4.6 Article

Investigation of the adsorption behaviour of different types of dyes on MIL-100(Fe) and their removal from natural water

期刊

ANALYTICAL METHODS
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 1463-1470

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c4ay02726d

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21375095, 20975054, 21403155]
  2. Tianjin Natural Science Foundation [12JCZDJC21700]
  3. Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of PR China [FANEDD-201023]
  4. Program for Innovative Research Team in University of Tianjin [TD12-5038]
  5. Program for young backbone talents in Tianjin [ZX110GG015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metal-organic framework MIL-100(Fe) has high surface area, mesoporous cages, metal active sites and excellent water stability. These fascinating properties endow MIL-100(Fe) with the potential to extract organic dyes from environmental water samples. In the present work, MIL-100(Fe) is synthesized and applied as an adsorbent to remove three different types of dyes from aqueous solution in view of assessing the adsorption isotherms, kinetics and thermodynamics, desorption, and adsorbent regeneration. The adsorption for methylene blue and methyl blue follows a pseudo-second-order kinetics and fits the Freundlich model. The adsorption is a spontaneous process, but is controlled by different thermodynamic parameter changes. Moreover, MIL-100(Fe) could hardly adsorb isatin. Variables influencing the adsorption efficiency, such as adsorption time, temperature, solution pH, adsorbent dosage and salt concentration, are investigated. No remarkable effects of pH and ionic strength are observed for the adsorption of methylene blue and methyl blue on MIL-100(Fe). The used MIL-100(Fe) could be regenerated effectively and recycled without a significant loss of adsorption ability. The adsorption efficiency is about 100% for methylene blue and 52.1% for methyl blue, and the developed method is applied to remove two types of dyes in local water samples.

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