for disinfection.
Therefore, hybrid technique is an effective and safe tech-
nology. They are much superior for disinfecting bore well
water than individual technique.
Acknowledgements
This study was financially supported by the National Nature
Science Foundation of China [grant nos. 51078148 and
41173103].
References
[1] Nissinen TK, Miettinen IT, Martikainen PJ, Vartiainen
T. Disinfection by-products in Finnish drinking waters.
Chemosphere. 2002;48:9–20.
[2] Hua GH, Reckhow DA. Comparison of disinfection byprod-
uct formation from chlorine and alternative disinfectants.
Water Res. 2007;41:1667–1678.
[3] Bond T, Goslan EH, Parsons SA, Jefferson B. Treatment
of disinfection by-product precursors. Environ Technol.
2011;32:1–25.
[4] USEPA. 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards
and Health Advisories. 2012; EPA/822/S/12/001. Office of
Water, US. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
DC, p. 2.
[5] Mezule L, Tsyfansky S, Yakushevich V, Juhna T. A simple
technique for water disinfection with hydrodynamic cavi-
tation: effect on survival of Escherichia coli. Desalination.
2009;248:152–159.
[6] Jyoti KK, Pandit AB. Ozone and cavitation for water disin-
fection. Biochem Eng J. 2004;18:9–19.
[7] Gogate PR. Application of cavitational reactors for water
disinfection: current status and path forward. J Environ
Manage. 2007;85:801–815.
[8] Gogate PR, Mededovic-Thagard S, McGuire D, Chapas G,
Blackmon J, Cathey R. Hybrid reactor based on combined
7
cavitation and ozonation: from concept to practical reality.
Ultrason Sonochem. 2014;21(2):590–598.
[9] Gogate PR, Tayal RK, Pandit AB. Cavitation: a technology
on the horizon. Curr Sci. 2006;91:35–46.
[10] Gogate PR, Pandit AB. A review and assessment of hydro-
dynamic cavitation as a technology for the future. Ultrason
Sonochem. 2005;12:21–27.
[11] Joshi RK, Gogate PR. Degradation of dichlorvos using
hydrodynamic cavitation based treatment strategies. Ultra-
son Sonochem. 2012;19:532–539.
[12] Patil PN, Gogate PR. Degradation of methyl parathion
using hydrodynamic cavitation: effect of operating param-
eters and intensification using additives. Sep Purif Technol.
2012;95:172–179.
[13] Chahine GL. Cavitation dynamics at microscale level. J
Heart Valve Dis. 1993;3:102–116.
[14] Wu CC, Roberts PH. Shock-wave propagation in a sonolu-
minescing gas bubble. Phys Rev Lett. 1993;70:3424–3427.
[15] Aguilar O, Angeles C, Castillo CO, Martinez C, Rodriguez
R, Ruiz RS, Vizcarra MG. On the ultrasonic degradation of
Rhodamine B in water: kinetics and operational conditions
effect. Environ Technol. 2014;35:1183–1189.
[16] Gogate PR. Hydrodynamic cavitation for food and water
processing. Food Bioprocess Tech. 2011;4:996–1011.
[17] Joyce E, Phull SS, Lorimer JP, Mason TJ. The development
and evaluation of ultrasound for the treatment of bacte-
rial suspensions. A study of frequency, power and sonica-
tion time on cultured Bacillus species. Ultrason Sonochem.
2003;10:315–318.
[18] Chakinala AG, Bremner DH, Gogate PR, Namkung KC,
Burgess AE. Multivariate analysis of phenol mineralisa-
tion by combined hydrodynamic cavitation and heteroge-
neous advanced Fenton processing. Appl Catal B: Environ.
2008;78:11–18.
[19] Chakinala AG, Gogate PR, Chand R, Bremner DH, Molina
R, Burgess AE. Intensification of oxidation capacity using
chloroalkanes as additives in hydrodynamic and acoustic
cavitation reactors. Ultrason Sonochem. 2008;15:164–170.
[20] Arrojo S, Benito Y, Tarifa AM. A parametrical study
of disinfection with hydrodynamic cavitation. Ultrason
Sonochem. 2008;15(5):903–908.
[21] Balasundaram B, Harrison S. Study of physical and bio-
logical factors involved in the disruption of E. coli by
hydrodynamic cavitation. Biotechnol Progr. 2006;22:907–
913.
[22] Jyoti KK, Pandit AB. Hybrid cavitation methods for water
disinfection: simultaneous use of chemicals with cavitation.
Ultrason Sonochem. 2003;10:255–264.
[23] Jyoti KK, Pandit AB. Effect of cavitation on chemical
disinfection efficiency. Water Res. 2004;38:2249–2258.
[24] Maslak D, Weuster-Botz D. Combination of hydrodynamic
cavitation and chlorine dioxide for disinfection of water.
Eng Life Sci. 2011;11:350–358.
[25] Chand R, Bremner DH, Namkung KC, Collier PJ, Gogate
PR. Water disinfection using the novel approach of ozone
and a liquid whistle reactor. Biochem Eng J. 2007;35:357–
364.
[26] Duckhouse H, Mason TJ, Phull SS, Lorimer JP. The effect
of sonication on microbial disinfection using hypochlorite.
Ultrason Sonochem. 2004;11:173–176.
[27] American Public Health Association. Standard methods for
the analysis of water and wastewater. Washington, DC:
American Public Health Association; 1985.
[28] Jyoti KK, Pandit AB. Water disinfection by acoustic and
hydrodynamic cavitation. Biochem Eng J. 2001;7:201–212.
[29] Sharma A, Gogate PR, Mahulkar A, Pandit AB. Model-
ing of hydrodynamic cavitation reactors based on orifice
 8 Y. Wang et al.
plates considering hydrodynamics and chemical reactions
occurring in bubble. Chem Eng J. 2008;143:201–209.
[30] Gogate PR, Pandit AB. Engineering design methods for
cavitation reactors II: hydrodynamic cavitation. Aiche J.
2000;46:1641–1649.
[31] Amin LP, Gogate PR, Burgess AE, Bremner DH. Optimiza-
tion of a hydrodynamic cavitation reactor using salicylic
acid dosimetry. Chem Eng J. 2010;156:165–169.
[32] Sivakumar M, Pandit AB. Wastewater treatment: a novel
energy efficient hydrodynamic cavitational technique.
Ultrason Sonochem. 2002;9:123–131.
[33] Ambulgekar GV, Samant SD, Pandit AB. Oxidation of
alkylarenes to the corresponding acids using aqueous potas-
sium permanganate by hydrodynamic cavitation. Ultrason
Sonochem. 2004;11:191–196.
Downloaded by [South China University of Technology] at 00:47 16 November 2014
View publication stats
[34] Vichare NP, Gogate PR, Pandit AB. Optimization of hydro-
dynamic cavitation using a model reaction. Chem Eng
Technol. 2000;23:683–690.
[35] Blume T, Neis U. Improving chlorine disinfection of
wastewater by ultrasound application. Water Sci Technol.
2005;52:139–144.
[36] Braeutigam P, Franke M, Wu ZL, Ondruschka B. Role of
different parameters in the optimization of hydrodynamic
cavitation. Chem Eng Technol. 2010;33:932–940.
[37] Mishra KP, Gogate PR. Intensification of degradation of
Rhodamine B using hydrodynamic cavitation in the pres-
ence of additives. Sep Purif Technol. 2010;75:385–391.
[38] Wu CD, Liu XH, Fan JC, Wang LS. Ultrasonic destruction
of chloroform and carbon tetrachloride in aqueous solution.
J Environ Sci Heal A. 2001;36:947–955.