ANALYSING THE PHYSICO CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE ... · CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE EFFLUENT USING VARIOUS AGRO ADSORBENTS **M. Angeline Mary, Rubini P S, Soundarya M R,*Yuvashree

International Journal of Research in Science and Technology http://www.ijrst.com

(IJRST) 2017, Vol. No. 7, Issue No. II, Apr-Jun e-ISSN: 2249-0604, p-ISSN: 2454-180X

29

IRA PUBLICATIONS www.irapub.com

ANALYSING THE PHYSICO CHEMICAL

CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE EFFLUENT USING

VARIOUS AGRO ADSORBENTS

**M. Angeline Mary, *Rubini P S, *Soundarya M R,*Yuvashree S

** Assistant Professor, *UG Students

Department of Civil Engineering,

K.L.N. College of Information Technology,

Sivagangai- 630612.

ABSTRACT

In this present paper, low cost Environmental friendly agro adsorbents are used for the treatment of textile

effluent. Current methods involve the application of various chemicals thus escalating the cost of treatment.

Utilization of agricultural waste as low cost adsorbent has great significance in India where more than 200

million tons of agricultural residues are generated annually. Adsorption is the process which is inexpensive. A

number of non-conventional low cost agro adsorbents such as neem leaves, banana peel, orange peel, garlic

peel, jack fruit peel, prosopis juliflora, calotropis gigantea latex, coconut coir, root of water hyacinth and

banana pith juice are used in our project. Properly treated agricultural residues are used as adsorbents in our

Project. Our Project main objective is to identify the low cost and adsorbent used for treating the textile effluent.

By varying the adsorbent dosage and its contact time the optimal usage of the corresponding adsorbent were

identified. The influent and the effluent were tested to identify the variation and changes in their physical as

well as chemical properties. This paper will help the textile industry to treat their effluent more economical by

using the low cost available adsorbents.

Keywords—neem leaves, banana peel, orange peel, garlic peel, jack fruit peel, prosopisjuliflora,

calotropisgigantea latex, banana pith juice, coconut coir, root of water hyacinth.

INTRODUCTION

Most of the developing countries face severe water scarcity due to ground water pollution. This

pollution mainly caused by the discharge of untreated effluent. The Indian textile industry is one the

largest sectors in the country. The textile industry consumes large quantities of water and produces

large volumes of wastewater through various steps in dyeing and finishing processes. The discharge

of toxic effluents from various industries adversely affects water resources, soil fertility, aquatic

organisms and ecosystem integrity. Wastewater from dyeing and printing units is often rich in color,

residues containing of chemicals and reactive dyes. The characteristics of textile industrial wastewater

http://www.ijrst.com/

http://www.irapub.com/



30


are high biological oxygen need, high chemical oxygen need, high pH, and high temperature. The

textile waste water is rated as the most polluting among all in the industrial sectors. The textile waste

water is a complex and variable mixture of polluting substances. The pollutants released from these

processes are very dangerous and it is very necessary to treat the textile effluent. The waste water

treatment is mostly by primary and secondary processes. The textile wastewater containing dye

substances is not only toxic to the biological world, its dark color blocks sunlight that leads to severe

problems to the ecosystem. However, these conventional methods of treatment are not very efficient

in removal of pollutants such as dissolved solids, color, trace metals etc. The advance treatment

methods, while reducing these pollutants also give scope for recovery and recycling. The usual

treatment processes like physical and chemical methods such as coagulation, flocculation, adsorption,

membrane filtration and irradiation. (Robinson et al., 2001) achieve good decolorizing efficiency but

they have two main constraints high cost and the production of the significant amount of sludge

material that requires final disposal again. Among all the methods adsorption is one of the most

effective methods of removing dyes from waste sewage (Deans and Dixon, 1992; Nigam et al., 2000).

The process of adsorption has an advantage over the other methods due to its sludge free operation

and complete removal of dyes even from dilute solutions. Activated carbons have been extensively

utilized in various industrial adsorption and separation processes because of its efficient adsorption of

the organic compound. However there are a number of drawbacks in utilization for decolourisation

like higher cost and operational losses such as combustion at high temperature, pore blocking and

hygroscopicity. Recently, a considerable amount of research has been undertaken to find cheaper

substitutions to activated carbon.

Developments of new strategies of making use of low cost, easily available biological and

agricultural waste materials for the adsorption process is gaining much importance to replace activated

carbon. Due to high energy consumption or application of variety of chemicals, this would decrease

the efficiency and increase cost of process. The adsorption is the process which seems to be the better

alternative to other processes. A wide range of adsorbent are used to treat large quantity of textile

effluent as a cost effective technique. It has potential advantages over the conventional methods as

adsorption technique is low cost, high efficiency on heavy metal removal and discoloration, less use

of chemicals, regeneration characteristics, minimum waste and recycling of water. In our studies we

designed to exploit the abundantly available agricultural wastes for the treatment of textile effluents

to remove color, pH, turbidity, suspended solids, TDS, COD, BOD, sulphide, phosphate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TEXTILE WASTEWATER

Our raw textile wastewater sample was collected from Tirupur industry. Samples were collected

in sampling bottles and preserved at 4℃ for analysis. The physicochemical parameters such as pH,

turbidity, chemical oxygen demand (COD), biological oxygen demand (BOD) and Total suspended

solids (TSS) were estimated before and after the treatment of water samples.

PREPARATION OF ADSORBENTS





31


Different agro adsorbents (neem leaves, banana peel, orange peel, garlic peel, prosopis juliflora,

calotropis gigantea latex, root of water hyacinth, jack fruit peel, banana pith juice and coconut coir)

were collected and rinsed several times with distilled water. The cleaned adsorbents were dried under

sun and then it was oven dried. The dried adsorbents were ground to powder and then sieved to get fine

particles. Each particle were sieved accordingly to their particle sizes using sieve set and stored in air

tight container.

BATCH STUDIES

Batch studies were carried out at room temperature to study the effects of important parameters

such as effect of adsorbent dosage, shaking speed and contact time..A fixed amount of prepared

adsorbent was placed in 250ml conical flask with known adsorbent dosage. Then the flask was agitated

using orbital shaker and jar test apparatus. The supernatant solution thus obtained was filtered using

filter paper and the physical and chemical parameters were examined. All the experiments were

performed in triplicate and reported values are mean±SD. The concentration of dye solution is

determined by using UV Spectrometer.

The %age of dye removal was calculated by using the following relationship:

%Removal = 𝐼𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑏𝑠−𝐹𝐼𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑏𝑠

𝐼𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑏𝑠 x 100

EFFECT OF ADSORBENT DOSAGE

Adsorbent dosage is an important parameter in order to determine the adsorbent’s capacity for

a given amount of the adsorbate at the operating conditions. Effect of adsorbent dosage was

investigated by using different adsorbent doses (0.05, 0.1, 0.15 and 0.2g) 50mL-1.The effect of

adsorbent dosage on the adsorption process can be carried out by preparing adsorbent–adsorbate

solution with different amount of adsorbents and shaken together until equilibrium time. Generally,

the percentage of removal increases with increasing adsorbent dosage. Initially the rate of increase in

the percent removal has been found to be rapid which slowed down as the dose increased. This

phenomenon can be explained based on the fact that, at lower adsorbent dosage the adsorbate is more

easily accessible.

With rise in adsorbent dose, there is less commensurate increase in adsorption, resulting from

many sites remaining unsaturated during the adsorption. But after a certain dosage the removal

efficiency is insignificant with respect to increase in dose. This is due to the fact that, at higher

adsorbent dosage there is a very fast superficial adsorption onto the adsorbent surface that produces a

minimum solute concentration in the solution than when adsorbent dosage is lower.

EFFECT OF CONTACT TIME

The effect of contact time on adsorption can be carried out by preparing adsorbent–adsorbate

solution with fixed adsorbent dose for different time intervals and shaken until equilibrium. Generally

the rate of removal increases with an increase in contact time to a certain limit. Further increase in

contact time does not increase the uptake due to deposition of effluent on the available adsorption site

on adsorbent material. The time required to attain this state of equilibrium is termed the equilibrium





32


time and it reflects the maximum adsorption capacity of the adsorbent under those operating

conditions.

Table 1

Influent Characteristics

PARAMETER UNITS BIS VALUE TESTED

EFFLUENT VALUE

pH - 6.5 – 8.5 9.5

Turbidity NTU 10 81.5

Suspended Solids mg/L 100 1800

BOD5 mg/l 30 502

COD mg/l 250 990

Sulphide mg/l 2.0 .46

Total Dissolved

Solids (TDS)

ppm 2100 6780

Iron mg/l 3.0 0.16

Phosphate mg/l 5.0 19

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

PHYSICO CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF TEXTILE EFFLUENT

The Influent characteristics of the samples were identified and the values are given in Table 1.After

using the adsorbents there was a change noticed in the Effluent characteristic before and after adsorption

trials for pH, Turbidity, COD, BOD, TDS and TSS and the values of these parameters are given in Table

2.Using the natural agro adsorbents plays a vital role in the removal of the organic pollutants present in

the wastewater samples i.e the textile effluent.





33


Table 2: Effluent Characteristics

EFFECT OF pH

pH is an important physical parameter to measure the quality of water. A general recommendation is

that the water having pH below 6.5 and above 8.5 is not reasonable for public consumption. TDS refers to

any minerals, salts, metals cation, or anion dissolved in water. The result indicate a decrease in COD, TDS,

TSS and other physico-chemical parameters after the treatment of textile effluents through adsorption(using

agro adsorbents) which shows that adsorption process is effective for the treatment of textile effluents.The

response of each adsorbents with the variation of pH is shown in Fig 1 to Fig 10.

Fig 1: Dosage Vs pH value using Neam leaf Fig 2: Dosage Vs pH value using Orange peel

0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9.4 9.1 8.7 8.2 7.8 7.8 7.9

pH

ADSORBENT DOSAGE (g/50ml)

NEEM LEAF

9.35

9.4

9.45

9.5

1 2 3 4 5

9.5

9.47

9.43

9.4 9.4

pH


ORANGE PEEL

PARAMETER pH Turbidity TSS BOD5

COD

NEEM LEAF 7.5 20.5 400 120 300

ORANGE PEEL 8.1 25.6 406 135 240

BANANA PEEL 8.5 30.3 500 420 200

GARLIC PEEL 7.9 40.5 1000 450 193.5

WATER HYACINTH 9.2 25.3 155 99.8 922.8

BANANA PITH JUICE 7.6 78.3 200 455.6 901.1

JACKFRUIT PEEL 8.9 80.1 1490 500 450

PROSOPIS JULIFLORA 8.8 79.8 1500 355.8 560.3

CALOTROPIS GIGANTEA 9.5 77.3 300 502 921.6

COCONUT COIR DUST

7.2 17.6 1700 467.8 777.8





34


Fig 3: Dosage Vs pH value using Water Hyacinth Root Fig 4: Dosage Vs pH value using Prosopis juliflora

Fig 5: Dosage Vs pH value using Garlic peel Fig 6: Dosage Vs pH value using Banana peel

Fig 7 :Dosage Vs pH value using Banana pith juice

Fig 8:Dosage Vs pH value using Calotropis gigantea

9

9.2

9.4

9.6

1 2 3 4 5

9.5

9.3 9.299.2 9.2

pH


WATER HYACINTH ROOT

8.5

9

9.5

1 2 3 4 5

9.4 9.349.18

8.98.8

pH


PROSOPIS JULIFLORA

0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5

9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5

pH


GARLIC PEEL

8.8

9

9.2

9.4

1 2 3 4 5

9.4

9.29.1 9.1 9.1

pH


BANANA PEEL

5

7

9

11

1 2 3 4 5

9.5 9.18.5 8.1

7.6

pH

ADSORBENT DOSAGE (ml/50ml)

BANANA PITH JUICE

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5

pH


CALOTROPIS GIGANTEA





35


Fig 9 : Dosage Vs pH value using Jackfruit peel

Fig 10 : Dosage Vs pH value using Coconut Coir

From the above graph, we know that by varying the dosage as 1gm, 2gm, 3 gm…..the removal

deficiency of the adsorbent varies correspondingly. An increase in the dose due to the increase in

removal efficiency. Among the ten adsorbents coconut coir has a good efficient to remove pH by

the optimum dosage of 5gm.

EFFECT OF TURBIDITY

Turbidity is the major pollutant parameter found in the textile effluent due to the presence

of suspended solids. The variation of Turbidity with the adsorbent dosage is given in the below graph.

Fig 11: Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Neem leaf Fig 12 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Orange peel

Fig 13 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using banana Peel Fig 14 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Water hyacinth root

8.6

8.8

9

9.2

9.4

1 2 3 4 5

9.359.27

9.09

8.9 8.9

pH


JACK FRUIT PEEL

5

7

9

1 2 3 4 5 6

8.78.1

7.47 7.2 7.2 7.2

pH


COCONUT COIR

0 20 40 60 801

3

5

7

71.2

59.4

41

32

27

25.5

25.5

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

NEEM LEAF

72 74 76 78 80 82

1

2

3

4

5

80.1

78

76.4

75.5

75.5

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

ORANGE PEEL

79.5 80 80.5 81 81.5

1

2

3

4

5

81.1

80.9

80.7

80.2

80.2

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g/5

0m

l)

BANANA PEEL

9 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5

1

2

3

4

5

9.5

9.3

9.29

9.2

9.2

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

WATER HYACINTH ROOT





36


Fig 15 : Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Prosopis juliflora Fig 16 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Garlic peel

Fig 17 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Banana Pith juice Fig 18 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Jackfruit peel

Fig 19 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Calotropis gigantean Fig 20 :Dosage Vs Turbidity value using Coconut Coir

From the result obtained we have plotted the graph. Coconut coir has the good ability to

remove turbidity form the textile effluent with the optimum dosage of 6gm for the 50 ml effluent.

EFFECT OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS

Suspended solids are those solids which remain floating in textile effluent. It is

calculated by varying the adsorbent dosage and its contact time with the effluent.

79 79.5 80 80.5 81

1

2

3

4

5

81

80.6

79.8

79.8

79.8

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

PROSOPIS JULIFLORA

79.5 80 80.5 81 81.5

1

2

3

4

5

81.3

81.1

80.2

80.2

80.2

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

GARLIC PEEL

76 77 78 79 80 81 82

1

2

3

4

5

81.5

81.3

80

78.3

78.3

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

BANANA PITH JUICE

78 80 82 84

1

2

3

4

5

6

81

80.1

80.1

80.1

80.1

84

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

JACK FRUIT PEEL

74 76 78 80 82

1

2

3

4

5

6

80.9

79

77.3

77.3

77.3

77.3

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

CALOTROPIS GIGANTEA

0 20 40 60 80

1

2

3

4

5

6

70

55

36.7

23.4

17.8

17.6

TURBIDITY (NTU)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

COCONUT COIR





37


Fig 21 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Neem leaf Fig 22 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Orange peel

Fig 23 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Banana peel Fig 24 :Dosage Vs TSS value using water hyacinth root

Fig 25 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Prosopis Juliflora Fig 26 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Garlic peel

Fig 27 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Banana pith juice Fig 28 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Jackfruit peel

0 500 1000 1500

1

3

5

7

14091020

912409

321201

115

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

NEEM LEAF

0 500 1000 1500 2000

1

2

3

4

5

1797

1501

1379

1156

1000

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

ORANGE PEEL

0 500 1000 1500 2000

1

2

3

4

5

1701

1625

1520

1390

1197

TSS(mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

BANANA PEEL

0 500 1000 1500 2000

1

2

3

4

5

1550

925

734

346

155

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

WATER HYACINTH ROOT

1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800

1

2

3

4

5

1750

1699

1623

1591

1500

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

PROSOPIS JULIFLORA

0 500 1000 1500 2000

1

2

3

4

5

1609

1473

1294

1009

895

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

GARLIC PEEL

0 500 1000 1500 2000

1

2

3

4

5

1800

1510

770

420

200

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(m

l/5

0m

l)

BANANA PITH JUICE

1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800

1

2

3

4

5

6

1709

1643

1593

1501

1490

1490

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

JACK FRUIT PEEL





38


Fig 29 :Dosage Vs TSS value using Calotropis gigantean Fig 30:Dosage Vs TSS value using Coconut Coir

From the experimental study, we know that the suspended solids are removed

efficiently by neem leaf powder.

EFFECT OF BOD

Fig 31 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Neem Fig 32 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Orange peel

1650 1700 1750 1800

1

2

3

4

5

6

1787

1760

1749

1721

1700

1700

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

COCONUT COIR DUST

0

100

200

300

400

500

1 2 3 4 5

447

304269

151100.3

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

BOD (mg/l)

ORANGE PEEL

0 500 1000 1500 2000

1

2

3

4

5

6

1554

1104

873

625

412

300

TSS (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

CALOTROPIS GIGANTEA

0

200

400

600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

403321

258209

11545.8 45.8

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

BOD (mg/l)

NEEM LEAF





39


Fig 33 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Banana peel

Fig 34 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Water hyacinth root

Fig 35 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Prosopis Juliflora Fig 36:Dosage Vs BOD value using Banana pith juice

0 100 200 300 400

1

2

3

4

5

397

221

109

99.8

99.8

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l))

WATER HYACINTH ROOT

420 440 460 480 500 520

1

2

3

4

5

502

500.5

496.7

455.6

455.6

BOD(mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

50

ml)

BANANA PITH JUICE

499 500 501 502

1

2

3

4

5

502

501

500.9

500.1

500.1

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

BANANA PEEL

0 100 200 300 400 500

1

2

3

4

5

491

463

401

355

355

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

PROSOPIS JULIFLORA





40


Fig 37 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Garlic peel Fig 38 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Jackfruit

Fig 39 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Calotropis gigantean Fig 40 :Dosage Vs BOD value using Coconut Coir

499 500 501 502

1

2

3

4

5

6

502

501.7

501.1

500

500

500

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

50

ml)

JACK FRUIT PEEL

450 460 470 480 490 500

1

2

3

4

5

6

493

486.4

475.8

469.3

468

467.8

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g5

0m

l)

COCONUT COIR

496 498 500 502

1

2

3

4

5

501.7

499.4

499

498.3

498.3

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T

DO

SA

GE

(g

/50

ml)

GARLIC PEEL

480 490 500 510 520 530 540

1

2

3

4

5

6

502

502

510

519

523

531

BOD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g5

0m

l)

CALOTROPIS GIGANTEA





41


If sufficient oxygen is available in textile effluent, the useful aerobic bacteria will

flourish and cause the aerobic biological decomposition of textile effluent. Which will continue until

oxidation is completed. The amount of oxygen consumed in this process is the BOD. By varying the

adsorbent dosage the results obtained in plotted in the above graph. From the result we know that

neem leaf powder is the best adsorbent to remove BOD.

EFFECT OF COD

Organic matter is most often assessed in terms of oxygen required to completely oxidise

the organic matter to CO2,H2O and other oxidized species. The COD of textile effluent is computed

and plotted below in Fig : 41 to Fig: 50. From the graph we can use jack fruit peel for the removal

of COD.

Fig 41 :Dosage Vs COD value using Neem leaf Fig 42 :Dosage Vs COD value using Orange peel

850 900 950 1000

1

2

3

4

5

974

949

933

900

900

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

ORANGE PEEL

975 980 985 990

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

989.3

988.6

983.5

981

980

980

980

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

NEEM LEAF





42


Fig 43 :Dosage Vs COD value using Banana peel Fig 44 :Dosage Vs COD value using Water hyacinth

880 900 920 940 960 980 1000

1

2

3

4

5

981

963

944

922.8

922.8

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

WATER HYACINTH ROOT

970 975 980 985 990

1

2

3

4

5

989

989

983

977.2

977.2

COD(mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

GARLIC PEEL

850 900 950 1000

1

2

3

4

5

981

961

943

903

899.1

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

BANANA PEEL

0 200 400 600 800 1000

1

2

3

4

5

977

951

803

631

560.3

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

PROSOPIS JULIFLORA





43


Fig 45 :Dosage Vs COD value using Prosopis juliflora Fig 46 :Dosage Vs COD value using Garlic peel

Fig 47 :Dosage Vs COD value using Banana pith Fig 48 :Dosage Vs COD value using Jackfruit peel

0 200 400 600 800 1000

1

2

3

4

5

6

978

899

623

559

482

450

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

JACK FRUIT PEEL

850 900 950 1000

1

2

3

4

5

990

973

942.3

911

901.1

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

BANANA PITH JUICE





44


Fig 49 :Dosage Vs COD value using Calotropis Gigantea Fig 50 :Dosage Vs COD value using Coconut Coir

REMOVAL EFICIENCY

In order to identify which is the apt adsorbent for the treatment of textile effluent. All

the parameters are compared with the removal efficiency of the adsorbents. The comparsion chart

is plotted below.

Fig 51 :% of pH removal Vs adsorbents

0 200 400 600 800 1000

1

2

3

4

5

6

970.6

899

865

828

789.7

777.8

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

COCONUT COIR

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

17.89

1.05

4.21

0

3.16

20

6.317.36

0

24.21

% O

F p

H R

EM

OV

AL

ADSORBENTS

880 900 920 940 960 980 1000

1

2

3

4

5

6

987

981

973

955.7

935

921.6

COD (mg/l)

AD

SO

RB

EN

T D

OS

AG

E

(g/5

0m

l)

CALOTROPIS GIGANTEA





45


Fig 52 :% of COD removal Vs adsorbents

Fig 53 :% of TURBIDITY removal Vs adsorbents

Fig 54 :% of TSS removal Vs adsorbents

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

211 10.3

2.38.2 9.7

53.241.2

8.1

18.2

% O

F C

OD

RE

MO

VA

L

ADSORBENTS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80% 68.71

7.361.22

1.59

6.89

3.92 1.712.09

5.15

78.4

% O

F T

UR

BID

ITY

RE

MO

VA

L

ADSORBENTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100% 93.61

44.44

38.06

50.28

91.39 88.89

17.22 16.67

83.33

5.55

% O

F T

SS

RE

MO

VA

L

ADSORBENTS





46


Fig 55 :% of BOD5 removal Vs adsorbents

OVERALL EFICIENCY COMPARISON OF ADSORBENT

Fig 56: Overall Efficiency comparison of adsorbents

From this graph we have compared the removal efficiences with all adsorbents.Neem leaf can

be efficiently used for the removal of BOD and TSS.Coconut coir is used for the removal of

pH and turbidity. Jack fruit peel is used for the remval of COD in a effective manner.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%90.88

80.02

0.36 0.74

80.12

9.24

0.40

29.12

0.006.81

% O

F B

OD

5 R

EM

OV

AL

ADSORBENTS

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

NL

OP

BP

GP

WHR

BPJ

JP

PJ

CG

CCD

pH Turbidity TSS BOD5 COD





47


CONCLUSION

The use of these low cost eco-friendly adsorbents is recommended since they are relatively cheap or

of no cost, easily available, renewable and show highly affinity for dyes. The process of adsorption

requires further investigation in the direction of modeling, regeneration of adsorbent and immobilization

of the waste material for enhanced efficiency and recovery. Neem, orange peel, banana peel, garlic peel,

juliflora and water hyacinth showed maximum efficiency for treatment of textile wastewater. Different

parameters were optimized during the study and best removal was obtained with several adsorbent. Hence

our project focuses to identify the adsorbents suitable for the maximum parameter removal and thus by

making a membrane with all the apt adsorbent. Hence this project will give a way to choose the adsorbent

that will give maximum removal efficiency of various parameters in the textile effluent.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all we would like to thank our almighty Lord for making us to complete the project. Second our

sincere thanks to our Faculty Ms. M. Angeline Mary for his valuable guidance and support in completing

the project. Our sincere thanks to our family and friends in collection of the samples and adsorbents.

REFERENCES

1. S. Abinaya, D. Shanthini, and S. Grija, “Colour removal from textile effluent using agro

adsorbents,” – A Review.Internatinal journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 7(6),

November – December 2016, pp.278-281.

2. Shubhra Bhattacharjee, “Adsorptive removal of methylene blue using azadiracha indica (Neem)

leaf,” in International Research Journal of Environment Sciences, Vol.5(1), 21-24, January (2016).

3. Asfaram, M.R. Fathi,S. Khodadoust and M. Naraki “Removalof Direct Red 12B by garlic peel

as a cheap adsorbent,” in Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy

127 (2014) 415-421.

4. Meena Soni, Ashok K. Sharma, Jitendra K. Srivastava and Jageet S. Yadav , “Adsorptive removal

of methylene blue dye from an aqueous solution using water hyacinth root powder as a low cost

adsorbent,”in International Journal of Chemical Sciences and Applications, Vol. 3, Issue 3, 2012,

pp. 338-345.

5. R.S. Mane and V.N. Bhusari, “Removal of colour from textile effluent by adsorption using orange

and banana peel,”in International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, Vol.2, Issue

3, May-Jun 2012, pp.1997-2004.

6. G.L.Gopika and K. Mophin kani, “Accessing the suitability of using banana pith juice as a natural

coagulant for textile wastewater treatment,” in International Journal of Scientific and Engineering

Research, Vol. 7, Issue 4, April 2016.





48


7. M. Jayarajan, K. Arunachalam and G. Annadurai, “Agricultural wastes of jackfruit peel nano-

porous adsorbent for removal of rhodamine dye,” in Asian Journal of Applied Sciences4(3):263-

270,2011.

8. U.J. Etim, S.A. Umoren and U.M. Eduok, “Coconut coir dust as a low cost adsorbent for the

removal of cationic dye from aqueous solution,” in Journal of Saudi Chemistry Society (2016) 20,

S67-S76.

9. P. Balaji, B. Vignesh, M. Sowmiya, M. Meena and L. Lokesh “Removal of colour from textile

effluent using natural adsorbent (Calotrpis Gingantea),” in International Journal of Innovation in

Engineering and Technology, Vol.5, Issue 4, August 2015.

10. N. Gopal and M. Asaithambi “Adsorption of acid blue- 40 (A Textile Dye) using prosopis juliflora

activated carbon embedded in polyaniline matrix,” in Rasiyan J.Chem, Vol.8, No. 3, July-

September 2015.

11. Monika Kharub “Use of various technologies, methods and adsorbents for the removal of dye,” in

Journal of Environmental Research and Development, Vol.6, No. 3A, Jan-March 2012.



Documents

ANALYSING THE PHYSICO CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE ... · CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE EFFLUENT USING VARIOUS AGRO ADSORBENTS **M. Angeline Mary, *Rubini P S, *Soundarya M R,*Yuvashree

ANALYSING THE PHYSICO CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE ... · CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXTILE EFFLUENT USING VARIOUS AGRO ADSORBENTS **M. Angeline Mary, Rubini P S, Soundarya M R,*Yuvashree