Evaluating the Efficacy of Implosion Water Treatment Versus Traditional Methods

Year : 2025 | Volume : 12 | Issue : 01 | Page : 10-21
    By

    Basudev Singh,

  • Jayanta Kumar Mahat,

  • Jyoti Sharma,

  1. Student, Shobhit Institute of Engineering and Technology (Deemed to be University), Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India
  2. Faculty, Shobhit Institute of Engineering and Technology (Deemed to be University), Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India
  3. Student, Shobhit Institute of Engineering and Technology (Deemed to be University), Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India

Abstract

The first worry of all people is the quality of the water. The majority of the water that is accessible is unfit for immediate usage. Certain methods are frequently employed to purify water for optimal use. These methods include UV treatment, chemical treatments, reverse osmosis, filtration, and ultrafiltration, among others. Each of these water treatment methods is applied separately or in combination. There are benefits and drawbacks to each of these methods. The present research work is aimed to make the water potable through various different water treatment processes. Reverse Osmosis is the major technique used for water treatment along with filtration and UV treatment. One more technique which is not used in general practice but can be very useful is Implosion technology. Filtration is the technique which only removes suspended particles; it does not work on dissolved solids. For bacterial contamination UV treatment is effective. Reverse osmosis efficiently eliminates minerals and dissolved solids, but regular use may have negative effects on the human body. Reverse osmosis has been shown to reduce dissolved solids from 60% to 95%. It also causes a significant drop in water pH, which is not good for the human body on a regular basis. The implosion technique is the only one that is durable and has no adverse effects on the human body. It improves the water’s chemistry by preserving its mineral content, raising the dissolved oxygen content (10–20%), decreasing turbidity (20–80%) and hardness (10–30%), improving the water’s appearance and flavor, and, in certain situations, assisting in the removal of bacterial contamination. Implosion technique. Such an increase of dissolved oxygen and removal of turbidity as well as hardness of water is highly beneficial for human health. Hence, implosion technique is the best solution among conventional water treatment techniques for the drinking water having acceptable dissolved solids (150mg/l to 600 mg/l); however, Reverse Osmosis is best solution when dissolved solids in water exceeds 600mg/l.

Keywords: Implosion, UV technique, Filteration, Reverse Osmosis, dissolved Solids, water quality

[This article belongs to Journal of Water Pollution & Purification Research ]

How to cite this article:
Basudev Singh, Jayanta Kumar Mahat, Jyoti Sharma. Evaluating the Efficacy of Implosion Water Treatment Versus Traditional Methods. Journal of Water Pollution & Purification Research. 2025; 12(01):10-21.
How to cite this URL:
Basudev Singh, Jayanta Kumar Mahat, Jyoti Sharma. Evaluating the Efficacy of Implosion Water Treatment Versus Traditional Methods. Journal of Water Pollution & Purification Research. 2025; 12(01):10-21. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/jowppr/article=2025/view=193325



References

  1. Sharma SK. Green chemistry for dyes removal from wastewater: research trends and applications. 2015.
  2. Rathoure AK. Toxicity and waste management using bioremediation. IGI Global; 2015.
  3. Farid S, Baloch MK, Ahmad SA. Water pollution: Major issue in urban areas. Int J Water Resour Environ Eng. 2012;4(3):55-65.
  4. Goel P. Water pollution: causes, effects and control. New Age International; 2006.
  5. Madhav S, et al. Water pollutants: sources and impact on the environment and human health. In: Sensors in water pollutants monitoring: Role of material. 2020. p. 43-62.
  6. Ahmed J, Thakur A, Goyal A. Industrial wastewater and its toxic effects. 2021.
  7. Chowdhary P, Bharagava RN, Mishra S, Khan N. Role of industries in water scarcity and its adverse effects on environment and human health. In: Environmental Concerns and Sustainable Development: Volume 1: Air, Water and Energy Resources. 2020. p. 235-56.
  8. Kucera J. Reverse osmosis. John Wiley & Sons; 2023.
  9. Castelletto S, Boretti A. Advantages, limitations, and future suggestions in studying graphene-based desalination membranes. RSC Adv. 2021;11(14):7981-8002.
  10. Peters CD, Li D, Mo Z, Hankins NP, She Q. Exploring the limitations of osmotically assisted reverse osmosis: Membrane fouling and the limiting flux. Environ Sci Technol. 2022;56(10):6678-88.
  11. Alsarayreh AA, Al-Obaidi MA, Patel R, Mujtaba IM. Scope and limitations of modelling, simulation, and optimisation of a spiral wound reverse osmosis process-based water desalination. Processes. 2020;8(5):573.
  12. Boyd CE, Boyd CE. Dissolved solids. In: Water Quality: An Introduction. 2020. p. 83-118.
  13. Rusydi AF. Correlation between conductivity and total dissolved solids in various types of water: A review. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2018;118:012019.
  14. Nayar R. Assessment of water quality index and monitoring of pollutants by physico-chemical analysis in water bodies: A review. Int J Eng Res Technol. 2020;9(01).
  15. Saalidong BM, Aram SA, Otu S, Lartey PO. Examining the dynamics of the relationship between water pH and other water quality parameters in ground and surface water systems. PLoS One. 2022;17(1):e0262117.
  16. Jain N, Yevatikar R, Raxamwar TS. Comparative study of physico-chemical parameters and water quality index of river. Mater Today Proc. 2022;60:859-67.
  17. Gharibzahedi SMT, Jafari SM. The importance of minerals in human nutrition: Bioavailability, food fortification, processing effects and nanoencapsulation. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2017;62:119-32.
  18. Lall SP. The minerals. In: Fish Nutrition. Elsevier; 2022. p. 469-554.
  19. Weyh C, Krüger K, Peeling P, Castell L. The role of minerals in the optimal functioning of the immune system. Nutrients. 2022;14(3):644.
  20. Akram M, et al. Vitamins and minerals: Types, sources and their functions. In: Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals: Bioactive Components, Formulations and Innovations. 2020. p. 149-72.
  21. Dindar E. An overview of the application of hydrodynamic cavitation for the intensification of wastewater treatment applications: A review. Innov Energy Res. 2016;5(137):1-7.
  22. Chandra MS, et al. A review on hydrodynamic cavitation – a promising technology for soil and water conservation in Inceptisol of North West IGP. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2019;8(8):739-53.
  23. Dular M, et al. Use of hydrodynamic cavitation in (waste) water treatment. Ultrason Sonochem. 2016;29:577-88.
  24. Mancuso G, Langone M, Andreottola G. A critical review of the current technologies in wastewater treatment plants by using hydrodynamic cavitation process: Principles and applications. J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2020;18:311-33.
  25. Song Y, Hou R, Zhang W, Liu J. Hydrodynamic cavitation as an efficient water treatment method for various sewage: A review. Water Sci Technol. 2022;86(2):302-20.
  26. Ranade VV, Bhandari VM, Nagarajan S, Sarvothaman VP, Simpson AT. Hydrodynamic Cavitation: Devices, Design and Applications. John Wiley & Sons; 2022.
  27. Panda D, Saharan VK, Manickam S. Controlled hydrodynamic cavitation: A review of recent advances and perspectives for greener processing. Processes. 2020;8(2):220.
  28. Darandale G, Jadhav M, Warade A, Hakke VS. Hydrodynamic cavitation – A novel approach in wastewater treatment: A review. Mater Today Proc. 2023;77:960-8.
  29. Anjaneyulu Y, Sreedhara Chary N, Samuel Suman Raj D. Decolourization of industrial effluents – Available methods and emerging technologies – A review. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol. 2005;4:245-73.
  30. Hai FI, Yamamoto K, Fukushi K. Hybrid treatment systems for dye wastewater. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol. 2007;37(4):315-77.
  31. Baudequin C, et al. Removal of fluorinated surfactants by reverse osmosis – Role of surfactants in membrane fouling. J Membr Sci. 2014;458:111-9.
  32. Meckes MC, Haught RC, Kelty K, Blannon JC, Cmehil D. Impact on water distribution system biofilm densities from reverse osmosis membrane treatment of supply water. J Environ Eng Sci. 2007;6(4):449-54.
Regular Issue Subscription Original Research
Volume 12
Issue 01
Received 19/12/2024
Accepted 29/12/2024
Published 10/01/2025
Total Visits: 112


My IP

PlumX Metrics