4.6 Article

Performance of defective Zr-MOFs for the adsorption of anionic dyes

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE
卷 57, 期 9, 页码 5438-5455

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10853-022-06874-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Shaanxi Natural Science Foundation [2021JZ-11]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have attracted attention in various fields due to their unique porous structure. This study focuses on the use of defective zirconium-based MOFs for removing dyes from water. The results show that MOF-808 has a higher adsorption capacity for EY and MO, and both chemical and physical adsorption occur during the process.
Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs), a new type of porous functional material, have attracted widespread attention in the field of adsorption separation, medicine, and catalysis, etc., due to their unique adjustable pore structure and large specific surface. The defective zirconium-based MOF is rich in terminal Zr-OH induced by the lack of linkers and the mu 3-OH originating from the Zr cluster, exhibiting high affinity for the carboxyl and sulfonic acid groups in the dyes. We report the performance of two defective zirconium-based MOFs (MOF-808 and MIL-140C) to remove Eosin y (EY), Methyl orange (MO), and Orange g from the water. Owing to the strong affinity, larger specific surface area, and better-matched pore structure, MOF-808 exhibits higher adsorption capacity for EY and MO, with maximum adsorption capacities of 661.7 mg g(-1) and 532.4 mg g(-1), respectively. The adsorption kinetics, thermodynamics, adsorption cycle performance, and adsorption mechanism of two MOFs for three dyes were investigated. Adsorption thermodynamics and XPS analysis certified that both chemical adsorption and physical adsorption occur during the adsorption process, especially chemical adsorption. Desorption and regeneration tests demonstrate that both MOF-808 and MIL-140C maintained their high adsorption capacity after four cycles, indicating two MOFs are favorable candidates for removing pollutants.

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