Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 26, pp 26419–26438 | Cite as

Progress in ultrasonic oil-contaminated sand cleaning: a fundamental review

  • Muhammad Shafiq Mat-ShayutiEmail author
  • Tuan Mohammad Yusoff Shah Tuan Ya
  • Mohamad Zaki Abdullah
  • Putri Nadzrul Faizura Megat Khamaruddin
  • Nur Hidayati Othman
Review Article


Steady efforts in using ultrasonic energy to treat oil-contaminated sand started in the early 2000s until today, although pilot studies on the area can be traced to even earlier dates. Owing to the unique characteristics of the acoustic means, the separation of oil from sand has been showing good results in laboratories. This review provides the compilation of researches and insights into the mechanism of separation thus far. Related topics in the areas of oil-contaminated sand characterizations, fundamental ultrasonic cleaning, and cavitation effects are also addressed. Nevertheless, many of the documented works are only at laboratory or pilot-scale level, and the comprehensive interaction between ultrasonic parameters towards cleaning efficiencies may not have been fully unveiled. Gaps and opportunities are also presented at the end of this article.


Oil-contaminated sand Sand management Soil remediation Ultrasonic cleaning Particle cracking Capillary action 


Funding information

This research was under the funding of BESTARI PERDANA Grant Scheme: 600-IRMI/PERDANA 5/3 BESTARI (049/2018), by Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.


  1. Abramov OV, Abramov VO, Myasnikov SK, Mullakaev MS (2007) Ultrasonic technologies for extracting oil products from oil-bearing sands and contaminated soils. Theor Found Chem Eng 43:504–510. Google Scholar
  2. Abramov OV, Abramov VO, Myasnikov SK, Mullakaev MS (2009) Extraction of bitumen, crude oil and its products from tar sand and contaminated sandy soil under effect of ultrasound. Ultrason Sonochem 16:408–416. Google Scholar
  3. Agarwal A, Liu Y (2015) Remediation technologies for oil-contaminated sediments. Mar Pollut Bull 101:483–490. Google Scholar
  4. Agarwal A, Zhou Y, Liu Y (2016) Remediation of oil-contaminated sand with self-collapsing air microbubbles. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:23876–23883. Google Scholar
  5. Al-Hawash AB, Alkooranee JT, Abbood HA, Zhang J, Sun J, Zhang X, Ma F (2018) Isolation and characterization of two crude oil-degrading fungi strains from Rumaila oil field, Iraq. Biotechnol Rep.
  6. Alrumman SA, Standing DB, Paton GI (2015) Effects of hydrocarbon contamination on soil microbial community and enzyme activity. J King Saud Univ Sci 27:31–41. Google Scholar
  7. Antes FG, Diehl LO, Pereira JSF, Guimarães RCL, Guarnieri RA, Ferreira BMS, Flores EMM (2017) Effect of ultrasonic frequency on separation of water from heavy crude oil emulsion using ultrasonic baths. Ultrason Sonochem 35:541–546. Google Scholar
  8. Ashokkumar M, Mason TJ (2000) Sonochemistry. In: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of chemical technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken. Google Scholar
  9. Ashokkumar M, Lee J, Iida Y, Yasui K, Kozuka T, Tuziuti T, Towata A (2009) The detection and control of stable and transient acoustic cavitation bubbles. Phys Chem Chem Phys 11:10118–10121. Google Scholar
  10. Avvaru B, Venkateswaran N, Uppara P, Iyengar SB, Katti SS (2018) Current knowledge and potential applications of cavitation technologies for the petroleum industry. Ultrason Sonochem 42:493–507. Google Scholar
  11. Bai L, Xu W, Deng J, Li C, Xu D, Gao Y (2014) Generation and control of acoustic cavitation structure. Ultrason Sonochem 21:1696–1706. Google Scholar
  12. Beresnev IA, Johnson PA (1994) Elastic-wave stimulation of oil production: a review of methods and results. GEOPHYSICS 59:1000–1017. Google Scholar
  13. Bonal NS, Paramkusam BR, Basudhar PK (2018) Enhancement of surfactant efficacy during the cleanup of engine oil contaminated soil using salt and multi-walled carbon nanotubes. J Hazard Mater 351:54–62. Google Scholar
  14. Bossert I, Bartha R (1984) The fate of petroleum in the soil ecosystem. Petroleum Microbiology, MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  15. Botton V, Lenoir JM, Henry D, BenHadid H (2014) Transient acoustic streaming flow in glycerolGoogle Scholar
  16. Bramley-Alves J, Wasley J, King CK, Powell S, Robinson SA (2014) Phytoremediation of hydrocarbon contaminants in subantarctic soils: an effective management option. J Environ Manag 142:60–69. Google Scholar
  17. Chang HJ, Jou C-JG, Lee C-L (2011) Treatment of heavy oil contaminated sand by microwave energy. Environ Eng Sci 28:869–873Google Scholar
  18. Cherskiy NV, Tsarev VP, Konovalov VM, Kuznetsov L (1977) The effect of ultrasound on permeability of rocks to water transactions (Doklady) of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Earth Sci Sec 232:201–204Google Scholar
  19. Chilingarian GV, Sadeghi KM, Sadeghi MA, Yen TF (1989) Development of a new method for the extraction of bitumen from tar sands using sonication and sodium silicate. Chem Technol Fuels Oils 25:3–11. Google Scholar
  20. Cho S-H, Son Y-G, Nam S-G, Cui M-C, Khim J-H (2010) The effect of ultrasound application to anionic/non-ionic surfactant aided soil-washing process for enhancing diesel contaminated soils remediation. J Environ Sci Int 19.
  21. Coghlan A (2015) Messy legacy of Gulf oil spill. New Sci 226:16. Google Scholar
  22. L.A. Crum, Timothy J. Mason, J.L. Reisse, K.S. Suslick (1999) Sonochemistry and Sonoluminescence. NATO ASI Series C, vol 524. Kluwer Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Csoka L, Katekhaye SN, Gogate PR (2011) Comparison of cavitational activity in different configurations of sonochemical reactors using model reaction supported with theoretical simulations. Chem Eng J 178:384–390. Google Scholar
  24. D. Schneider (1999) Construction of a high performance reactor vol 25. Ultrasound in Environmental Engineering,TUHH Reports on Sanitary EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  25. Dahlem O, Demaiffe V, Halloin V, Reisse J (1998) Direct sonication system suitable for medium-scale sonochemical reactors. AIChE J 44:2724–2730. Google Scholar
  26. Dezhkunov NV, Leighton TG (2004) Study into correlation between the ultrasonic capillary effect and sonoluminescence. J Eng Phys Thermophys 77:53–61. Google Scholar
  27. Dezhkunov NV, Prokhorenko PP (1980) Action of ultrasound on the rise of a liquid in a capillary tube and its dependence on the properties of the liquid. J Eng Phys 39:1014–1019. Google Scholar
  28. Dion J-L (2009) Contamination-free high capacity converging waves sonoreactors for the chemical industry. Ultrason Sonochem 16:212–220. Google Scholar
  29. Duhon RD, Campbell JM (1965) The effect of ultrasonic energy on the flow of fluids in porous media. Paper presented at the SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Charleston, West Virginia, 1965/1/1/Google Scholar
  30. Ekpo MA, Udofia US (2008) Rate of biodegradation of crude oil by microorganisms isolated from oil sludge environment. Afr J Biotechnol 7:4495–4499Google Scholar
  31. Feng D, Aldrich C (2000) Sonochemical treatment of simulated soil contaminated with diesel. Adv Environ Res 4:103–112. Google Scholar
  32. Feng D, Lorenzen L, Aldrich C, Maré PW (2001) Ex situ diesel contaminated soil washing with mechanical methods. Miner Eng 14:1093–1100. Google Scholar
  33. Firoozabadi A, Ramey HJ (1988) Surface tension of water hydrocarbon systems at reservoir conditions. J Can Pet Technol 27:41–48Google Scholar
  34. Fu L, Zhang G, Ge J, Zhang J, Pei H, Liao K (2014) Dual-frequency ultrasound assisted oil-sands separation technology Shenzhen Daxue Xuebao (Ligong Ban)/Journal of Shenzhen University science and engineering 31:436-440 doi:
  35. Fu L, Zhang G, Ge J, Liao K, He Y, Wang X, Li H (2017) Study on dual-frequency ultrasounds assisted surfactant extraction of oil sands. Fuel Process Technol 167:146–152. Google Scholar
  36. Gallego-Juarez JA (2010) High-power ultrasonic processing: recent developments and prospective advances. Phys Procedia 3:35–47. Google Scholar
  37. Gao Y-c, Guo S-h, Wang J-n, Li D, Wang H, Zeng D-H (2014) Effects of different remediation treatments on crude oil contaminated saline soil. Chemosphere 117:486–493. Google Scholar
  38. Gao Y, Ding R, Wu S, Wu Y, Zhang Y, Yang M (2015) Influence of ultrasonic waves on the removal of different oil components from oily sludge. Environ Technol 36:1771–1775. Google Scholar
  39. George LA, Dewoolkar MM, Znidarcic D (2009) Simultaneous laboratory measurement of acoustic and hydraulic properties of unsaturated soils. Vadose Zone J 8:633–642Google Scholar
  40. Ghoreishi G, Alemzadeh A, Mojarrad M, Djavaheri M (2017) Bioremediation capability and characterization of bacteria isolated from petroleum contaminated soils in Iran Sustainable. Environ Res 27:195–202. Google Scholar
  41. Gogate PR, Shirgaonkar IZ, Sivakumar M, Senthilkumar P, Vichare NP, Pandit AB (2001) Cavitation reactors: efficiency assessment using a model reaction. AIChE J 47:2526–2538. Google Scholar
  42. Gogate PR, Sutkar VS, Pandit AB (2011) Sonochemical reactors: important design and scale up considerations with a special emphasis on heterogeneous systems. Chem Eng J 166:1066–1082. Google Scholar
  43. Griffiths S, Rescaglio A, Melo F (2010) Ultrasound propagation in wet and airless non-consolidated granular materials. Ultrasonics 50:139–144. Google Scholar
  44. Haghollahi A, Fazaelipoor MH, Schaffie M (2016) The effect of soil type on the bioremediation of petroleum contaminated soils. J Environ Manag 180:197–201. Google Scholar
  45. Han Y, Nambi IM, Prabhakar Clement T (2018) Environmental impacts of the Chennai oil spill accident – a case study. Sci Total Environ 626:795–806. Google Scholar
  46. Hertz H (1896) Über die Berührung fester elastischer Körper (On the contact of elastic solids). J Reine Angew Math 92:156–171Google Scholar
  47. Hirokazu O, Tomonao S, Ryota H, Takashi N, Youhei K, Katsuyasu S (2010) Effects of different ultrasound irradiation frequencies and water temperatures on extraction rate of bitumen from oil sand. Jpn J Appl Phys 49:07HE12Google Scholar
  48. Hirokazu O, Tomonao S, Ryota H, Takashi N, Youhei K, Shinobu K (2011) Recovery of bitumen from oil sand by sonication in aqueous hydrogen peroxide. Jpn J Appl Phys 50:07HE12Google Scholar
  49. Hu G, Li J, Thring RW, Arocena J (2014) Ultrasonic oil recovery and salt removal from refinery tank bottom sludge. J Environ Sci Health A 49:1425–1435. Google Scholar
  50. Iizuka A, Iwata W, Shibata E, Nakamura T (2016) Physical washing method for press oil removal from side surfaces using microbubbles under ultrasonic irradiation. Ind Eng Chem Res 55:10782–10787. Google Scholar
  51. Jernelöv A (2018) Environmental effects of terrestrial oil spills. In: Dellasala DA, Goldstein MI (eds) Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 323–335. Google Scholar
  52. Johnston K, Tapia-Siles C, Gerold B, Postema M, Cochran S, Cuschieri A, Prentice P (2014) Periodic shock-emission from acoustically driven cavitation clouds: a source of the subharmonic signal. Ultrasonics 54:2151–2158. Google Scholar
  53. Jordens J, Honings A, Degrève J, Braeken L, Gerven TV (2013) Investigation of design parameters in ultrasound reactors with confined channels. Ultrason Sonochem 20:1345–1352. Google Scholar
  54. Kerboua K, Hamdaoui O (2018a) Influence of reactions heats on variation of radius, temperature, pressure and chemical species amounts within a single acoustic cavitation bubble. Ultrason Sonochem 41:449–457. Google Scholar
  55. Kerboua K, Hamdaoui O (2018b) Ultrasonic waveform upshot on mass variation within single cavitation bubble: investigation of physical and chemical transformations. Ultrason Sonochem 42:508–516. Google Scholar
  56. Khim J, Kim S, Lim M, Yuan Q, Hwang A, Park I-C, Kim Y Effect of ultrasound on surfactant aided soil washing for diesel decontamination. In: Proc. Symp. Ultrason. Electron, 15–17 November 2006. pp 471–472Google Scholar
  57. Kim YU, Wang MC (2003) Effect of ultrasound on oil removal from soils. Ultrasonics 41:539–542. Google Scholar
  58. Kim YU, Park SH, Moon JH, Jang SMH Ultrasonically enhanced effectiveness of various surfactants on diesel removal from contaminated soil. In: Proceedings of Symposium on Ultrasonic Electronics, 13–15 November 2012. pp 227–228Google Scholar
  59. Koh T, Lee D, Lee J, Hwang S, Yoo J (2015) Oil-contaminated soil remediation technology by microwave thermal desorption 2015 6th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology 84Google Scholar
  60. Kwon MJ, Lee G, Hwang YH, Lee M, Yang J-S (2016) Effects of soil micro-particles and micro-pores on petroleum hydrocarbons released from contaminated soils during solvent extraction with ultrasound. Water Air Soil Pollut 227:357. Google Scholar
  61. Labud V, Garcia C, Hernandez T (2007) Effect of hydrocarbon pollution on the microbial properties of a sandy and a clay soil. Chemosphere 66:1863–1871. Google Scholar
  62. Leighton T (1997a) The acoustic bubble. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  63. Leighton T (1997b) The acoustic bubble, 1st Edition. Academic Press,Google Scholar
  64. Leong T, Collis J, Manasseh R, Ooi A, Novell A, Bouakaz A, Ashokkumar M, Kentish S (2011) The role of surfactant headgroup, chain length, and cavitation microstreaming on the growth of bubbles by rectified diffusion. J Phys Chem C 115:24310–24316. Google Scholar
  65. Li J, Song X, Hu G, Thring RW (2013) Ultrasonic desorption of petroleum hydrocarbons from crude oil contaminated soils. J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng 48:1378–1389. Google Scholar
  66. Lim MW, Lau EV, Poh PE (2016) A comprehensive guide of remediation technologies for oil contaminated soil — present works and future directions. Mar Pollut Bull 109:14–45. Google Scholar
  67. Lim MW, Lau EV, Poh PE (2018) Micro-macrobubbles interactions and its application in flotation technology for the recovery of high density oil from contaminated sands. J Pet Sci Eng 161:29–37. Google Scholar
  68. Lu Z, Sabatier JM (2009) Effects of soil water potential and moisture content on sound speed. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73:1614–1625. Google Scholar
  69. Ma X, Xing T, Huang B, Li Q, Yang Y (2018) Combined experimental and theoretical investigation of the gas bubble motion in an acoustic field. Ultrason Sonochem 40:480–487. Google Scholar
  70. Mandrone G (2016) An ultrasonic prototype to remedy pipes clogging: experimental effects on drains used for landslide mitigation. Bull Eng Geol Environ 75:673–680Google Scholar
  71. Mao Z, Yang C (2017) Micro-mixing in chemical reactors: a perspective. Chin J Chem Eng 25:381–390. Google Scholar
  72. Mason TJ (2007) Sonochemistry and the environment – providing a “green” link between chemistry, physics and engineering. Ultrason Sonochem 14:476–483. Google Scholar
  73. Mason TJ (2016) Ultrasonic cleaning: an historical perspective. Ultrason Sonochem 29:519–523. Google Scholar
  74. Mason TJ, Collings A, Sumel A (2004) Sonic and ultrasonic removal of chemical contaminants from soil in the laboratory and on a large scale. Ultrason Sonochem 11:205–210. Google Scholar
  75. Mason TJ, Chemat F, Ashokkumar M (2015) Power ultrasonics for food processing. In: Gallego-Juárez JA, Graff KF (eds) Power ultrasonics: applications of high-intensity ultrasound. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, pp 815–843. Google Scholar
  76. Merouani S, Ferkous H, Hamdaoui O, Rezgui Y, Guemini M (2015) A method for predicting the number of active bubbles in sonochemical reactors. Ultrason Sonochem 22:51–58. Google Scholar
  77. Mettin R (2005) Bubble structures in acoustic cavitation. Bubble and Particle dynamics in acoustic fields: modern trends and applications,. Research Signpost,, Kerala, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  78. Michlmayr G, Cohen D, Or D (2012) Sources and characteristics of acoustic emissions from mechanically stressed geologic granular media — a review. Earth-Sci Rev 112:97–114. Google Scholar
  79. Mohammadian E, Junin R, Rahmani O, Idris AK (2013) Effects of sonication radiation on oil recovery by ultrasonic waves stimulated water-flooding. Ultrasonics 53:607–614. Google Scholar
  80. Moubasher HA, Hegazy AK, Mohamed NH, Moustafa YM, Kabiel HF, Hamad AA (2015) Phytoremediation of soils polluted with crude petroleum oil using Bassia scoparia and its associated rhizosphere microorganisms. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 98:113–120. Google Scholar
  81. Mrayyan B, Battikhi MN (2005) Biodegradation of total organic carbons (TOC) in Jordanian petroleum sludge. J Hazard Mater 120:127–134. Google Scholar
  82. Muthukumaran S, Kentish Sandra E, Stevens Geoff W, Ashokkumar M (2006) Application of ultrasound in membrane separation processes: a review vol 22. doi:
  83. Odeh AS (1987) Mathematical modeling of the behavior of hydrocarbon reservoirs–the present and the future. Advances in Transport Phenomena in Porous Media. Martinus Nijhoff PublicationGoogle Scholar
  84. Ohno T, Iizuka A, Shibata E, Nakamura T (2012) Basic study on a washing method utilizing high-speed movement of microbubbles under ultrasound irradiation. Kag Kog Ronbunshu 38:61–67Google Scholar
  85. Ollivier B, Magot M, Microbiology AS (2005) Petroleum microbiology. 2nd edn. ASM Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  86. Paniwnyk L (2017) Applications of ultrasound in processing of liquid foods: a review. Ultrason Sonochem 38:794–806. Google Scholar
  87. Park B, Son Y (2017) Ultrasonic and mechanical soil washing processes for the removal of heavy metals from soils. Ultrason Sonochem 35:640–645. Google Scholar
  88. Pham TD (2014) Ultrasonic and electrokinetic remediation of low permeability soil contaminated with persistent organic pollutants. Lappeenranta University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  89. Pham TD, Shrestha RA, Sillanpää M (2009) Electrokinetic and ultrasonic treatment of kaolin contaminated by POPs. Sep Sci Technol 44:2410–2420. Google Scholar
  90. Ramaswamy B, Kar DD, De S (2007) A study on recovery of oil from sludge containing oil using froth flotation. J Environ Manag 85:150–154. Google Scholar
  91. Ramirez MI, Arevalo AP, Sotomayor S, Bailon-Moscoso N (2017) Contamination by oil crude extraction – refinement and their effects on human health. Environ Pollut 231:415–425. Google Scholar
  92. Sabraoui A, Inserra C, Gilles B, Béra J-C, Mestas J-L (2011) Feedback loop process to control acoustic cavitation. Ultrason Sonochem 18:589–594. Google Scholar
  93. Schrope M (2010) The lost legacy of the last great oil spill vol 466Google Scholar
  94. Servant G, Laborde JL, Hita A, Caltagirone JP, Gérard A (2003) On the interaction between ultrasound waves and bubble clouds in mono- and dual-frequency sonoreactors. Ultrason Sonochem 10:347–355. Google Scholar
  95. Shrestha RA, Pham TD, Sillanpää M (2009) Effect of ultrasound on removal of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) from different types of soils. J Hazard Mater 170:871–875. Google Scholar
  96. Shrestha RA, Pham TD, Sillanpää M (2010) Electro ultrasonic remediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from contaminated soil. J Appl Electrochem 40:1407–1413. Google Scholar
  97. Silva CS, de Oliveira OMC, Moreira ITA, Queiroz AFS, de Almeida M, Silva JVL, da Silva Andrade IO (2019) Potential application of oil-suspended particulate matter aggregates (OSA) on the remediation of reflective beaches impacted by petroleum: a mesocosm simulation. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:18071–18083. Google Scholar
  98. Simkin EM (1985) Oil will return in three months energy (Energiya) 3:44–47Google Scholar
  99. Somfai E, Roux J-N, Snoeijer JH, van Hecke M, van Saarloos W (2005) Elastic wave propagation in confined granular systems. Phys Rev E 72:021301Google Scholar
  100. Son Y, Cha J, Lim M, Ashokkumar M, Khim J (2011) Comparison of ultrasonic and conventional mechanical soil-washing processes for diesel-contaminated sand. Ind Eng Chem Res 50:2400–2407. Google Scholar
  101. Son Y, Nam S, Ashokkumar M, Khim J (2012) Comparison of energy consumptions between ultrasonic, mechanical, and combined soil washing processes. Ultrason Sonochem 19:395–398. Google Scholar
  102. Song X (2011) Remediation of salt- and petroleum hydrocarbon- contaminated soils using ultrasound and soil washing. University of Northern British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  103. Sutkar VS, Gogate PR (2009) Design aspects of sonochemical reactors: techniques for understanding cavitational activity distribution and effect of operating parameters. Chem Eng J 155:26–36. Google Scholar
  104. Swamy KM, Narayana KL (2001a) Intensification of leaching process by dual-frequency ultrasound. Ultrason Sonochem 8:341–346Google Scholar
  105. Swamy KM, Narayana KL (2001b) Ultrasonically assisted leaching. In: Mason TJ, Tiehm A (eds) Advances in Sonochemistry. Theme issue––ultrasound in environmental protection, vol 6. Elsevier,Google Scholar
  106. Szopińska M, Szumińska D, Bialik RJ, Dymerski T, Rosenberg E, Polkowska Ż (2019) Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and other organic pollutants in freshwaters on the western shore of Admiralty Bay (King George Island, Maritime Antarctica). Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:18143–18161. Google Scholar
  107. Tezel A, Mitragotri S (2003) Interactions of inertial cavitation bubbles with stratum corneum lipid bilayers during low-frequency sonophoresis. Biophys J 85:3502–3512. Google Scholar
  108. Tiong TJ, Low LE, Teoh HJ, Chin J-K, Manickam S (2015) Variation in performance at different positions of an ultrasonic VialTweeter – a study based on various physical and chemical activities. Ultrason Sonochem 27:165–170. Google Scholar
  109. Tiong TJ, Liew DKL, Gondipon RC, Wong RW, Loo YL, Lok MST, Manickam S (2017) Identification of active sonochemical zones in a triple frequency ultrasonic reactor via physical and chemical characterization techniques. Ultrason Sonochem 35:569–576. Google Scholar
  110. Tripathi V, Gaur VK, Dhiman N, Gautam K, Manickam N (2019) Characterization and properties of the biosurfactant produced by PAH-degrading bacteria isolated from contaminated oily sludge environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res.
  111. Tuziuti T (2016) Influence of sonication conditions on the efficiency of ultrasonic cleaning with flowing micrometer-sized air bubbles. Ultrason Sonochem 29:604–611. Google Scholar
  112. Tzanakis I, Eskin DG, Georgoulas A, Fytanidis DK (2014) Incubation pit analysis and calculation of the hydrodynamic impact pressure from the implosion of an acoustic cavitation bubble. Ultrason Sonochem 21:866–878. Google Scholar
  113. Ultrasonics M Advantages of MMM Technology for Sonic & Ultrasonic Cleaning. 2018
  114. Vidonish JE, Zygourakis K, Masiello CA, Sabadell G, Alvarez PJJ (2016) Thermal treatment of hydrocarbon-impacted soils: a review of technology innovation for sustainable remediation. Engineering 2:426–437. Google Scholar
  115. Villermaux J, David R (1983) Recent advances in the understanding of micromixing phenomena in stirred reactors. Chem Eng Commun 21:105–122. Google Scholar
  116. Whitaker S (1986) Flow in porous media I: a theoretical derivation of Darcy’s law. Transp Porous Media 1:3–25. Google Scholar
  117. Winquist E et al (2014) Bioremediation of PAH-contaminated soil with fungi – from laboratory to field scale. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 86:238–247. Google Scholar
  118. Wu M, Li W, Dick WA, Ye X, Chen K, Kost D, Chen L (2017) Bioremediation of hydrocarbon degradation in a petroleum-contaminated soil and microbial population and activity determination. Chemosphere 169:124–130. Google Scholar
  119. Xu Y, Langbauer C, Hofstaetter H (2017) The application of ultrasonic technology for cleaning oil contaminated sand. 2017/4/3/Google Scholar
  120. Yingming F (2013) Modification and separation of oil sand with ultrasonic wave and analysis of its products. Int J Min Sci Technol 23:531–535. Google Scholar
  121. Yusof NSM, Babgi B, Alghamdi Y, Aksu M, Madhavan J, Ashokkumar M (2016) Physical and chemical effects of acoustic cavitation in selected ultrasonic cleaning applications. Ultrason Sonochem 29:568–576. Google Scholar
  122. Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Li S (2016) The secondary Bjerknes force between two gas bubbles under dual-frequency acoustic excitation. Ultrason Sonochem 29:129–145. Google Scholar
  123. Zhao X, Zhang X, Liu L, Fan L, Ge D (2017a) Effect of ultrasonic reactor and auxiliary stirring on oil removal from oily sludge Environ Technol:1-6
  124. Zhao X, Zhang X, Liu L, Fan L, Ge D (2017b) Effect of ultrasonic reactor and auxiliary stirring on oil removal from oily sludge. Environ Technol 38:3109–3114. Google Scholar
  125. Zimmerman RW (2002) Flow in porous media. M.Sc. in Petroleum Engineering. Imperial College, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Shafiq Mat-Shayuti
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tuan Mohammad Yusoff Shah Tuan Ya
    • 1
  • Mohamad Zaki Abdullah
    • 1
  • Putri Nadzrul Faizura Megat Khamaruddin
    • 2
  • Nur Hidayati Othman
    • 2
  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentUniversiti Teknologi PETRONASSeri IskandarMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of Chemical EngineeringUniversiti Teknologi MARAShah AlamMalaysia

Personalised recommendations