You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Impact of biological activated carbon pre-treatment on the hydrophilic fraction of effluent organic matter for mitigating fouling in microfiltration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Technology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1080/09593330.2017.1354072 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Biplob Kumar Pramanik, Felicity A. Roddick, Linhua Fan |
| Abstract |
The hydrophilic (HPI) fraction of effluent organic matter, which has protein and carbohydrate content, has a high propensity to foul low pressure membranes. Biological activated carbon (BAC) filtration was examined as a pre-treatment for reducing the fouling of a microfiltration membrane (0.1 µm PVDF) by the HPI organic fraction extracted from a biologically treated secondary effluent (BTSE). Although the BAC removed less dissolved organic carbon, carbohydrate and protein from the HPI fraction than the granular activated carbon treatment which was used for comparison, it led to better improvement in permeate flux. This was shown to be due to the removal/breakdown of the HPI fraction resulting in less deposition of these organics on the membrane, many components of which are high molecular weight biopolymers (such as protein and carbohydrate molecules) through biodegradation and adsorption of those molecules on the biofilm and activated carbon. This study established the potential of BAC pre-treatment for reducing the HPI fouling of the membrane and thus improving the performance for the microfiltration of BTSE for water reclamation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Israel | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 30% |
| Professor | 2 | 20% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 3 | 30% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 20% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 10% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,904,262
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Technology
#1,030
of 2,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,249
of 316,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Technology
#21
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,423 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.