2010
DOI: 10.1109/tps.2010.2044588
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative Inactivation of Bacillus subtilis Spores Using a DBD-Driven Xenon Iodide Excilamp and a Conventional Mercury Lamp

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Unsurprisingly, depending on the values of these parameters, different characteristics of the discharge and performance of the reactor can be achieved; this fact has been already evidenced for different DBD reactors, e.g., DBD-driven ozone generators [10], precipitators [11], and ultraviolet (UV) excilamps [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Unsurprisingly, depending on the values of these parameters, different characteristics of the discharge and performance of the reactor can be achieved; this fact has been already evidenced for different DBD reactors, e.g., DBD-driven ozone generators [10], precipitators [11], and ultraviolet (UV) excilamps [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This paper is mainly focused on DBD-driven excilamps, which are high efficiency and environmentally friendly UV sources, with the potential to replace the traditional mercury-based UV lamps [12], for example, in drinking water treatment applications [13]. One of the challenges for this technology to be massively adopted is the optimization and management of the overall lamp-supply system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[9] Inactivation experiments with Bacillus subtilis spores also demonstrated the high efficiency of XeBr [10] and XeI excilamp (253 nm). [11] Wang et al [12] have studied the disinfection effects of VUV and UV radiation on B. subtilis spores at 172 (Xe 2 excimer lamp), 222 (KrCl excilamp) and 254 nm (low-pressure Hg lamp) and found Xe 2 excimer lamp was the least efficient, while the KrCl excilamp was more efficient than a Hg lamp. Further, a KrCl excilamp was also used for evaluation of inactivation of E. coli at high initial populations on agar surfaces and in aqueous media.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the data in [4], a KrCl exciplex lamp is the most effective for inactivation of Bacillus subtilis spores compared with a Xe 2 exciplex lamp (172 nm) and a low-pressure mercury lamp (254 nm). The bactericidal effect of XeI exciplex lamps (253 nm) was studied for the same spores [5]. Some of the most promising modern technologies for water disinfection are technologies based on combination oxidation processes, or AOPs (Advanced Oxidation Processes).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%