4.7 Article

Selective separation of gold and palladium using the improved Gemini Micellar-Enhanced ultrafiltration

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 444, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.136570

关键词

Selective separation; Gemini surfactant; Gemini micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration; (GMEUF) process; Precious metals; Chelating agent

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to selectively separate precious metals such as gold and palladium from a binary solution using the Gemini micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (GMEUF) process. The results showed that the improved GMEUF process achieved good selectivity in the separation of gold and palladium.
The aim of this study was to selectively separate precious metals such as gold and palladium from a binary solution using the Gemini micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (GMEUF) process. The selectivity of this process was improved by adding the chelating agent ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) to the solution. It means that one of these two metals can interact with the surface of Gemini micelles and reject by the membrane. The other metal must tend to bind to the ligand and enter the permeate stream. The effect of various parameters such as solution pH, operating pressure, flow rate, molar concentration ratio of the surfactant to the metal (S/M) and molar concentration ratio of the chelating agent to the metal (C/M) was investigated on the selective separation of these metals by a commercial polyethersulfone (PES) membrane and two Gemini surfactants. The rejection of gold and palladium in the optimal conditions of the above parameters reached the values of 90.2% and 21.4%, respectively, for the solutions containing N1-dodecyl-N1,N1,N2,N2-tetramethyl-N2-octylethane-1,2-diaminium bromide (CG12) micelles. In the presence of pentanediyl-1,5-bis (dimethyl cetyl ammonium bromide) (G5) micelles, these rejection values changed to 91.7% and 27.1%, respectively. The obtained results indicated a good selectivity in the separation of gold and palladium by the improved GMEUF process.

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