Kariana Moreno-Sader1, Alvaro García-Padilla1, Alvaro Realpe1, María Acevedo-Morantes1, João B P Soares2. 1. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Cartagena, Avenida Consulado St. 30 #48-152, 130015 Cartagena de Indias, Colombia. 2. Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Alberta, 116 St. and 85 Ave., T6G 2R3 Edmonton, Canada.
Abstract
Nanocomposites composed of polyacrylamide and nanoclay were synthesized via free-radical cross-linking polymerization and used to adsorb Co2+ and Ni2+ ions from water. The polyacrylamide (PAM)/sodium montmorillonite (Na-MMT) nanocomposites were characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, and scanning electron microscopy to confirm the interaction between montmorillonite and the polymer matrix. The effects of pH and heavy metal ion concentration on the adsorption capacity of PAM/Na-MMT were evaluated to determine suitable operating conditions for further experiments. Batch adsorption experimental data were fitted to Langmuir and Freundlich models, which provided information about the adsorption mechanism and the adsorbent surface. The highest Ni2+ removal yield was found to be 99.3% using the 2:1 (w/w) nanocomposite at pH 6 in 100 ppm of Ni2+ solution. The Co2+ removal yield was 98.7% at pH 6 in 60 ppm of Co2+ solution using the 4:1 (w/w) nanocomposite. These results were higher than those obtained by polyacrylamide and nanoclay under the same conditions (removal yield between 87.40 and 94.50%), indicating that PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites remove heavy metal water pollutants more efficiently and can be used as a novel adsorbent for further industrial applications.
Nanocomposites composed of polyacrylamide and nanoclay were synthesized via free-radical cross-linking polymerization and used to adsorb Co2+ and Ni2+ ions from water. The polyacrylamide (PAM)/sodium montmorillonite (Na-MMT) nanocomposites were characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, and scanning electron microscopy to confirm the interaction between montmorillonite and the polymer matrix. The effects of pH and heavy metal ion concentration on the adsorption capacity of PAM/Na-MMT were evaluated to determine suitable operating conditions for further experiments. Batch adsorption experimental data were fitted to Langmuir and Freundlich models, which provided information about the adsorption mechanism and the adsorbent surface. The highest Ni2+ removal yield was found to be 99.3% using the 2:1 (w/w) nanocomposite at pH 6 in 100 ppm of Ni2+ solution. The Co2+ removal yield was 98.7% at pH 6 in 60 ppm of Co2+ solution using the 4:1 (w/w) nanocomposite. These results were higher than those obtained by polyacrylamide and nanoclay under the same conditions (removal yield between 87.40 and 94.50%), indicating that PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites remove heavy metalwater pollutants more efficiently and can be used as a novel adsorbent for further industrial applications.
Water pollution is a major global environmental problem due to
its effect on living organisms and on the equilibrium of the whole
ecosystem. A wide range of toxic derivatives, including heavy metals,
suspended particles, aromatic compounds, and chemicals dyes are discharged
in water sources.[1] Contamination with heavy
metals caused by metal plating facilities, mining operations, fertilizer
industries, tanneries, batteries, paper industries, and pesticides,
among others has become the focus of attention of researchers and
policy makers due to the high level of these pollutants in the environment.[2] Currently, ten heavy metals are of major public
health concern: led, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, mercury,
manganese, zinc, and nickel.[3] Their high
solubility in water makes them easily absorbed by aquatic living organisms,
causing them to accumulate in the environment and reach hazardous
concentration levels.[4,5] In this paper, we will focus our
attention on cobalt and nickel; exposure to cobalt compounds may cause
adverse effects such as vomiting, heart failure, and nausea,[6,7] whereas exposure to nickel may produce human health problems such
as contact dermatitis.[8]Recently, numerous approaches have been developed to remove heavy
metals from water (such as chemical precipitation, ion exchange, and
reverse osmosis), but some of these are considered too expensive and
inadequate to treat water pollutants.[9] Adsorption
has been considered an attractive alternative to decrease the amount
of heavy metals in wastewater due to the availability of low cost,
ecofriendly, high-efficiency adsorbents.[4,10] Novel adsorbents
have been also developed to improve the selectivity, adsorption capacity,
and reusability for large-scale application of traditional adsorbents.[7] Compared to other conventional adsorbents such
as starch,[11] activated carbon,[6] chitosan,[12] and graphene
oxides,[13] high-molecular-weight acrylamide-based
polymers are promising adsorbents for heavy metal removal due to their
ability to increase adsorption performance at a relatively low cost.[14,15]Recent research on this area has focused on polyacrylamide and
its modification with starch, chitosan, guar gum, and nanoclay to
improve its properties as an adsorbent (such as Brunauer–Emmett–Teller
surface area, total pore volume, and pore diameter).[1,16−18] Hayati et al.[19] studied
the adsorption capacity of nanocomposites based on carbon nanotubes
(CNs) and PAM for the removal of Ni2+, Zn2+,
As3+, and Co2+. They characterized these new
materials by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR), scanning electron
microscopy (SEM), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and evaluated
their adsorption performances for different initial metal ion concentrations,
temperatures, solution pH values, nanocomposite dosages, and contact
times. The results indicated that Ni2+ was more easily
adsorbed by PAM/CN than the others heavy metals and that a pH of 8
is the most suitable condition for maximum adsorption. On the other
hand, Zhao et al.[20] synthesized a superadsorbent
based on polyacrylamide and bentonite for the adsorption of Cu2+. They also evaluated the effect of pH, heavy metals initial
concentration, and ionic strength on the adsorption percentage. The
highest adsorption capacity of 97%, which was achieved at a pH of
7 in 10 mg/L of Cu2+ solution, suggested that this nanocomposite
could be used successfully to remove Cu2+ from aqueous
solutions.In this work, a surfactant-free dispersion radical cross-linking
polymerization was carried out to synthesize acrylamide and sodium
montmorillonite (Na-MMT) nanocomposites. The nanoclay/polymer-based
matrix nanocomposites were evaluated at three different ratios of
acrylamide (AAm) to Na-MMT (1:1, 2:1, and 4:1 w/w). These nanomaterials
were characterized by FTIR, X-ray diffraction (XRD), and SEM to observe
the chemical structure, the degree of intercalation, and the morphology,
respectively. The Co2+ and Ni2+ removal yield
from aqueous solution was evaluated at different pH values (3, 4.5,
and 6) and heavy metal initial concentrations (20, 60, 100, 140, and
180 ppm). The residual concentration of heavy metals after a contact
time of 24 h was measured by atomic absorption spectroscopy, and these
results were used to construct Langmuir and Freundlich isotherms.
Materials and Methods
Experimental Materials
Acrylamide
(AAm, ≥98%, MW = 71.08 g/mol), ammonium persulfate (APS, ≥98%), N,N′-methylene-(bis)-acrylamide
(MBA, 99%), N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyl-ethylenediamine (TEMED,
99%), poly(vinylpyrrolidone) (PVP, average mol wt 40 000),
nickel(II) chloride hexahydrate (99.9% trace metals basis), and cobalt(II)
chloride hexahydrate (reagent grade) were purchased from Sigma Aldrich.
Sodium montmorillonite nanoclay (commercially referred as Cloisite
Na+) was obtained from Southern Clays. Deionized water
and ethanol of analytical grades were used as solvents during cross-linking
polymerizations.
Synthesis of Nanocomposites
The polyacrylamide/Na-MMT
nanocomposites were synthesized using different clay-to-monomer ratios
to evaluate the effect of Na-MMT amount on the adsorbent capacity
for Co2+ and Ni2+ uptake. It is important to
point out that AAm loading affects the intercalation degree of Na-MMT,
affecting the adsorption capacity of these materials.[21] The purpose of nanocomposite preparation lies on increasing
the interlayer space of nanoclay that makes possible a greater exchange
of metallic ions. PAM was selected as the polymer matrix due to its
ability to interact with the clay surface via its amide groups.[22] In addition, these amide functional groups (as
well as alcohol and amine groups) are important for the removal of
Ni2+ and Co2+ due to their strong interaction
with substrates. Since monomer cross-linking is widely used to disperse
clay sheets in polymer composites,[10] it
was selected as technique to prepare these nanocomposites. All reactions
were conducted below 50 °C due to low temperature polymerizations
promote the synthesis of high-molecular-weight PAM.[23] To assure an efficient dispersion of the clay particles
in PAM, vigorous stirring was kept throughout the polymerization.[24] Since oxygen scavenges off free radicals during
AAm polymerization, the polymerizations were carried out under an
inert nitrogen atmosphere.[25]Such
nanocomposites were prepared according to the procedure described
by Atta et al.[10] A solution of 100 mL of
water/ethanol (60/40 vol %) was used to disperse different amounts
of Na-MMT, which are summarized in Table . Afterward, PVP was added as a stabilizer
under vigorous stirring for 24 h. The surfactant-free dispersion radical
cross-linking polymerization was carried out under an inert nitrogen
atmosphere at 40 °C. The monomer was dispersed in 50 mL of the
previously prepared Na-MMT suspension. A solution of APS at 0.01 g/mL
was used as a radical initiator to start the polymerization. The reaction
temperature was gradually increased to 50 °C, and the remaining
Na-MMT suspension was added dropwise during 1 h. Subsequently, the
remaining amounts of AAm, MBA, and TEMED were dispersed into the other
50 mL of Na-MMT suspension and this mixture was injected dropwise
during 1 h. Then, dilution of APS was introduced into the reactor
and the reaction temperature was decreased to 45 °C. After 24
h of continuous stirring, the reaction mixture was repeatedly centrifuged
at 10 000 rpm and rinsed with ethanol to remove impurities
and the PAM homopolymer. Finally, the product was dried under vacuum
at 30 °C, pulverized by a mortar pestle, and sieved through a
100 mesh screen.[24]
Table 1
Experimental Conditions for Polymerization
Runs to Synthetize the Nanocomposite
nanocomposite
type
Na-MMT (g)
AAm (g)
PVP (g)
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (1:1)
2
2
0.3
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1)
1
2
0.15
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (4:1)
0.5
2
0.075
Characterization Techniques
FTIR Analysis
FTIR spectra of commercial
nonionic polyacrylamide, Cloisite Na+, and nanocomposite
(1:1, 2:1, and 4:1 w/w) samples were recorded on a Cary FTIR Model
660 (Agilent Technologies) by acquiring 64 scans with 4 cm–1 resolution in the 4000–400 cm–1 region
on attenuated total reflection (ATR) mode.
XRD Analysis
The XRD patterns of
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites and its base materials (PAM and Cloisite
Na+) were recorded using a Rigaku Ultima IV diffractometer
with Co Kα (λ = 0.1789 nm) radiation. The diffraction
intensities were recorded from 5 to 40° (2θ) angle. The d-spacing of MMT layers was calculated using the Bragg equationwhere θ is the diffraction angle, n is the order of diffraction, and λ is the incident
wavelength.
SEM Analysis
SEM analyses of nanocomposite
samples were carried out on a Sigma HD Zeuss scanning electron microscope
at an acceleration voltage of 20 kV (SE detector). The main objective
of this characterization technique is the identification of materials
morphology that represents a key factor to analyze in the adsorption
process.
Adsorption Experiments
The adsorption
of Co2+ and Ni2+ onto PAM/Na-MMT was analyzed
by varying the initial concentrations (20, 60, 100, 140 and 180 ppm)
of these heavy metal ions. All batch experiments were carried out
under ambient conditions (20 °C). In this respect, the pH values
of stock solutions (3, 4.5, and 6) were adjusted using 0.1 M HCl and
NaOH in negligible volumes. Afterward, 50 mL of stock solutions and
0.1 g of nanocomposite were added to a beaker placed on a stirring
plate. The contact time was fixed to 24 h. After adsorption, the separation
of solid and liquid phases was performed by centrifugation at 10 000
rpm for 30 min. The supernatant (1 mL) was separated to measure its
residual heavy metal concentration through atomic absorption spectrometry
(VARIAN 220 FS) with air-acetylene flame technique. The pH was also
measured at the end of batch experiments with nonsignificant variations
with respect to its initial value. The amount of Co2+ and
Ni2+ ions adsorbed onto PAM/Na-MMT at equilibrium and the
removal yield were calculated with the following equationswhere Co and Ce (mg/L) are the initial concentration of metal
ions and equilibrium concentration in the supernatant after centrifugation,
respectively, V is the volume of the solution (L), m is the mass of adsorbent (g), and qe is the amount of heavy metals ions adsorbed per weight unit
of adsorbent after equilibrium (mg/g).After analyzing the influence
of solution pH and initial concentration of both heavy metals, it
was selected the optimum conditions to perform further adsorption
processes using PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites. Then, the sorption performance
of these nanocomposites was compared with the adsorption removal yields
that can achieve separately polyacrylamide and nanoclay under the
same conditions of initial pH and concentration. This comparison is
needed to judge whether it is worth incorporating polyacrylamide into
the interlaminar space of MMT nanoclay.
Results and Discussion
Characterization of Nanocomposites
FTIR Spectra
The FTIR spectra for
nanoclay, polyacrylamide, and three PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites made
at different ratios of AAm to Na-MMT (1:1, 2:1, and 4:1 w/w) are compared
in Figure .
FTIR spectra of (a) Na-MMT nanoclay, (b) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(1:1), (c) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1), (d) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(4:1), and (e) PAM.The FTIR spectra of the nanoclay shows H–O–H bending
vibrations related to interlayer water molecules at 1623 cm–1.[26,27] The characteristic adsorption band assigned
to the stretching vibrations of AlOH and SiOH was observed at 3558
cm–1.[28][28] The Na-MMT structure consists of 2:1 layers formed by two
silica tetrahedral sheets linked with an alumina octahedral sheet;[29,30] hence, the presence of this functional groups was expected. In the
spectra of the nanocomposites (Figure b–d), this peak shifted to lower frequencies,
perhaps due to interactions between the functional groups of PAM and
Na-MMT.[31] The peak at 3311 cm–1 was attributed to the NH2 group, which is also observed
in the spectrum of commercial polyacrylamide (Figure e).[24] The peak
at 1662 cm–1 was assigned to the stretching vibration
of the C=O group.[10] In addition,
the CH groups from the backbone of PAM were observed at 1459 cm–1.[32] The presence of amide
functional groups, as well as alcohol and amine groups, contributes
to the formation of strong hydrogen bonds.[33] The sharpest adsorption band of montmorillonite was identified at
958 cm–1, which is related to stretching vibrations
of Si–O bonds in the tetrahedral layer.[34,35] In addition, peaks at 950 and 575 cm–1 were assigned
to Al–Al–OH[34,36] and Si–O–Al,[35] respectively. The fact that PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites
exhibit characteristic adsorption bands of nanoclays indicates a successful
synthesis due to the incorporation of the polymer matrix into Na-MMT
nanoclay layers.[10]XRD analysis was performed
to study structural variations in the Na-MMT galleries due to the
dispersion of PAM and to determine possible intercalation or exfoliation
phenomena.[37]Figure displays XRD patterns for PAM, nanocomposites
(1:1, 2:1, and 4:1 w/w), and the Na-MMT nanoclay.
XRD patterns of (a) Na-MMT nanoclay, (b) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(1:1), (c) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1), (d) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(4:1), and (e) PAM.The interlaminar distance d(001) was calculated
using eq and the 2θ
angle measured by XRD. Figure a shows a sharp peak for Na-MMT nanoclay at 2θ of 9.12°,
which corresponds to d(001) = 1.12 nm, a value similar
to those reported in other studies.[31,38−44] The spectra for the nanocomposites (Figure b–d) also exhibited a weakened peak
in the d(001)-position with a nonsignificant displacement,
which may indicate the formation of a slightly intercalated montmorillonite
structures and incomplete exfoliation. This means that the distance
between clay layers increase, but they retain, at least partially,
their original morphology in the nanocomposite.[45,46] The lack of complete exfoliation in the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
might have been caused by insufficient stirring during the polymerization,[24] which were not enough to overcome the attractive
electrostatic and van der Waals forces between the Na-MMT layers,
as suggested by other authors.[10,45] In addition, good interfacial
interactions have been reported to greatly affect the formation of
intercalated and exfoliated structures, which occur when polarities
of polymer surfaces and clays are similar.[47,48]
SEM Micrographs
The morphology
of the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites was characterized by the SEM technique
to help visualize the interaction between the clay layers and the
polymer matrix.[24]Figure compares SEM micrographs of PAM, nanoclay,
and nanocomposites. The commercial polyacrylamide micrograph (Figure e) displays a regular
structure with smooth surface morphology.[49] After adding Na-MMT nanoclay, the PAM morphology changed drastically,
as it formed agglomerates with the nanoclay particles, indicating
the dispersion of the clay layers into the polymer matrix.[24] The micrograph of Na-MMT nanoclay (Figure a) shows that it
is composed of flakes or agglomerates of variable sizes. As the ratio
of AAm to Na-MMT increases from Figure b to 3d, a higher number of
“smoother” domains appear due to the higher ratio of
PAM to nanoclay.
Figure 3
SEM micrographs of (a) Na-MMT nanoclay, (b) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites
(1:1), (c) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites (2:1), (d) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites
(4:1), and (e) PAM.
SEM micrographs of (a) Na-MMT nanoclay, (b) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites
(1:1), (c) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites (2:1), (d) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites
(4:1), and (e) PAM.
Adsorption Studies
Adsorption Isotherms
Adsorption
is a dynamic process that is commonly described by isotherms, determined
by fitting mathematical models to experimental data.[5] The information provided by these models quantifies how
the adsorbate is distributed between the solid and liquid phases.[50] In this investigation, the Langmuir, eq , and the Freundlich, eq , isotherms were used to
study the equilibrium adsorption of Co2+ and Ni2+ ions onto PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites (1:1, 2:1, and 4:1 w/w). The
suitability of both models was quantified with the correlation coefficient
(R2) obtained from linear fitting and
adsorption capacity (qe).[51]In eqs and 5, qm is the amount of heavy metal present in a monolayer (mg/g), Ce is the equilibrium concentration of heavy
metal remaining in the solution (mg/L), qe is the quantity of the heavy metal adsorbed by per unit of adsorbent
at equilibrium (mg/g), KL is the Langmuir
constant (L/mg), KF is the Freundlich
constant (mg/g), and (1/n) is the heterogeneity factor.[50]The equilibrium adsorption experimental
data is shown in Figure . The resulting isotherm parameters are summarized in Tables and 3.
Figure 4
Heavy metal adsorption on nanocomposite at pH values of 3 (●),
4.5 (▲), 6 (⧫): (a) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (1:1) and
Ni2+ ions, (b) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1) and Ni2+ ions, (c) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (4:1) and Ni2+ ions, (d) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (1:1) and Co2+ ions,
(e) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1) and Co2+ ions, and (f)
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (4:1) and Co2+ ions.
Table 2
Isotherm Parameters for the Adsorption
of Ni2+ Ions
pH
isotherm
model
parameter
ratio AAm/Na-MMT
3
4.5
6
Langmuir
1:1
0.009
0.437
0.448
2:1
0.036
0.34
0.47
4:1
–0.012
0.288
0.237
1:1
322.58
81.97
76.92
2:1
119.05
90.91
83.33
4:1
–158.73
91.74
92.59
R2
1:1
0.26
0.94
0.99
2:1
0.65
0.97
0.97
4:1
0.13
0.98
0.97
Freundlich
1:1
3.06
22.40
20.93
2:1
6.93
24.83
26.67
4:1
1.20
20.14
17.52
n
1:1
1.06
2.17
2.29
2:1
1.58
2.37
2.65
4:1
0.78
1.97
1.83
R2
1:1
0.94
0.97
0.89
2:1
0.89
0.86
0.84
4:1
0.85
0.89
0.94
Table 3
Isotherm Parameters for the Adsorption
of Co2+ Ions
pH
isotherm
model
parameter
ratio AAm/Na-MMT
3
4.5
6
Langmuir
1:1
–0.011
0.118
0.158
2:1
–0.007
0.142
0.097
4:1
–0.012
0.107
0.163
1:1
–107.53
114.94
84.75
2:1
–222.22
98.04
108.69
4:1
–103.09
106.38
97.09
R2
1:1
0.40
0.81
0.95
2:1
0.09
0.95
0.90
4:1
0.36
0.70
0.77
Freundlich
1:1
0.63
20.98
15.53
2:1
1.06
11.15
13.91
4:1
0.66
17.46
22.54
n
1:1
0.76
2.31
2.28
2:1
0.82
1.54
1.72
4:1
0.75
2.14
2.61
R2
1:1
0.96
0.49
0.72
2:1
0.89
0.86
0.84
4:1
0.96
0.54
0.43
Heavy metal adsorption on nanocomposite at pH values of 3 (●),
4.5 (▲), 6 (⧫): (a) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (1:1) and
Ni2+ ions, (b) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1) and Ni2+ ions, (c) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (4:1) and Ni2+ ions, (d) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (1:1) and Co2+ ions,
(e) PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1) and Co2+ ions, and (f)
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (4:1) and Co2+ ions.Comparing the correlation coefficients (R2) obtained by fitting the adsorption results with the Langmuir
and Freundlich isotherms for both Co2+ and Ni2+, the Langmuir isotherm provided a better description of the data
than the Freundlich isotherm for pH values of 4.5 and 6, but when
the pH was 3, the Freundlich isotherm outperformed the Langmuir isotherm.
This suggests that a monolayer adsorption process on homogeneous sites
(described by the Langmuir isotherm) takes place in aqueous solutions
with lower acidity. At lower pH values, the Langmuir model may deviate
from the real adsorption behavior due to the assumption of no interactions
between sorbate molecules. Nevertheless, this model provides satisfactory
interpretations of a wide number of experiments that mainly present
chemisorption.[5] On the other hand, the
Freundlich isotherm models multilayer adsorption processes on heterogeneous
surfaces and its better fit suggests that this mechanism describes
the process at pH 3 more accurately.As is widely known, the concept of linearity is not enough in accepting
or rejecting a model; therefore, information about the main adsorption
mechanism given by model parameters needs to be analyzed.[50,52] The Langmuir constant parameter was used to determine the dimensionless
separation factor RL, which confirms the
favorability of the adsorption process[53]Because the Langmuir isotherm did not fit
the data collected at pH 3, RL was only
calculated for pH values of 4.5 and 6. The values obtained for the
dimensionless separation factor are shown in Figure .
Figure 5
RL dimensionless factor versus initial
concentration for (a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions at pH values of 4.5 and 6 with the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(4:1).
RL dimensionless factor versus initial
concentration for (a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions at pH values of 4.5 and 6 with the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(4:1).The PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites (1:1) showed values of 0.012 < RL < 0.1 for Ni2+ ions and 0.028
< RL < 0.297 for Co2+ ions. For the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites (2:1), 0.012 < RL < 0.129 for and 0.038 < RL < 0.34 for Ni2+ and Co2+ ions, respectively. The dimensionless
separation factor may take the value RL = 0 for irreversible, between 0 < RL < 1 for favorable, RL = 1 for linear,
or RL > 1 for unfavorable adsorption processes.[52]Figure shows that all values obtained for RL are between 0 and 1, so the adsorption process on PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposites can be identified as favorable, tending to irreversibility
at low initial concentrations of heavy metal ions. Because irreversible
adsorption occurs slowly, the desorption of the adsorbed species may
be undetectable during the time interval of the experiments.[54] This work did not study desorption; thus, it
is not possible to determine if irreversible adsorption took place
for RL very close to zero.Figure displays
the heterogeneity factor 1/n of the Freundlich isotherm
for PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites, which provides information on the adsorption
mechanism and surface heterogeneity. Cooperative (multilayer) adsorption
occur when 1/n > 1, and mainly chemisorption takes
place when 1/n < 1.[5] Most values for the heterogeneity factor of Ni2+ are
less than 1, suggesting that the adsorption process onto the nanocomposites
with greater concentration of montmorillonite is mostly affected by
chemisorption. The PAM/Na-MMT (4:1) nanocomposite reported the heterogeneity
factor greater than 1, similar to those results when Co2+ ions are removed, suggesting a cooperative adsorption in all of
these scenarios. A heterogeneous surface is represented for 1/n approaching to zero; thus, adsorption of heavy metal ions
may occur at homogeneously distributed active sites of PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposites instead of heterogeneous one; on the basis of that,
1/n is not close to zero for any of the synthetized
nanocomposites.
Figure 6
Heterogeneity factor of the Freundlich adsorption model for (a)
Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions at pH 3.
Heterogeneity factor of the Freundlich adsorption model for (a)
Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions at pH 3.
Influence of pH and Initial Concentration
on Removal Yield of Heavy Metals
Figures –9 show the effect of both operational parameter on the removal
yield of heavy metal ions using nanocomposites (1:1, 2:1, and 4:1
w/w). One of the most influential parameters during the adsorption
process is the pH, which affects the adsorption mechanism and the
uptake capacity. As shown in these surface plots, the lowest removal
yields were achieved at pH 3, which may be attributed to the competition
between attractive and repulsive interactions caused by modifying
the polyacrylamide structure and its properties when protonation of
amine and hydroxyl groups takes place.[33] Therefore, a high H3O+ concentration at low
pH decreased the number of binding sites for Ni2+ and Co2+ ions and, therefore, decreased the adsorption capacity of
the nanocomposite.[50]
Figure 7
Effects of initial concentration and pH on removal yield (%) of
(a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions using the PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposite (1:1).
Figure 9
Effects of initial concentration and pH on removal yield (%) of
(a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions using the PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposite (4:1).
Effects of initial concentration and pH on removal yield (%) of
(a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions using the PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposite (1:1).Effects of initial concentration and pH on removal yield (%) of
(a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions using the PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposite (2:1).Effects of initial concentration and pH on removal yield (%) of
(a) Ni2+ ions and (b) Co2+ ions using the PAM/Na-MMT
nanocomposite (4:1).The initial concentration of Ni2+ and Co2+ solution also plays an important role in the adsorption process
because it provides the driving force required to surmount all of
the mass transfer limitations of heavy metal ions between the aqueous
and solid phases.[55] It was observed that
a high initial concentration of heavy metal ions reduced the removal
yield, which may be attributed to the saturation of available sites
onto the adsorbent surface. Hence, an initial concentration from 60
to 100 ppm was considered optimum for these experimental conditions.
It was found that the highest Co2+ removal yield of 98.67%
was reached at pH 6 and Co of 60 ppm using
the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (4:1 w/w). For the Ni2+ uptake
process, the highest removal yield of 99.3% was obtained at pH 6 and Co of 100 ppm using the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(2:1 w/w). These optimum results of adsorption yields were compared
to those obtained using PAM and Na-MMT under the same conditions of
pH and concentration. Table lists the removal yields achieved by PAM, Na-MMT, and the
nanocomposite for nickel and cobalt sorption. This comparison revealed
that the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite features higher sorption capacity
than that of its base compounds, i.e., polyacrylamide and nanoclay,
which may be attributed to the increase in ion exchange capacity after
increasing the interlayer space of Na-MMT.
Table 4
Comparison of Co2+ and
Ni2+ Adsorption Capacity of PAM, Na-MMT, and the PAM/Na-MMT
Nanocomposite
adsorbent
Co2+ removal yield (%)a
Ni2+ removal yield (%)b
polyacrylamide (PAM)
87.40
90.20
sodium montmorillonite (Na-MMT)
89.17
94.50
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
98.67
99.30
pH = 6 and Co = 60 ppm.
pH = 6 and Co = 100 ppm.
pH = 6 and Co = 60 ppm.pH = 6 and Co = 100 ppm.
Conclusions
This research project evaluated the adsorption capacity of nanocomposites
based on PAM and montmorillonite for the removal of heavy metal ions
(Ni2+ and Co2+) from wastewater. The prepared
composites were characterized by FTIR, SEM, and XRD to assess functional
groups, morphologies, and structures. The nanocomposites were successfully
synthesized as indicated by the presence of alumina silicate bonds
in the nanocomposite spectrum and its XRD patterns. Adsorption of
Ni2+ and Co2+ ions is best described by the
Langmuir isotherm at higher pH values, as evidenced by a coefficient
of correlation close to 1. The influence of pH and initial concentration
of metal ions was confirmed through the removal yield results at different
values of these parameters (pH = 3, 4.5, and 6; Co = 20, 60, 100, 140, and 180). The following operating
parameter values were selected as suitable for Co2+ uptake:
pH 6 and an initial concentration of 60 ppm using the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite
(4:1 w/w). For Ni2+ ions, the highest removal yield was
reached at pH 6 and Co of 100 ppm using
the PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposite (2:1 w/w). These results were higher
than those obtained by polyacrylamide and nanoclay under the same
conditions (removal yield between 87.40 and 94.50%), suggesting that
PAM/Na-MMT nanocomposites can be used more efficiently in heavy metal
ion adsorption from aqueous solution.
Authors: Angela M Gutierrez; Erin Molly Frazar; Maria Victoria X Klaus; Pranto Paul; J Zach Hilt Journal: Adv Healthc Mater Date: 2021-12-11 Impact factor: 9.933