4.7 Article

Removal of nickel(II) ions from aqueous solution using crab shell particles in a packed bed up-flow column

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 113, 期 1-3, 页码 223-230

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.06.014

关键词

crab shell; nickel; biosorption; packed bed column; regeneration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the ability of crab shell to remove nickel(II) ions from aqueous solution in a packed bed up-flow column with an internal diameter of 2 cm. The experiments were performed with different bed heights (15-25 cm) and using different flow rates (5-20 ml/min) in order to obtain experimental breakthrough curves. The bed depth service time (BDST) model was used to analyze the experimental data and the model parameters were evaluated. The column regeneration studies were carried out for seven sorption-desorption cycles. The elutant used for the regeneration of the sorbent was 0.01 M EDTA (disodium) solution at pH 9.8 adjusted using NH4OH. Due to continuous usage of crab shell. a performance loss was observed as the breakthrough curves become more flattened also indicated by the broadened mass transfer zone. The breakthrough time decreased uniformly from 28.1 to 9.5 h as the cycles progressed from one to seven, whereas nickel uptake remained approximately constant throughout the seven cycles. The life-factors for crab shell in terms of critical bed length and breakthrough time were found to be 1.1 cm/cycle and 0.17 per cycle, respectively. The elution efficiency was greater than 99.1% in all the seven cycles. The pH profiles during both sorption and desorption process were also reported. In sorption cycles, there was a sudden raise in pH in the early part of the process and then the pH decreased as the time progressed. In desorption cycles, pH decreased in initial stages and followed by gradual increase in pH, which eventually reached the pH of the inlet elutant. (C) 2004 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