Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Water Process Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jwpe

Electrocoagulation/electroflotation as a combined process for the laundry T

wastewater purification and reuse
⁎
A. Dimogloa, , P. Sevim-Elibola, Ö. Dinçb, K. Gökmena, H. Erdoğana
a
Department of Environmental Engineering, Duzce University, Duzce, 81620, Turkey
b
Department of Biotechnology, University of Health Sciences, 34668, Istanbul, Turkey

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The purpose of this work is to purify wastewater from industrial laundries and return them to the washing
Laundry wasterwater process. By means of the methods of electrocoagulation and electroflotation, laboratory and pilot studies on the
Electrocoagulation wastewater treatment were carried out using aluminium electrodes. The process of wastewater treatment has
Electroflotation been studied in dependence on treatment time, temperature, pH and current density. The effectiveness of the
cleaning process under different values of operating parameters of the reactor was estimated as the percentage of
color, turbidity and surfactant removal from the wastewater. As a result of laboratory studies, the optimum
values of the operating parameters of the reactor at 90% removal of contamination were the following: current
density value as 5.26 mA/cm2, pH as 5.5 and 5 min processing time. The consumption of electrical energy in this
case amounted to 1.25 kW h/ m3. The quality control of the purified water was carried out according to such
additional parameters as total suspended solids, chemical oxygen demand, total organic carbon, and the content
of metal ions and phosphate and nitrate anions in the water. The study of the wastewater treatment in a pilot
plant with laboratory values of operating parameters showed the reproducibility of the purification results for
the controlled parameters of water quality and suitability of the water for reuse. The washing performed with
purified water was estimated by the whiteness index for bed linen and was not inferior to the traditional washing
with water from a source of water supply.

1. Introduction cleaning method should be sufficient wastewater treatment (WWT)

The widespread use of synthetic surfactants (SS) as washing, stabi-
lizing and foaming agents, determines their presence in most types of
industrial and domestic wastewater. The recent studies show a sig-
nificant effect of synthetic surfactants on all living organisms, plants
and humans [1,2]. When interacting with other contaminants, surfac-
tants contribute to the emulsification and stabilization of liquid and
solid dispersed types of contaminants. Therefore, wastewater con-
taining SS are characterized by a complex chemical and phase-dis-
persed composition, which makes it possible to treat them as a special
type of sewage [3–7].
The analysis of existing technological solutions shows that the
creation of circulating water supply systems in industrial enterprises is
quite a difficult, but solvable task. At the same time, the creation of
closed cycle of water consumption can be hampered only by economic
reasons. The choice of purification technology is being carried out,
based on the specific operating conditions and features of the cleaning
equipment. The main criteria that ensure the selection of an appropriate
efficiency, as well as low operational cost of the cleaning equipment, its
simplicity and reliability.
This article discusses the electrocoagulation (EC) and electroflota-
tion (EF) as methods that can be applied to the treatment of wastewater
from industrial laundries with the purpose of their reuse. Combined use
of these methods has shown their efficiency and cost-effectiveness in
solving various problems related to the environment protection [8–13].
Over the past 20 years there is no such industry, whose model waste-
water would not have been investigated in the laboratories by elec-
trochemical methods in general and by EC, in particular.
There was an attempt to treat and reuse laundry wastewater (LWW)
by taking various configurations of hybrid systems based on the bio-
logical treatment followed by oxidation and membrane separation
[14–18]. It should be noted that processes of the surfactants oxidation
can be accompanied by the release of more toxic products of destruc-
tion. It is shown that the Photo-Fenton process proved to be tox-
icologically safe, in comparison with the initial solution [19]. Removal
of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) from model solutions of wastewater by

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: anatolidimoglo@duzce.edu.tr (A. Dimoglo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.100877
Received 26 December 2018; Received in revised form 28 April 2019; Accepted 11 June 2019
2214-7144/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
A. Dimoglo, et al.
EC and peroxy-electrocoagulation with the help of iron electrodes can
be found in [20–23].
The purpose of this work is to study the effectiveness of the WWT in
one of the industrial-type laundries alone with the possibility of the
purified wastewater reuse. In this connection, the influence on the
process of WWT of such working parameters as types of electrodes
connection, applied voltage, amount of electricity, temperature and pH
of the solution, together with the nature of the surfactant, was con-
sidered. Additionally, the energy efficiency of the surface-active sub-
stances removal was calculated for the EC reactor.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Experimental apparatus and procedure
Recently, methods of electrochemical WWT are being increasingly
used in recycling water supply processes [24]. The methods are char-
acterized by technological simplicity and the process continuity. Ad-
ditional chemical reagents are not introduced into the solutions but
obtained directly in the electrochemical bath, that ensures the ecolo-
gical safety of the water purification processes [25–29]. The process is
similar to the treatment of water with appropriate reagents, however,
during EC, water is not enriched with sulfates or chlorides, the content
of which is limited by discharging treated sewage into reservoirs or in
circulating systems. Currently, there are various designs of electro-
coagulators [8,24]. In the present study, a plate electrode reactor was
used.
As known, plate electrodes are a block of plates arranged perpen-
dicularly and separated by washers in such a way that a gap exists
between adjacent plates where the flow of the solution happens in the
direction perpendicular to the direction the electric current flows. For
different pH, the electrolysis of wastewater at the anode and cathode
proceeds differently. The presence of Cl− - anions in water leads to the
release and formation of ClO- anions. Due to the release of gaseous
hydrogen, flotation of solid particles including hydroxides of iron and
aluminum occurs. The main limiting stage of electrocoagulation is the
formation of metal cations. The second stage of coagulation is reduced
to chemical hydration of the resulting metal cations, formation of in-
soluble metal hydroxides, and their precipitation (crystallization), fol-
lowed by the formation of flakes, which can adsorb coarse impurities of
the wastewater.
The process of coagulation in the electrocoagulators proceeds much
more intensively than with chemical reagents. This can be explained by
positive influence of electrophoresis on the mutual coarsening of the
nuclei of the metal hydroxide particles and by that the water is being
mixed by hydrogen bubbles released at the surface of cathodes. The use
of EC can reduce the metal doses required for the purification by 20–40
%, compared with the doses of chemical reagents. Although Al(OH)3
produced as the result of anodic aluminum dissolution is thought more
active as to the coagulation of pollutants in wastewater, the aluminum
anodes passivation, together with impermeable film formed on cath-
odes, may interfere with the performance of electrocoagulation and
electroflotation [30].
Optimization of the LWW treatment relative to such parameters as
time, pH of the solution and current density was carried out in a sta-
tionary mode on a separate EC reactor completely identical to that
shown in Fig. 1. It should be emphasized that in the EC, along with the
coagulation process, flotation occurs. The data obtained in stationary
mode, were applied for the continuous batch mode. The hydraulic re-
tention time of the LWW in the EC was regulated by the rate at which it
entered the reactor and controlled using a flow meter. After treatment
in the EC, water flows by gravity into the EF for additional purification
of the remaining dispersed phase. The volume of the EF is twice as large
as of the EC, that doubles the flotation time. The continuous batch
mode is schematically shown in Fig. 1.
In the EC reactor, 7 electrodes including 4 anodes and 3 cathodes
2
Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877
were used. The system mainly includes EC (2) and EF (4) reactors with
a volume of 1.5 dm3 and 3.0 dm3, respectively. The aluminum
еlectrodes are connected with the source of direct current (DC) (1). The
electrodes part of the EF consists of graphite anode and cathode in the
form of a steel mesh with DC source (8). The dimensions of the Al
electrode are 150 mm × 150 mm × 2 mm. The effective area of all the
anodes on both sides is 350 cm2, and the distance between electrodes is
10 mm. The EF consists of an outer cylinder reactor with a diameter of
15 сm.
The LWW intended for purification is supplied to the system from
storage tank (9). The LWW enters the EC reactor through the pipe (5)
from the bottom and move upward between the electrodes (2). The
wastewater in the EC reactor unit (2) is stirred at 250 rpm by a mag-
netic stirrer (6). It enters the EF chamber from above and move
downward in the opposite direction to the evolving bubbles of gaseous
hydrogen. Thus, the formed flocks flotate and adsorb the contaminated
particles. Purified wastewater is removed from the bottom (7) of the EF,
and the flotation contaminants are removed from the top of it (3). The
LWW collected from Eczacibasi (Professional) company was used for all
experimental tests. Main parameters characterizing the LWW taken
during the three-months period are presented in Table 1.
2.2. Analytical method
All chemicals used for this study were obtained from Sigma Aldrich.
Anionic surfactants (Methylene Blue Active Substances - MBAS) and
other parameters of wastewater were measured according to Standard
Methods [31,32]. Turbidity was recorded on a 2100 N IS Turbidimeter
(Hach). Before the EC, the pH of the LWW was corrected by the addition
of HCl and NaOH, and its measurement was performed on a Thermo-
scientific pH Meter (Orion star A215). Parameters characterizing the
wastewater obtained are close by value to the data of the three-months
monitoring of LWW. All the experiments were repeated twice, to check
if the results are reproducible. The maximum experimental error was
lower than 5%, and the average values have been reported. Each
measurement was repeated for three times, and the average value was
calculated. The MBAS, TOC and/or COD removal efficiency, Re, is
calculated as:
Re (%) = [(Ci – Cj) / Ci] x 100, (1)
Where Ci (mg/L) is initial MBAS, TOC or COD concentration, and Cj is
the corresponding final concentration.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Optimization of the EC reactor
The effect of different factors, such as current density, the amount of
electricity, and operation time, on the temperature of the wastewater
was investigated. In the laboratory scale studies, theoretical and ex-
perimental assessment of the electrodes consumption was carried out,
and pH, colort, turbidity, suspended solids, and MBAS were analyzed.
Preliminarily the electrodes were cleaned, degreased, dried and
brought to a constant weight. Electrochemical dissolution of anodes for
each amount of electricity passed through the solution, was estimated
as the loss of the electrode weight. Fig. 2 shows the results of aluminum
yield for two different electrode connections in an electrochemical re-
actor. As independent parameter, the quantity of electricity Q (A h),
which has passed through the solution, is taken. As can be seen from
Fig. 2, with the increase in the amount of electricity, the amount of the
formed aluminum increases as well.
At the initial stage of the solution treatment, the yield of Al3+ does
not depend essentially on the connection mode of the electrodes. Thus,
for Q = 1 A h, the yield of Al3+ is 0.45 g for the monopolar connection
and 0.37 g for bipolar connection. For Q = 5 A h, the yield was 1.73 g.
A. Dimoglo, et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877

Fig. 1. Combined ElectroCoagulation (EC) and ElectroFlotation (EF) laboratory scale treatment system. 1-DC power apply for EC cell; 2-EC Cell; 3-Floated sladge; 4-
EF Cell; 5-Inlet LWW; 6- Magnetic bar-stirrer; 7-Purified LWW; 8- DC power apply for EF cell; 9-Feed Sludge Tank.

Table 1
Characterization of laundry wastewater (Eczacibasi company, Turkey) for
samples taken at different times and of purified LWW, compared with Water
standard for the laundry.
Parameters / January February March Purified Water
Month 2018 2018 2018 LWWa standardb

pH 11.3 11.4 11.4 5.9 6–8

Conductivity (mS/ 1.7 2.1 1.7 1.4 < 1.5
cm)
Temperature (oC) 21 20 21 20 20–25
Color (Pt-Co) 196 181 221 20 < 30
Turbidity (NTU) 626 703 669 29 < 25
TSS (mg/L) 85 74 99 3 5–25
MBAS (mg/L) 77 83 98 5.3 –
COD (mg/L) 1237 1244 1251 80 40–80
TOC (mg/L) 290 282 270 35 < 50
Alkalinity (mg 541 630 680 11 < 100
CaCO3/L)
Total Phosphate 6.2 6.4 6.9 1.9 5–10
(mg/L)
Total Iron (mg/L) 0.02 0.03 0.01 ND < 0.1 Fig. 2. The anode dissolution rate as a function of quantity of electricity Q
Total Aluminium 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.07 < 0.1 (рH = 5.5, T = 25 °C).
(mg/L)
Sulfate (mg/L) 93 95 95 9 < 10
removal of COD was 62% for monopolar and 7% for bipolar junction of
TSS- Total Suspended Solids, COD- Chemical Oxygen Demand, TOC- Total electrodes. The authors do not discuss at what values of current density
Organic Carbon, ND- Not Detected. these results are obtained. In [34], the conclusion was made about a
a
Purified LWW by EC/EF. more efficient cleaning of the LWW in the case of bipolar connection of
b
Water standard for laundry. electrodes.

For the bipolar electrode connection, the corresponding value of the

Al3+ yield is 1.65 g (A h = 5). For all types of connections, the elec-
trodes area is same, but difference in their polarization results in dif-
ferent volumes of generated ions of Al3+. Monopolar electrodes have
characteristics of low voltage and high current, while bipolar electrodes
are characterized by high voltage and low current. When comparing the
influence of the monopolar and bipolar connection of aluminum elec-
trodes on the LWW purification, it was stated [33] that at pH = 5.2 the
3.2. The effect of solution temperature on the yield of Al3+ ions
Taking into account the fact that the monopolar connection of the
electrodes gives the best results, further laboratory investigations were
carried out with this configuration of the electrodes. The next step in
the process optimization was to investigate the effect of the electrolyte
temperature in the reactor on the process of the Al3+ ions production.
This is important from the point of view that the wastewater entering

3
A. Dimoglo, et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877

Fig. 3. Dependence of the yield of Al3+ on the water temperature for three
Fig. 4. The efficiency of removal of surfactants as a function of the treatment
different CDs (pH = 5.5, treatment time 10 min).
time of the solution (CD =5.26 mA/cm2, Csurf =0.1 g/L), T = 25 °C, pH = 5.5).

the electrochemical treatment has a temperature of 30–35 °C. The de-

not significantly change after more than 7 min of processing. The values
pendence of the yield of Al3+ on the temperature of the treated was-
of cationic and non-ionic removal of surfactants (for the 3-minute
tewater is shown for three different values of CD in Fig. 3.
processing) reach 89% and 83%, respectively, and after 5 min the in-
As it can be seen from Fig. 3, a positive effect of the temperature
dices grow up to 93% and 91%. Further increase in the processing time
growth, which is important for industrial laundries, is observed only
for these two surfactants does not affect the percentage of removal.
before reaching a certain temperature maximum (60–80 °C). Further
Similarly behave such characteristics as color and turbidity. Their
increase in temperature reduces the yield of the metal. This is due to the
changes, as depending on the time of treatment of the solution, are
increasing intensity of the passivation of the aluminum anode for the
shown in Fig. 5.
account of the compaction and swelling of the colloidal aluminum
Optimal values of the processing time needed for the removal of
hydroxide in its micropores. The increase in the CD values from 1.5 up
turbidity and color, can be considered as 5 and 7 min, respectively.
to 3.0 mA/cm2 at the given temperature leads also to an increase in the
yield of Al3+. As can be seen from Fig. 3, the metal yield is much
greater than theoretical values calculated from the Faraday law. 3.4. The effect of current density on the removal of surfactants, color and
This is primarily related to the fact that electrochemical dissolution turbidity
of metals involves anodic dissolution (due to external electric current)
and chemical dissolution of anodes and cathodes. Therefore, in prac- As it was mentioned before, the process of coagulation in electro-
tice, the yield of metals by electric current can be greater than theo- coagulators proceeds much more intensively than reagent coagulation.
retical values calculated from the Faraday formula and can reach For this study, three different surfactants, namely, cationic, anionic and
110–125 % of the theoretical yield. At pH in the range of 5–7 up to 90% non-ionic, were taken. The dependence between efficiency of the sur-
of the aluminum anodes are dissolved, as the result of the electro- factant removal and CD is presented in Fig. 6. As we can see from the
chemical process. In addition, about 10% of the metal dissolves che- Fig. 6, the CD increase leads to a greater percentage of the surfactant
mically at the same time. removal.
At low values of CD (1 mA/cm2), the surfactants removal achieved
3.3. The effect of processing time on the removal of surfactants, color and is in the range of 23–40 % of the initial concentration. For cationic
turbidity of the solution surfactants, a maximum removal (93%) is achieved with CD
=5.26 mA/cm2. For two other surfactants and for the given CD, the
The time of the solution treatment is an important characteristic in
the studies of the wastewater treatment at industrial enterprises. As
follows from a number of experimental works [20,33,35], the proces-
sing time for cleaning the LWW depends on many parameters. Primarily
it depends on the concentration of surfactants, CD in the electrolytic
cell, temperature, pH, and a number of other parameters. As the ana-
lysis of these works shows, the processing time can vary from 3 to
30 min. For example, for aluminum electrodes the most optimal pro-
cessing time at low pH values (4–8) and current density within 4–6 mA/
cm2 is 5–10 minutes [35]. In [34], for the 90% removal of COD and
turbidity with the help of bipolar electrodes, the processing time was
20 min, while for the removal of surfactants and color it was 50 min.
In Fig. 4, the results of the surfactants removal from solutions by EC
are shown in dependence with the time of processing. As follows from
the graphs presented in Fig. 4, within a minimum period of the solution
processing time (t =1 min), the percentage of the surfactants removal is
negligible and amounts to 30–40 %. Increase in the treatment time up
to 3 min results in a significantly greater surfactant removal. Fig. 5. Change in color and turbidity as a function of the treatment time of the
For anionic surfactants, this value reaches a value of 71% and does solution (CD =5.26 mA/cm2, Csurf = 0.1 g/L), T = 25 °C, pH = 5.5).

4
A. Dimoglo, et al.
Fig. 6. The effectiveness of the surfactants removal in dependence with CD
(pH = 5.5, Csurf =0.1 g/L, treatment time =5 min., T = 25 °C).
Fig. 7. Influence of CD on the efficiency of removing color and turbidity of the
solution (pH = 5.5, Csurf = 0.1 g/L, T = 25 °C, treatment time = 5 min).
surfactants removal takes values close to 80%. Further increase in CD
(7.89 mA/cm2) for anionic and nonionic surfactants leads to the more
effective removal of surfactants (within 90–95 %), as well. Alone with
the removal of surfactants, a process of discoloration and removal of the
turbidity of wastewater is under way. Fig. 7 presents the results of the
effect of CD on the removal of color and turbidity of the solution. For
CD =1 mA/cm2, color removal was 45%, and turbidity removal was
53%.
The increase in CD up to 2.63 mA/cm2 leads to a sharp increase in
the percentage of color (87%) and turbidity (92%) removal. The max-
imum turbidity removal (99%) is achieved with CD =5.26 mA/cm2.
When CD =7.89 mA/cm2, the maximum percent of color removal is
achieved (98%). Introduction of the surfactants into the solution re-
duces the rate of the anode dissolution. As noted in a number of studies
[33,36,37], passivation of both the anode and cathode is a serious
disadvantage when using electrocoagulation, which leads to a decrease
in the rate of dissolution of the anodes. A slight dissolution of the anode
is observed for anionic surfactants. This may be due to greater passi-
vation of the surface of the electrodes. In the case of the superimposed
potential, the motion of negatively charged particles of surfactant to the
anode can lead to the formation of stable complex particles on the
surface of the electrode and reduction of its effective surface. This, in
turn, leads to a slower dissolution of the anode. As can be seen, the
factors such as temperature and CD affect the efficient operation of the
anode. In the above mentioned works [20,33,35] on cleaning the LWW
5
Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877
Fig. 8. Dependence of the surfactants removal in the electrochemical reactor on
the pH values (CD = 5.26 mA/cm2, Csurf = 0.1 g/L), T = 25 °C, treatment
time = 5 min).
using EC (Al electrodes) for the pH range of 3–9 and processing time of
5–20 minutes, the effective CD ranges from 3 to 6 mA/cm2.
3.5. The influence of the pH on the removal of surfactants, color and
turbidity
The pH of the solution, along with processing time and CD, is an
important parameter for conducting electrochemical reactions in aqu-
eous media. In Fig. 8 the influence of pH values of the medium on the
removal of surfactants in the electrochemical reactor is presented. For
such low pH values as 4, the surfactants removal is achieved within
55–65 % of the initial concentration of MBAS.
The percentage of the surfactants removal changes in the following
way. For pH = 4.5 there is a sharp increase, 73–84 % in average. For
anionic surfactants, a maximum of 93% is achieved at pH = 5.5. For
two other surfactants, a certain decrease is observed, and a maximum is
achieved at pH = 7.5. Further increase in pH does not lead to any
changes in the percentage. A similar study of the effect of pH on the
removal efficiency of surfactants in the LWW is given in [20]. So, under
laboratory conditions with the use of flat aluminum electrodes at pH 3
(CD =3.13 mA/cm2) the removal of SDS was 95%. The effect of the
bipolar design of aluminum electrodes on the MBAS and turbidity re-
moval process in dependence with the pH of the LWW is presented in
[35]. While maintaining pH of 5 and the treatment time of 5 min, the
removal efficiency of MBAS and turbidity was 97% and 98%, respec-
tively. This suggests that even at low pH values, high removal of MBAS
can be achieved. The change in color and turbidity as a function of the
pH of the solution is shown in Fig. 9.
As can be seen from the data in Fig. 9, at a low pH, percentage of
removal was 65% for color and 75% for turbidity. The increase of pH to
5.5 or higher leads to a complete removal of the turbidity in the solu-
tion and to the 90% removal of color. It should be noted that the in-
crease in pH values (9–11) leads to the decrease in the degree of re-
moval of surfactants, color and turbidity. The percentage of removal
takes values of 65, 54 and 58% for MBAS, color and turbidity, corre-
spondingly. The observed effect of pH can be explained by the presence
of various hydrated forms of aluminum in the solution. As shown in
[38], in the pH range of 5–8 the hydrolysis and polymerization of Al3+
leads to the formation of particles Al(OH)2+, [Al2(OH)2]4+, Al(OH)3,
and of highly charged polymeric hydroxo complexes [Al13(OH)32]7+,
which are effective for coagulation. When pH is greater than 10, the
main hydrolysis product is Al(OH)4−, which does not favor the for-
mation of anodized aluminum species and the adsorption of dispersed
solids. At low pH (< 4.5) where one has only aluminum ions, the
A. Dimoglo, et al.
Fig. 9. Change in color and turbidity as a function of the pH of the solution
(CD = 5.26 mA/cm2, Csurf =0.1 g/L), T = 25 °C, treatment time =5 min).
adsorption effect is insignificant.
Electrical energy consumption (EEC) is the index of the effectiveness
for the EC/EF processes. This important parameter is obtained from the
following equation [8]:
WEEC = U(V) I(A) t(s) / Φ(m3) 3600 (s/h) 103 W/kW),
3
Where WEEC is electrical energy (kWh/m ), U is the cell voltage (Volt), I
is current in Ampere (A), t is electrochemical process time (sec), and Φ
is the volume of the treated solution. To calculate EEC, those indices
were taken as initial parameters, at which the 90% removal of surfac-
tant, color and turbidity of wastewater had been achieved. Calculations
show that for these three characteristics of the LWW the average value
of W is equal to 1.25 kW h/m3. Parameter WЕЕC that is close to our
parameters of the EC reactor (CD and pH) takes the value of 3.68 kW h/
m3 in [20]. The increased WЕЕC value is associated with more than three
times growth of time for processing the LWW. Thus, in the light of the
conducted research, it is possible to determine basic optimal conditions
for the electrochemical purification of LWW. As a general criterion for
the parameters comparison, their 90% removal from the LWW was
taken. For LWW taken immediately after the washing process, they will
be as follows: pH is 5.5, CD is 5.26 mA/cm2, the treatment time of LWW
is 5 min. These parameters were taken as operating parameters for the
pilot plant.
In conclusion, we present the results of the LWW purification for the
EC/EF process (see Table 1, optimal experimental conditions). As seen
from the experimental results, the values of such parameters as TSS,
COD and TOC indicate a significant removal of pollutants from LWW.
The concentrations of phosphate, nitrogen and sulfate anions in was-
tewater are significantly reduced, as well.
3.6. Pilot-scale field tests
Based on the results of laboratory studies of LWW, a pilot EC plant
with a volume of 0.5 m3/h was manufactured. Twenty aluminum
electrodes (the area of each was 0.12 m2) with an interelectrode dis-
tance of 15 mm were connected in the monopolar manner. To prevent
the passivation of the electrodes and the formation of sediment on their
surface, their polarity was changing every 20 min. The installation was
mounted in the laundry room of a hotel. The purpose of the research
was to study the process of purification and reuse of LWW immediately
in an industrial environment. The equipment consisted of a LWW sto-
rage tank, a reactor, a power source (power 50 V/50A), the foam col-
lector with sludge flotation, and a separator.
Fig. 10 shows the scheme of the pilot unit for cleaning LWW. As it
can be seen, it consists of an EC/EF reactor (1) into which LWW is fed
Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877
Fig. 10. Pilot installation for cleaning LWW. (1-EC/EF unit; 2- pump; 3- pur-
ified water tank; 4- filter; 5- collection of flotation sludge; 6- gas outlet pipe; 7-
LWW supply line; 8- electrolyte supply line; 9- line for withdrawal of flotation
sludge; 10- line output of purified water; 11- purified water supply line for
reuse; 12- DC power apply for EC/EF reactor.).
(2)
via the line (7). The operation of the reactor begins with the supply of
electrolyte through the line (8) using the pump (2). The upper part of
the reactor provides the output of gases (6), the withdrawal of flotation
sludge into the collector (5) along the line (9), and the discharge of
purified water through the line 10 into the tank (3). After filtration (4),
purified water is fed through the line (11) for reuse. After the foam
destruction and the solid fraction separation, the remaining water re-
turns to the EC reactor for re-treatment and purification. Thus, ap-
proximately 90–95 % of wastewater is returned for reuse.
Table 2 shows the test results for the pilot plant. As can be seen from
the table, satisfactory results are observed for the main parameters of
the water quality assessment that allows the water reuse. They are
standard parameters used in industrial laundries (see Table 1). The
exception is low content of the MBAS. However, their presence allows
you to save washing powder for the next wash cycle. For example, the
percentage of turbidity removal during 7-minutes treatment for
pH = 5.5 is 90–95 %, color removal is 75–80 %, and the removal of
MBAS is 80–85 % of the initial concentration. As to the other para-
meters listed in Table 1 and characterizing the quality of the purified
water, they also have a high percentage. It should be noted that the
washing performed with purified water and water from a water supply
source (traditional washing) did not differ in quality. This suggests that
it is possible in principle to use treated wastewater in repeated washes
and to obtain both economic benefits and an ecologic effect. Un-
fortunately, it is not yet possible to compare the results of the electro-
chemical approach to the LWW cleaning and re-use with other works.
There is a study [3] in the literature, where on the basis of physico-
chemical pre-treatment and different levels of filtration and ultra-
filtration the issue of returning water to reuse is solved. In terms of the
washing quality, the results of the second washing based on the purified
water do not differ from those for the original water. In our case, the
quality of purified water taken for reuse was checked out on bed linen.
Whiteness measurements were made using a portable device Konica
Minolta CR-20 color reader. When using primary water the whiteness
index (W) was 100.8 and for purified water (cycles 1–5) the index was
changing within 101.4 - 102.3. The results of the measurements suggest
that the LWW purified using the EC/EF method is quite suitable for
reuse in the washing process.
6
A. Dimoglo, et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877

Table 2
The parameters of initial and treated LWW for five cycles of its use in the laundry hotel industry, as an example (pilot plant).
LWW/Purified LWW Parameters

MBAS (mg/L) pH Conductivity (μS/cm) Turbidity (NTU) Color (Pt-Co)

LWW 1 (Starting) 45 11 1646 252 220

Purified LWW 1 14 6 1190 22 36
LWW 2 (Washing with Purified LWW 1) 83 11 1799 632 116
Purified LWW 2 11 6 1602 7 24
LWW 3 (Washing with Purified LWW 2 61 9 1656 740 179
Purified LWW 3 12 7 1577 9 46
LWW 4 (Washing with Purified LWW 3 84 11 1369 506 205
Purified LWW 4 13 6 1243 17 37
LWW 5 (Washing with Purified LWW 4 75 11 1457 540 185
Purified LWW 5 14 7 1105 6 31

4. Conclusion detergents, Water Sci. 28 (2014) 51–64, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsj.2014.09.

The process of the wastewater of industrial laundries treatment
done by the method of electrocoagulation has been studied. As the
result of laboratory studies and the use of a pilot plant, the data on the
efficiency of removal of surfactants, color, turbidity, depending on
parameters such as pH, current density, processing time and tempera-
ture of waste water were obtained. It was shown that a content of
surfactants in the LWW slightly reduces the amount of the coagulant
Al3+, when the anode is dissolved.
The treatment time of the solution is an important characteristic of
the electrocoagulation process, since it is directly related to the amount
of the coagulant generated. The percentage of the surfactant, color and
turbidity removal is insignificant at the initial stage of the LWW
treatment (t =1 min), and it is 30–40 % for surfactant and 60% and
70% for turbidity and color, respectively. The increase in processing
time leads to an increase in the percentage of removal, and the value of
5 min is taken as optimal and more economical from the point of view
of energy consumption. The increase in current density (CD) and pro-
cessing time leads to an increase in the percentage of the surfactant,
color and turbidity removal. For the solution processing time of 5 min, a
CD value of 5.26 mA/cm2 is taken as optimal.
The study of the effect of the pH value on the removal of surfactants,
of color and turbidity, has shown that at low pH values (pH < 4), the
percentage of removal for these components of the LWW is less than
75%. To achieve the 90% removal of surfactant, color and turbidity
from wastewater under optimized parameters, electricity consumption
was found as 1.25 kW h/m3. The results of laboratory studies were used
when operating the pilot plant in an industrial environment. As ana-
lyses of purified water has shown, it is appropriate for reuse. The
washing performed with purified water was estimated by the whiteness
index for bed linen and was not inferior to the traditional washing with
water from a source of water supply.
Ethical issues
Ethical issues such as plagiarism have been observed by the authors.
Authors’ Contribution
All authors equally help to write this manuscript.
Acknowledgement
The authors acknowledge funding support from The Scientific and
Tecnological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK Project 115Y797)
References
[1] H. El-Gawad, Aquatic environmental monitoring and removal efficiency of
001.
[2] E. Olkowska, Ż. Polkowska, J. Namieśnik, Analytics of surfactants in the environ-
ment: problems and challenges, Chem. Rev. 111 (2011) 5667–5700, https://doi.
org/10.1021/cr100107g.
[3] I. Ciabatti, F. Cesaro, L. Faralli, E. Fatarella, F. Tognotti, Demonstration of a
treatment system for purification and reuse of laundry wastewater, Desalin 245
(2009) 451–459, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2009.02.008.
[4] C. Nicolaidis, I. Vyrides, Closing the water cycle for industrial laundries: an op-
erational performance and techno-economic evaluation of a full-scale membrane
bioreactor system, Resour. Conserv. Recyc. 92 (2014) 128–135, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.resconrec 2014.09.001.
[5] K.N. Sheth, M. Patel, M.D. Desai, A study on characterization and treatment of
laundry effluent, IJIRST – intern, J. Innov. Res. Sci. Technol. 4 (2017) 50–55.
[6] J.K. Braga, M.B.A. Varesche, Commercial laundry water characterisation, Amer. J.
Analyt. Chem. 5 (2014) 8–16, https://doi.org/10.4236/ajac.2014.51002.
[7] D. Basketter, N. Berg, F.H. Kruszewski, K. Sarlo, B. Concoby, The toxicology and
immunology of detergent enzymes, J. of Immunotoxic. 9 (2012) 320–326, https://
doi.org/10.3109/1547691X.2012.659358.
[8] J.G. Rajeshwar, K. Ibañez, Environmental Electrochemistry, Fundamentals and
Applications in Polution Abatement, Academic Press, London, UK, 1997.
[9] M.Y.A. Mollah, J.R. Schennach, D.L. Parga, Cocke, Electrocoagulation (EC)-science
and applications, J. Hazard. Mater. 84 (2001) (2001) 29–41, https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0304-3894(01)00176-5.
[10] D. Rajkumar, K. Palanivelu, Electrochemical treatment of industrial wastewater, J.
Hazard. Mater. 113 (2004) 123–129, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.05.
039.
[11] N. Boudjema, N. Abdi, H. Grib, N. Drouiche, H. Lounici, N. Mameri, Simultaneous
removal of natural organic matter and turbidity from Oued El Harrach River by
electrocoagulation using an experimental design approach, Desalin. Water Treatm.
57 (2016) 14386–14395, https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2015.1065449.
[12] V. Kuokkanen, T. Kuokkanen, J. Rämö, U. Lassi, Recent applications of electro-
coagulation in treatment of water and wastewater-A Review, Green and Sustain.
Chem. 3 (2013) 89–121, https://doi.org/10.4236/gsc.2013.32013.
[13] G.H. Chen, Electrochemical technologies in wastewater treatment, Sep. Purif.
Technol. 38 (2004) 11–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2003.10.006.
[14] H.G. Leu, S.H. Lin, T.M. Lin, Enhanced electrochemical oxidation of anionic sur-
factants, J. Environ. Sci. Health. 33 (1998) 681–699, https://doi.org/10.1080/
10934529809376755.
[15] G. Lissen, J. Pieters, M. Verhaege, L. Pinoy, W. Verstraete, Electrochemical de-
gradation of surfactants by intermediates of water discharge at carbon-based elec-
trodes, Electrochem. Acta. 48 (2003) 1655–1663, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-
4686(03)00084-7.
[16] S. Mozia, M. Janus, P. Brożek, A.W. Morawski, Hybridization of advanced oxidation
processes separation for treatment and reuse of industrial laundry wastewater,
Intern. J. Memb. Sci. Technol. 3 (2016) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.15379/2410-
1869.2016.03.01.01.
[17] M. Janus, S. Mozia, S. Bering, K. Tarnowski, J. Mazur, A.W. Morawski, Application
of MBR technology for laundry wastewater treatment, Desalin. Water Treatm. 64
(2017) 213–217, https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2017.11438.
[18] A. Karci, I. Arslan-Alaton, M. Bekbolet, Advanced oxidation of a commercially
important nonionic surfactant: investigation of degradation products and toxicity,
J. Hazard. Mater. 263 (2013) 275–282, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.
03.052.
[19] H.M. Nguyen, C.M. Phan, T. Sen, Degradation of sodium dodecyl sulfate by pho-
toelectrochemical and electrochemical processes, Chem. Eng. J. 287 (2016)
633–639, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.11.074.
[20] B. Mohebrad, A. Rezaee, S. Dehghani, Anionic surfactant removal using electro-
chemical process: effect of electrode materials and energy consumption, Iran. J.
Health, Saf. Environ. 5 (2017) 939–946.
[21] T. Ramcharan, A. Bissessur, Treatment of laundry wastewater by biological and
electrocoagulation methods, Water Sci. Technol. 75 (2016) 84–93, https://doi.org/
10.2166/wst.2016.464.
[22] S.S. Mahmoud, M.M. Ahmed, Removal of surfactants in wastewater by electro-
coagulation method using iron electrodes, Phys. Sci. Res. Intern. 2 (2014) 28–34.

7
A. Dimoglo, et al.
[23] E. Yüksel, I.A. Şengil, M. Özacar, The removal of sodium dodecyl sulfate in synthetic
wastewater by peroxi-electrocoagulation method, Chem. Eng. J. 152 (2009)
347–353, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2009.04.058.
[24] M. Sillanpää, M. Shestakova, Equipment for electrochemical Water treatment,
Electrochemical Water Treatment Methods, Elsevier Inc., 2017, pp. 227–263,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811462-9.00004-9 Chap. 4.
[25] C. Jiménez, C. Sáez, P. Cañizares, M.A. Rodrigo, Optimization of combined elec-
trocoagulation-electroflotation reactor, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23 (2016)
9700–9711, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-6199-y.
[26] P.K. Holt, G.W. Barton, M. Wark, C.A. Mitchell, A quantitave comparison between
chemical dosing and electrocoagulation, Coloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng.
Aspects. 211 (2002) 233–248 http://hdl.handle.net/10453/534.
[27] A. Dimoglo, H.Y. Akbulut, F. Cihan, M. Karpuzcu, Petrochemical wastewater
treatment by means of clean electrochemical technologies, Clean Technol. Environ.
Policy. 6 (2004) 288–295, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-004-0248-9.
[28] T. Öztürk, S. Veli, A. Dimoglo, The Effect of seawater conductivity on the treatment
of leachate by electrocoagulation, Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q. 27 (2013) 347–354.
[29] S. Barisci, F. Ulu, M. Sillanpää, A. Dimoglo, Evaluation of flurbiprofen removal from
aqueous solution by electrosynthesized ferrate (VI) ion and electrocoagulation
process, Chem. Eng. J. 262 (2015) 1218–1225, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.
10.083.
[30] M. Karpuzcu, A. Dimoglo, H.Y. Akbulut, Purification of agro-industrial wastewater
from the grease-protein mixture by means of electroflotocoagulation, Water Sci.
Technol. 45 (2002) 233–240, https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2002.0431.
[31] W. APHA, AWWA, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Journal of Water Process Engineering 31 (2019) 100877
Wastewater, 20, Federation, American Public Health Association/American Water
Works Association/Water Environment, Washington DC, USA, 1998.
[32] C. Way, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Water
Environment Federation, Secaucus, NJ, USA, 2012.
[33] C. Wang, W. Chou, Y. Kuo, Removal of COD from laundry wastewater by electro-
coagulation/electroflotation, J. Hazard. Mater. 164 (2009) 81–86, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.122.
[34] F. Janpoor, A. Torabian, V. Khatibikamal, Treatment of laundry waste-water by
electrocoagulation, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 86 (2011) 1113–1120, https://
doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2625.
[35] J. Ge, J. Qu, P. Lei, H. Liu, New bipolar electrocoagulation–electroflotation process
or the treatment of laundry wastewater, Sep. Purif. Technol. 36 (2004) 33–39,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5866(03)00150-3.
[36] P.K. Holt, G.W. Barton, C.A. Mitchell, The future for electrocoagulation as a loca-
lized water treatment technology, Chemosphere 59 (2005) 355–367, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.10.023.
[37] W.J. Lee, S.I. Pyun, Effects of hydroxide ion addition on anodic dissolution of pure
aluminumin chloride ion-containing solution, Electrochim. Acta 44 (1999)
4041–4049.
[38] S. Garcia-Segura, M.M.S.G. Eiband, J.V. Melo, C.A. Martínez-Huitle,
Electrocoagulation and advanced electrocoagulation processes: a general review
about the fundamentals, emerging applications and its association with other
technologies, J. Electroanal. Chem. 15 (2017) 267–299, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jelechem.2017.07.047.