4.6 Article

Comparison of gas phase discharge and gas-liquid discharge for water activation and methylene blue degradation

期刊

VACUUM
卷 181, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vacuum.2020.109644

关键词

Gas-liquid discharge; Gas phase discharge; Reactive species; Optical emission spectra (OES); FTIR spectra; Methylene blue degradation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51677019, 51977023]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [DUT18LK42]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, an air gas-liquid discharge operated in contact with water is compared with air gas phase discharge operated in contact with quartz surface for their performance on the generation of aqueous reactive species and degrading methylene blue. The discharge images, electrical characteristics, optical emission spectra detected from discharge region, FTIR spectra detected from effluent gas, and plasma gas temperatures in both discharge regimes are compared. The results show that the gas-liquid discharge has lower efficiency to produce gaseous reactive species due to its higher discharge power and lower emission intensities of N-2 (C-B) and O, and lower FTIR absorbance intensities of O-3, NO2, and N2O, than those of gas phase discharge. Besides, the plasma gas temperature in gas-liquid discharge is much higher. Furthermore, both gas-liquid discharge and gas phase discharge are used for treating deionized water and methylene blue solution. It is found that gas-liquid discharge is more conducive to the activation of deionized water due to its higher production of aqueous H2O2, NO2, and NO3-. However, as for methylene blue degradation, the G(50) of methylene blue degradation in gas-liquid discharge (2.29 g.kWh(-1)) is much lower than that of gas phase discharge (9.14 g.kWh(-1)).

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

4.6
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