4.7 Article

Experimental and theoretical studies on the removal mechanism of formaldehyde from water by mesoporous calcium silicate

期刊

SCIENCE CHINA-TECHNOLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 63, 期 10, 页码 2098-2112

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11431-019-1504-7

关键词

chemical adsorption; mechanism; molecular dynamics simulation; mesoporous calcium silicate; formaldehyde

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21606005]
  2. Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation [2192016]
  3. Support Project of High-level Teachers in Beijing Municipal Universities in the Period of 13th Five-year Plan [CITTCD201904042]
  4. Innovative Research Team of New Functional Materials of Beijing Technology and Business University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most porous materials with high specific surface area and diverse internal structures possess good adsorption ability. In this work, a tremella-like mesoporous calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) with high adsorption capacity was successfully prepared via a facile hydrothermal method. The adsorption effect and adsorption mechanism of the as-prepared calcium silicate hydrate (AP-CSH) towards formaldehyde from water were investigated systematically. Results indicate that AP-CSH has high Ca/Si ratio (1.95), large specific surface area (122.83 m(2) g(-1)) and exhibits excellent adsorption capacity. The results of batch adsorption experiments show that AP-CSH can remove formaldehyde from water rapidly and effectively with the maximum removal efficiency of 98.94%. The adsorption process agrees well with the pseudo-second-order and Freundlich isotherm model. Furthermore, regeneration can be achieved by simply immersing AP-CSH in absolute ethanol and the removal efficiency can still reach about 99.50% after five cycles. The adsorption mechanism was also studied by experimental analyses and molecular dynamics simulation. Both experimental results and theoretical simulation support that formaldehyde adsorption over AP-CSH belongs to chemical adsorption.

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