Integrating experimental design and machine learning for efficient dye adsorption in textile wastewater treatment
Source abstract
Abstract
The textile industry generates large volumes of dye-contaminated wastewater, posing significant environmental risks. This study aims to optimize the adsorption of textile dyes from wastewater using activated carbon through a general factorial design. The research investigates the effects of key variables, including activated carbon type (powdered and granular), contact time, carbon dosage, salinity, and temperature, on dye removal efficiency. A comprehensive analysis using ANOVA identifies the most significant factors and their interactions. The study also integrates machine learning models, such as Gaussian process regression (GPR) and artificial neural networks (ANN), to predict adsorption outcomes. The results demonstrate that granular activated carbon (GAC) and lower salinity significantly enhance dye removal efficiency. ANN models outperformed GPR in predictive accuracy, achieving an R 2 value of 0.85 compared to GPR’s 0.71. The findings provide optimized operational parameters that can be applied in the textile industry for efficient wastewater treatment and environmental compliance.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Water Quality Monitoring and Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
King Khalid University
Funding
Deanship of Scientific Research, King Khalid University
References (58)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.24018/ejchem.2020.1.5.1410.24018/ejchem.2020.1.5.14 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.cogsc.2022.10067410.1016/j.cogsc.2022.100674 ↗
3. 10.31875/2410-4701.2020.07.1010.31875/2410-4701.2020.07.10 ↗
4. 10.1007/s42773-022-00140-710.1007/s42773-022-00140-7 ↗
5. 10.1038/s41598-020-72401-z10.1038/s41598-020-72401-z ↗
6. 10.1007/s13201-020-01245-910.1007/s13201-020-01245-9 ↗
7. 10.1007/s13762-023-04810-210.1007/s13762-023-04810-2 ↗
8. 10.5004/dwt.2020.2602310.5004/dwt.2020.26023 ↗
9. 10.1039/D2RA06691B10.1039/D2RA06691B ↗
10. 10.3390/en1513464210.3390/en15134642 ↗
11. 10.2166/wst.2020.21110.2166/wst.2020.211 ↗
12. 10.5004/dwt.2022.2801310.5004/dwt.2022.28013 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.10091110.1016/j.jwpe.2019.100911 ↗
14. 10.1007/s13201-022-01832-y10.1007/s13201-022-01832-y ↗
15. 10.2166/wpt.2022.06310.2166/wpt.2022.063 ↗
16. 10.1039/D2RA07595D10.1039/D2RA07595D ↗
17. 10.3390/separations1001005710.3390/separations10010057 ↗
18. 10.1038/s41598-023-27477-810.1038/s41598-023-27477-8 ↗
19. Alkhatib EA Snetsinger PA Alanazi A et al. Application of factorial design in the analysis of factors influencing textile dye adsorption on activated carbon. 2017.10.4172/2165-784X.1000287 ↗
20. 10.1007/s12221-023-00184-x10.1007/s12221-023-00184-x ↗
21. 10.1007/s12221-025-00858-810.1007/s12221-025-00858-8 ↗
22. 10.3390/su16221012910.3390/su162210129 ↗
23. 10.1111/cote.1270010.1111/cote.12700 ↗
24. 10.1111/cote.1266510.1111/cote.12665 ↗
25. Hamri N, Imessaoudene A, Hadadi A, et al. Enhanced adsorption capacity of methylene blue dye onto kaolin through acid treatment: batch adsorption and machine learning studies. Water (Lond 1974) 2024; 16: 243.
26. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.10.01710.1016/j.jenvman.2018.10.017 ↗
27. Leon VB, Negreiros BAF, Brusamarello CZ, et al. Artificial neural network for prediction of color adsorption from an industrial textile effluent using modified sugarcane bagasse: characterization, kinetics and isotherm studies. Environ Nanotechnol Monit Manag 2020; 14: 100387.
28. 10.1080/09593330.2021.196187410.1080/09593330.2021.1961874 ↗
29. 10.2166/wpt.2023.20310.2166/wpt.2023.203 ↗
30. 10.3390/molecules2909203810.3390/molecules29092038 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.psep.2018.03.00710.1016/j.psep.2018.03.007 ↗
32. 10.3390/molecules2421383110.3390/molecules24213831 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.cscee.2023.10049810.1016/j.cscee.2023.100498 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.14153810.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.141538 ↗
35. 10.1080/1070551090343900310.1080/10705510903439003 ↗
36. 10.1080/09593330.2018.146406610.1080/09593330.2018.1464066 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.microc.2016.08.01210.1016/j.microc.2016.08.012 ↗
38. 10.54097/fcis.v5i1.1195710.54097/fcis.v5i1.11957 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.jwpe.2022.10327310.1016/j.jwpe.2022.103273 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.indic.2022.10017610.1016/j.indic.2022.100176 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.jece.2020.10405510.1016/j.jece.2020.104055 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.aca.2014.10.01410.1016/j.aca.2014.10.014 ↗
43. Imam F, Petr M, Marek Z. Reformat. “Parametric and nonparametric machine learning techniques for increasing power system reliability: a review.” Information 15.1 (2024): 37.
44. 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30149-410.1016/S1470-2045(19)30149-4 ↗
45. 10.1007/s42979-021-00815-110.1007/s42979-021-00815-1 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.12800810.1016/j.biortech.2022.128008 ↗
47. Nargis F Sharna AS Islam MS. Comparative study of PAC and GAC on removal of waste from textile dyeing wastewater.
48. 10.1186/s40068-020-00191-410.1186/s40068-020-00191-4 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.10118810.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101188 ↗
50. 10.3390/separations1111031210.3390/separations11110312 ↗
51. Radhi AA. Comparison of granulated and powdered activated carbon in the removal of organic matter from river water. Int Res J Adv Eng Sci 2020; 5: 191–197.
52. 10.1007/s11270-022-05614-910.1007/s11270-022-05614-9 ↗
53. 10.1002/tqem.2228810.1002/tqem.22288 ↗
54. 10.1002/jnm.325910.1002/jnm.3259 ↗
55. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13156410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131564 ↗
56. Chukwuma AN, Ugbebor J, Ugwoha E. Modeling of re-aeration coefficient for Nkisa River, Egbema, Rivers State, Nigeria. Water Pract Technol 2024; 19: 200–212.
57. 10.1016/j.molliq.2023.12371910.1016/j.molliq.2023.123719 ↗
58. 10.1038/s41598-025-86032-910.1038/s41598-025-86032-9 ↗