4.6 Article

Fixed-Bed Adsorption of Ciprofloxacin onto Bentonite Clay: Characterization, Mathematical Modeling, and DFT-Based Calculations

期刊

INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
卷 60, 期 10, 页码 4030-4040

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.0c05700

关键词

-

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico-Brazil (CNPq) [406193/2018-5]
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo-Brazil (FAPESP) [2019/11353-8, 2016/05007-1]
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior-Brazil (CAPES)
  4. CENAPAD SP
  5. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [16/05007-1] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the adsorption behavior of antibiotic ciprofloxacin in a calcined Verdelodo clay-packed fixed-bed system. The experimental results showed a breakthrough adsorption capacity of 0.038 mmol g(-1) and a mass transfer zone of 4.29 cm. Comparison with ofloxacin adsorption performance and density functional theory computations were also conducted.
The objective of this paper was to examine the adsorption of the antibiotic ciprofloxacin (CIP) in a calcined Verdelodo (CVL) clay-packed fixed-bed system. The characterization study of the fresh and contaminated clay indicated filling of the clay pores by the CIP (pore volume decreased from 65.4 to 31.1 cm(3) g(-1)) and did not evidence significant changes in the clay texture. The fixed-bed system reached a breakthrough adsorption capacity of 0.038 mmol g(-1) (12.6 mg g(-1)) and a mass transfer zone of 4.29 cm. Five mathematical models were fitted to the breakthrough curves, and the dual-site diffusion displayed the best fit to the experimental data (R-2 > 0.98). The adsorption performance of CIP was compared to that of the antibiotic ofloxacin, reported in the literature, in which density functional theory (DFT) computations were performed to clarify the particularities of the adsorption of both compounds onto CVL clay.

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