4.7 Article

Preparation, characterization and adsorption kinetics of methylene blue dye in reduced-graphene oxide supported nanoadsorbents

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR LIQUIDS
卷 309, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.molliq.2020.113171

关键词

Graphene; Methylene blue; Nanoadsorbent; Ultrasonic processing

资金

  1. Dumlupinar University [2014-05]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reduced-graphene-oxide-supported Ni nanoadsorbents (Ni@rGO) were synthesized in this work to remove methylene blue (MB) dye from aqueous solutions using ultrasonic process method. These synthesized nanoadsorbents were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), Raman spectroscopy, N-2 sorption, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) apparatus. The effect of independent parameters (initial dye concentration, H2O2 concentration, adsorbent particle concentration, initial pH, contact time, and temperature were investigated) on dye removal efficiency with Ni@rGO nanoadsorbents. The zero charge points (pHzpc) of the Ni@rGO composite particles were determined by using experimental results. The max adsorption capacity (qe(max)) of the removal of methylene blue (MB) with Ni@rGO was determined as 946.12 mg g(-1) as a result of experimental data under optimum conditions using ultrasonic process method. The experimental data obtained in the kinetic study concluded that the adsorption process was more consistent with the pseudo second-order model. Thermodynamic functions such as Gibbs free energy change (Delta G(0)), entropy change (Delta S-0) and enthalpy change (Delta H-0) values were investigated in order to get an idea about the working mechanism of MB as a result of adsorption interaction with Ni@rGO composite particles. As a result of all the data obtained Ni@rGO nanoadsorbent has proven to be an effective nanoadsorbent material to remove methylene blue from aqueous solution under different parameters in ultrasonic process systems. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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