4.7 Article

Mn-doped zirconium metal-organic framework as an effective adsorbent for removal of tetracycline and Cr(VI) from aqueous solution

期刊

MICROPOROUS AND MESOPOROUS MATERIALS
卷 277, 期 -, 页码 277-285

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.micromeso.2018.11.014

关键词

UiO-66; Mn-doped; Adsorption; Tetracycline; Cr(VI)

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51578223, 51521006, 51709103]
  2. Key Research and Development Program of Hunan Province [2017SK2242]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M630901]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) with porous property have gained much concern in environment remediation. Herein, the Mn-doped UiO-66 (denoted as MnUiO-66) with cubic morphology was fabricated with a facile solvothermal method. To investigate the adsorption performance of MnUiO-66, tetracycline (TC) and Cr(VI) were chosen as the target pollutant. The maximum adsorption capacity of MnUiO-66 for TC and Cr(VI) were 184.493 mg g(-1) and 32.773 mg g(-1), respectively, which were 4.9 and 3.1 times higher than the pristine UiO-66. Effects of the solution pH values, initial concentrations and coexisting ions on adsorption capacity were investigated and the adsorption mechanism based on zeta potential measurement was proposed. The adsorption process of MnUiO-66 over TC and Cr(VI) had the most accordance with pseudo-second-order and Langmuir models, which suggested that chemisorption was dominant in adsorption reaction and the MnUiO-66 adsorbent had a homogenous surface for adsorption. Adsorption thermodynamic studies implied that the adsorption process of TC and Cr(VI) on MnUiO-66 were spontaneous and exothermic. In addition, the MnUiO-66 showed excellent adsorption performance in TC-Cr(VI) mixed sample and pharmaceutical wastewater. More importantly, the regeneration experiment indicated the MnUiO-66 adsorbent was recyclable. This work provided a useful insight into the fabrication MOFs-based adsorbent for water purification.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据