Herein, a metal-organic framework (MOF-5) is synthesized by a solvothermal process and graphene oxide (GO) is prepared from the improved Hummer's method. The synthesis of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is one-pot process via a grinding method and employed for the removal of Rhodamine B (RhB) dye. The removal efficiency of RhB is found to be 60.64% (151.62 mg·g-1) at 500 ppm. About 98.88% of RhB is removed within 5 min of contact time and increased up to 99.68% up to 10 min. The removal rate of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is much better than that of pristine MOF-5. Equilibrium adsorption capacity is determined by a series of different experimental conditions such as pH, time, and concentration of dye solution. Although the results also showed that dye removal on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is well described by the Langmuir isotherm (R 2 = 0.9703), the adsorption kinetics data reveals pseudo-second-order (R 2 = 0.9908). The synthesized nanocomposite is efficient for removal of dye, cost-effective, and reusable. Additionally, stability and self-degradation studies of pure RhB are reported in aqueous solution for up to 120 days at different pH values (pH 1-12).
Herein, a metal-organic framework (MOF-5) is synthesized by a solvothermal process and graphene oxide (GO) is prepared from the improved Hummer's method. The synthesis of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is one-pot process via a grinding method and employed for the removal of Rhodamine B (RhB) dye. The removal efficiency of RhB is found to be 60.64% (151.62 mg·g-1) at 500 ppm. About 98.88% of RhB is removed within 5 min of contact time and increased up to 99.68% up to 10 min. The removal rate of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is much better than that of pristine MOF-5. Equilibrium adsorption capacity is determined by a series of different experimental conditions such as pH, time, and concentration of dye solution. Although the results also showed that dye removal on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is well described by the Langmuir isotherm (R 2 = 0.9703), the adsorption kinetics data reveals pseudo-second-order (R 2 = 0.9908). The synthesized nanocomposite is efficient for removal of dye, cost-effective, and reusable. Additionally, stability and self-degradation studies of pure RhB are reported in aqueous solution for up to 120 days at different pH values (pH 1-12).
Rhodamine
B (RhB) is a well-known cationic fluorescent dye that
is widely used as a colorant in textiles, foodstuffs, scientific research,
and pharmaceutical industries.[1] It is toxic
and harmful to human beings and animals, causes damage to skin, eyes,
and respiratory tract, and causes gene mutations. Additionally, it
is a well-known carcinogenic and neurotoxic material toward animals
and humans.[2] Worldwide, more than 10,000
textile dyes are used commercially with their yearly production exceeding
∼7 × 105 metric tons,[3] out of which about 2% (∼14 × 103 metric tons)
of the annual dye production is discharged as an effluent from manufacturing
units. Color is one of the clearest indicators of water pollution
caused by the discharge of dye as a waste, which is responsible for
the damage to water bodies, aesthetic pollution, eutrophication, and
perturbations in aquatic life.[4,5] RhB exists for a long
time in a natural water body or aqueous medium. So, it is necessary
to remediate dye from the aqueous solution. The remediation of dye
from the aqueous medium is one of the most challenging tasks. Among
the several purification techniques, adsorption process has been verified
to be one of the best and simplest techniques for eliminating pollutants
from water bodies. The advantages of the adsorption process are its
cost-effectiveness, accuracy, remarkable versatility, simplicity in
design, safety of operation, high efficiency, and adsorbent reusability.[6−8] There are many reports where a variety of substrates are used for
adsorption of dye from wastewater such as Cu-MOF,[9] modified 1-hydroxybenzotriazole (HBT),[10] alumina oxides,[11] Fe3O4@l-arginine,[12] porous
silica beads,[13] carbon nanotubes[14] (CNT), carbon-based materials,[15] and graphene oxide[16] (GO); however,
in these cases, there is poor sorption capacities, multi-step synthesis,
and low sorption rates. Therefore, MOFs/GO-based nanocomposites are
potential material for the adsorption of dye due to easy modification
of surface, low toxicity, and large surface area. Consequently, there
is an urgent need for these types of nanocomposite materials that
can adsorb toxic dye more efficiently. The cationic dye (RhB) is known
to be better adsorbed on the graphene oxide via strong
interactions from negatively charged oxygenated functional groups.[17,18] Already available adsorbents are not only expensive but also difficult
to handle and redevelop after use. Meanwhile, metal–organic
frameworks (MOFs) are highly ordered crystalline coordination polymers
and one of the most fascinating classes of adsorbent,[19] having the advantages of high surface area, porosity, excellent
absorbability, good catalytic activity, and controlled modification
synthesis.[20] Additionally, MOFs are promising
candidates for a variety of applications such as dye adsorption, energy
storage, catalysis, and gas separation.[21] In the case of MOF-5, formerly described in 1999, it is made up
of ZnO4 units connected by a 1,4-benzenedicarboxylate linker
to form an amazing cubic network. The first series of MOF-5 reported
in 2002 is cubic in shape.[22] The increased
catalytic activity, conductivity, and surface area of MOFs needed
to be combined with other materials such as mesoporoussilica/MOF,
mesoporous alumina/MOF, and MOF/graphene have been reported for adsorption.[23−29] Furthermore, carbon-based materials including activated carbon,
CNT, and GO have also been incorporated with MOFs to improve the adsorptive
properties of composite materials.[30] Owing
to their remarkable chemical and physical characteristics, MOFs/GO-based
nanocomposite materials are in tremendous demand for adsorption of
dye.[31,32] In the last 10 years, the excellent and
exclusive chemical, electrical, and mechanical characteristics of
graphene oxide have attracted remarkable interest.[33] The process of chemical modification of graphene and graphene
oxide includes covalent binding and non-covalent binding.[34] The structure of graphene is extremely stable,
the bond between each carbon atom is strong, and the connection between
carbon atoms via a covalent bond is strong. Graphene
has a simpler synthetic process and lower production cost as compared
to other carbon-based materials. GO is a two-dimensional material
with hexagonal shape and has well-developed functional groups that
contain oxygen moieties. However, these oxygen-containing groups may
increase catalytic activity, increase stability, and are also according
to the requirements that need chemical modification.[35] GO is readily dispersed in water and some other polar solvents
due to its hydrophilic character, water stability, and solution dispersibility.[36] A series of MOF@GO composites of excellent adsorption
capacity has been recorded by the Bandosz group.[24,37] However, the possible interactions between GO and MOF-5 composites
enhance the hydrophobic stability of the MOF-5 framework.[38,39] MOF-5 also has the characteristic problem due to lack of stability
in water. The development of MOF-GO composites occurs through interactions
between oxygen groups of GO and the metallic centers of MOFs by chemical
bonding or electrostatic interaction.[40,41] Therefore,
to resolve its shortcomings, the combination of MOF-5 with GO is largely
necessary. However, there are needs for MOF-5@GO nanocomposites such
as one-step synthesis, ambient reaction conditions, potential for
catalyst recovery, recyclability, and efficient and successful adsorbents
for RhB in the treatment of wastewater. This is a simple and solvent-free
synthetic process to minimize environmental pollution. Herein, we
report a one-step synthesis of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites employed for
adsorption kinetic studies of RhB. Additionally, the effect of MOF-5
and GO ratio (1:1, 1:2, and 2:1) with pH, contact time, and concentration
of RhB on the adsorption performance is also studied. Moreover, adsorption
kinetics and adsorption isotherms are well described along with the
plausible mechanism of RhB adsorption onto MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
The stability and self-degradation studies of RhB (up to 120 days)
at different pH values (pH 1–12) are also reported.
Results and Discussion
FTIR and XRD Study
The FTIR and XRD
spectra of pristine GO, MOF-5, MOF-5@GO, and RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites
are given in Figure . The FTIR spectrum of GO exhibits strong characteristics bands at
3414, 1734, 1618, 1224, 1041, and 866 cm–1 (Figure a(i)). The typical
peaks found in GO are the hydroxyl group of −OH stretching
vibrations at 3414 cm–1, the carbonyl or carboxylic
moiety of C=O stretching frequency at 1734 cm–1, the aromatic stretching frequency of C=C present at 1618
cm–1, and the stretching vibration of C–O
epoxy found at 1224 cm–1. The C–O alkoxy
stretching vibration appeared at 1041 cm–1, and
the epoxy or peroxide functional group occurred at 866 cm–1 of GO.[42] The pure MOF-5 shows two strong
bands present at 1657 and 1599 cm–1 corresponding
to the C=O and C–O stretching vibration of the aromatic
ring of terephthalic acid. The stretching frequency of C–H
is found at 1387 cm–1, although the characteristics
peaks were found at 1200–600 cm–1 out-of-plane
vibrations of an aromatic ring of terephthalic acid of the MOF-5 framework.[43] The absorption band appears at 530 cm–1 can be assigned to the Zn–O stretching frequency as shown
in Figure a(ii). FTIR
spectra of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites show that the majority of peaks
for GO and MOF-5 are retained and there was no significant change.
It was also proven that GO did not affect the property of MOF-5, as
given in Figure a(iii).
FTIR spectra of RhB are shown in Figure a(iv), and the absorption band displayed
at 1683 cm–1 can be assigned to the stretching frequency
of C=O. The peaks at 2985 cm–1 indicated
the stretching band of −CH. The peaks at 1586 cm–1 were attributed to the stretching vibration of the aromatic benzene
ring of C=C. The functional group of RhB shows peaks at 1403
(−CH3), 1327 (C=N), and 991 cm–1 for the C–H group. The RhB-adsorbed MOF-5@GO nanocomposite
is shown in Figure a(v).
Figure 1
FTIR spectra of (a) (i) GO, (ii) MOF-5, (iii) MOF-5@GO, (iv) RhB,
and (v) RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites. XRD pattern of (b) MOF-5 standard
and (c) (i) graphite powder, (ii) GO, (iii) MOF-5, (iv) MOF-5@GO,
and (v) RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites. (d, e) FTIR and XRD of as-synthesized
nanocomposites and after water immersion for up to 7 days.
FTIR spectra of (a) (i) GO, (ii) MOF-5, (iii) MOF-5@GO, (iv) RhB,
and (v) RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites. XRD pattern of (b) MOF-5 standard
and (c) (i) graphite powder, (ii) GO, (iii) MOF-5, (iv) MOF-5@GO,
and (v) RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites. (d, e) FTIR and XRD of as-synthesized
nanocomposites and after water immersion for up to 7 days.The adsorption band slightly shifted, and the obtained bands
are
found at 2977, 1685, 1586, 1549, 1389, 1294, 932, and 757 cm–1, which may be hydrogen bonding and confirm the RhB adsorbed on MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites.[44] The Zn–O band
is shifted and found to be 494 cm–1 due to interactions
with water, GO, and RhB. However, after being immersed in water up
to 5 days, the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite did not lose its crystallinity.
Additionally, some interactions from oxygenated functional groups
of graphene oxide with vacant sites of the zinc cluster of MOF-5 maintain
the crystallinity as well as increase the conductivity of MOF-5 and
enhanced the adsorption properties, and this is consistent with a
previous study.[45] Furthermore, the FTIR
spectrum of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites in water is observed up to the
7th day, which is represented in Figure c. Subsequently, the interactions of the
−OH group of the water molecule from vacant sites of the zinc
cluster may create some disorderness of MOF-5 by breaking of the Zn–O
bond between the metal cluster and organic linker.The XRD pattern
of graphite, GO, MOF-5, MOF-5@GO, and RhB-MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites is shown in Figure c. Graphite shows a characteristic sharp peak at 2θ
= 26.5° attributed[46] to ⟨002⟩
as shown in Figure c(i). Furthermore, GO shows typical peaks in Figure c(ii) for planes ⟨001⟩ and
⟨100⟩ at 2θ = 10.3° and 46.3°, respectively.
Pure MOF-5 has shown crystalline peaks, which find 2θ values
at 6.82, 9.65 13.65, 15.30, 20.59, 22.36, 24.71, 31.31, and 32.13
for crystal planes ⟨200⟩, ⟨220⟩, ⟨400⟩,
⟨420⟩, ⟨531⟩, ⟨533⟩, ⟨551⟩,
⟨751⟩, and ⟨911⟩, respectively, as depicted
in Figure c(iii).
The MOF-5@GO shows diffraction peaks detected at 2θ at 10.12,
15.61, 18.55, 20.58, 25.95, 27.27, 28.39, 30.31, 31.12, 32.34, 34.06,
and 43.80, and these peaks are slightly shifted as compared to pure
MOF-5 but do not distort the crystalline nature after the combination
of GO as shown in Figure c(iv). The RhB-adsorbed MOF-5@GO nanocomposite shows similar
diffraction peaks for MOF-5@GO nanocomposites, which is shown in Figure c(v). The adsorbed
molecule RhB is not crystalline, it is amorphous. Furthermore, XRD
results show that the crystalline nature of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites
did not distort up to the 5th day of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites[47] as shown in Figure e. However, after 7 days, the crystallinity
of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites was lost and might be some distorted after
being immersed in water due to strong interactions from the free vacant
d-orbital of the zinc metal cluster,[48,49] as given in Figure d.
X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) Studies
The
synthesized GO, MOF-5, and MOF-5@GO nanocomposites were further
studied via XPS to define the chemical states of
different aspects and the presence of functional groups.[50,51] The deconvoluted high-resolution XPS C1s region spectra of GO and
MOF-5 are displayed in Figure a,b, respectively. The C1s spectra of pristine GO have characteristic
peaks at binding energies of 282.80, 284.78, 285.81, and 287.16 eV,
representing C–C, C−O, and O—C=O, and
C=O respectively (Figure a). Similarly, the high-resolution XPS of the C1s region
spectra of MOF-5 (Figure b) have peaks with binding energies of 284.91, 286.0, and
288.86 eV, which can be attributed to C–C, C=O, and
O—C=O, respectively. Figure c illustrates the XPS of O1s of GO where
peaks at binding energies of 529.55, 530.59, 531.34, and 531.62 eV
represent O—C=O, C=O, C–OH, and C–O–C,
respectively. Moreover, the deconvoluted O1s of MOF-5 as shown in Figure d depicts peaks at
binding energies of 529.91 and 531.49 eV representing O—C=O
and C=O, respectively. Furthermore, peaks at binding energies
of 1045.13 and 1022.07 are attributed to Zn2p1/2 and Zn2p3/2 as represented in Figure e. The full spectra of GO, MOF-5, and MOF-5@GO nanocomposites
clearly showing the presence of carbon, oxygen, and zinc metal are
represented in Figure f.
Figure 2
High-resolution XPS of (a) C1s of GO, (b) C1s of MOF-5, (c) O1s
of GO, (d) O1s of MOF-5, and (e) Zn2p metal. (f) Survey XPS spectra
of (i) GO, (ii) MOF-5, and (iii) MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
High-resolution XPS of (a) C1s of GO, (b) C1s of MOF-5, (c) O1s
of GO, (d) O1s of MOF-5, and (e) Zn2p metal. (f) Survey XPS spectra
of (i) GO, (ii) MOF-5, and (iii) MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
Thermogravimetric Analysis
GO, MOF-5,
and RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites were characterized by thermogravimetric
analysis (TGA) and are shown in Figure . GO shows four weight loss results between 25 and
600 °C as shown in Figure a(i). The first weight loss observed between 25 and 106 °C
(17.07%) can be assigned to the removal of physically adsorbed water.
The second weight loss between 106 and 183 °C (9.39%) is attributed
to the removal of labile oxygen-containing functional groups. The
third weight loss between 183 and 220 °C (24.3%) indicates the
decomposition of stable oxygen functionalities. The fourth weight
loss between 220 and 600 °C (27.68%) is due to the full collapse
of GO.
Figure 3
(a) (i) GO, (ii) MOF-5, (iii) RhB, and (iv) RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
(b) RL values.
(a) (i) GO, (ii) MOF-5, (iii) RhB, and (iv) RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
(b) RL values.There are four weight loss results of MOF-5 depicted in Figure a(ii). The weight
loss between 25 and 119 °C (2.67%) is due to the removal of physically
adsorbed water. The weight loss between 119 and 215 °C (15.62%)
is attributed to the removal of N,N-dimethylformamide. The weight loss between 215 and 330 °C (13.1%)
is due to the partial decomposition of the MOF-5 frameworks. The weight
loss between 330 and 524 °C (41.79%) is due to the collapse of
the framework[52] of MOF-5 and constant up
to 600 °C.RhB shows three weight loss results between
176 and 600 °C
and stability up to 176 °C. The first weight loss between 176
and 215 °C (4.07%) is attributed to the removal of water, the
second weight loss between 215 and 300 °C (8.89%) is credited
to the removal of the oxygen functionality group, and the third weight
loss between 300 and 600 °C (65.22%) is attributed to aromatic
containing groups as illustrated in Figure a(iii).In the case of RhB-MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites, there are five weight
loss results. The first weight loss between 25 and 99 °C (7.32%)
indicates the loss of physically adsorbed water. The second weight
loss between 97 and 167 °C (4.07%) indicates the loss of oxygen
functionality of the surface of GO sheet. The third weight loss between
167 and 215 °C (12.76%) is due to the DMF molecule as well as
the stable oxygen functionality of GO and RhB functional groups, and
the fourth weight loss between 215 and 300 °C (18.28%) is attributed
to the partial decomposition of the MOF-5 frameworks, GO, and RhB
functional groups, while the fifth weight loss between 300 and 600
°C (23.57%) can be attributed to the full decomposition of RhB-MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites as shown in Figure a(iv).
Surface Area Analysis
The N2 adsorption–desorption isotherm of GO (Figure S2a), MOF-5 (Figure S2b),
and MOF-5@GO nanocomposites (Figure S2c) is shown in the Supporting Information. The MOF-5@GO
nanocomposite of the surface area is found to be 135.37 m2 g–1, indicating the successful reaction with GO
and MOF-5. The surface area of the MOF-5 is 29.95 m2 g–1, which is greater than that from the literature,
which is given as 12.35 m2 g–1.[53] This value is too low due to air exposure during
the treatment, and the perfect BET surface area of MOF-5 as reported
by the group of Yaghi[54] reached up to 2900
m2 g–1. The surface area of GO is found
to be 9.45 m2 g–1. The specific surface
area of the synthesized nanocomposite material is increased due to
the combination of MOF-5 and GO. The calculated results indicate that
the average pore size of the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite is found to be
0.014 nm. The higher surface area and pore volume of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites
can afford extra possible sites for adsorption reactions. The MOF-5@GO
nanocomposite displays a type III curve and H3 hysteresis loop, and
this indicates that the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite is shown as a mesoporous
structure with a relatively high surface area.
Morphological
Characterization
The
morphologies of nanocomposite are studied by HRTEM and FESEM, and
illustrations of the pristine GO sheet, pure MOF-5, and RhB-adsorbed
MOF-5@GO nanocomposites are shown in Figure . The FESEM image of GO shows that it is
a typical sheet-like randomly aggregated thin crumpled layer structure
as shown in Figure a. The FESEM image of pure MOF-5 depicts a stacked elongated hexagonal
structure as shown in Figure b. However, in the FESEM image in Figure c and HRTEM image in Figure d of RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites, MOF-5 formed
an irregularly shaped structure of 50–200 nm instead of an
elongated hexagon, and this might be due to the facile synthesis of
the nanocomposite. Furthermore, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
(EDS) of RhB-adsorbed MOF-5@GO nanocomposites shows the elemental
composition as well as mapping of elements such as C, O, N, Cl, and
Zn as given in the Supporting Information, i.e., Figure S3a–g.
Figure 4
FESEM monograph of (a) GO, (b) MOF-5, and (c)
RhB-MOF-5@GO. (d)
HRTEM image of RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
FESEM monograph of (a) GO, (b) MOF-5, and (c)
RhB-MOF-5@GO. (d)
HRTEM image of RhB-MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
Influence of Process Variable on Adsorption
Effect of pH on RhB
The absorbance
spectra of the RhB were recorded in an aqueous solution from the wavelength
of 350–650 nm in a quartz cell having a path length of 1 cm
with λmax corresponding to RhB found at 554 nm. The
absorbance spectra of RhB show a pH-independent behavior at pH 4–12
and are shown in Figure a. There is no noticeable change that occurs in this range. Thus,
this confirms that RhB is more stable and does not lose its chemical
behavior between pH 4 and 12.
Figure 5
(a) Stability of RhB at pH 1–12. (b)
Calibration plot of
RhB.
(a) Stability of RhB at pH 1–12. (b)
Calibration plot of
RhB.
Calibration
Plot of RhB
The stock
solution of RhB was prepared in double-distilled water. A series of
solutions with known concentrations (1–8 ppm) were prepared
in a 25 mL standard volumetric flask. The Lambert–Beer law
is valid up to 6 ppm for RhB dye. RhB in aqueous solution shows a
pH-independent absorption behavior at a range of 4–12. However,
the calibration plot of RhB was prepared at pH 7, and the correlation
coefficient (R2) was found to be 0.996
and is shown in Figure b. Hence, at pH 7, further estimation of RhB has been carried out.
Batch Extraction Study and Removal of RhB
Using the batch extraction process, the adsorption behavior of
RhB on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites was studied as a function of pH, contact
time, and initial concentration of the aqueous RhB solution. Each
experiment was done with 50 mg of the nanocomposite at room temperature.
The unabsorbed RhB concentration present in the supernatant was calculated
by UV–Vis spectrophotometry. The percentage (%) removal of
RhB on the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite was determined using eq :
Removal
of RhB as a Function of pH
In the adsorption method, pH plays
an important role in RhB. This
study was done at 50 mg of the nanocomposite in different ratios of
MOF-5 and GO and 25 mL of 20 ppm RhB at different pH values like 2,
4, 5, 6, 8, and 12 at room temperature as given in Figure . Adsorption of RhB on the
ratio of MOF-5 and GO such as 1:1, 1:2, and 2:1 is shown in Figures a, , respectively. The highest
removal of RhB was observed on the ratio of 1:1 in comparison to 1:2
and 2:1. Henceforth, the 1:1 ratio is selected for further batch study.
The amount of RhB adsorbed on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites was found in
a higher acidic medium (at pH 2) as compared to the basic medium and
remained almost constant from pH 6 to 8. So, consequently, pH 2 and
1:1 ratio are chosen for further study.
Figure 6
Removal of RhB at (a)
1:1, (b) 1:2, and (c) 2:1 ratios as a function
of pH and (d) a function of time.
Removal of RhB at (a)
1:1, (b) 1:2, and (c) 2:1 ratios as a function
of pH and (d) a function of time.
Removal of RhB as a Function of Contact
Time
In the study, 50 mg of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites was used
for 25 mL of 20 ppm RhB for adsorption while maintaining the pH at
2. Approximately 98.88% of RhB is removed within 5 min of contact
time, which increased to 99.68% within 10 min, and this may be due
to the availability of more adsorption sites due to a high surface
area. However, adsorption remained almost constant after 15 min as
shown in Figure d.
The reason thereof, during the initial few minutes, is that the rate
of removal of RhB is very fast due to the concentration gradient that
formed at the start of the process between RhB and the adsorbent surface.
This effect is clarified by the presence of vacant sites on the surface
of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites available for adsorption. Furthermore,
due to the saturation of adsorption sites or blockage of pore on MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites, the adsorption percent of RhB becomes constant.
Effect of the Initial Concentration of RhB
The removal of RhB by MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is also affected
by the initial amount of RhB present in the aqueous solution. Therefore,
the consequence of initial concentration on the removal of RhB is
investigated with 25 mL of RhB with 50 mg of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites
at pH 2, and the concentration of RhB that varies from 5 to 550 ppm
is shown in Figure a. The rate of removal of RhB by MOF-5@GO nanocomposites increases
up to 500 ppm; however, due to saturation of available loading sites,
no significant increment in adsorption percentage of RhB is further
observed.
Figure 7
Percentage removal (a) effect of the initial concentration of RhB
and (b) effect of Ni2+ and Cu2+ metal ions.
Percentage removal (a) effect of the initial concentration of RhB
and (b) effect of Ni2+ and Cu2+metal ions.The removal of RhB was found to be 60.64% (151.62
mg·g–1) at 500 ppm; therefore, RhB adsorbed
on MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites. Hence, to investigate the structure and morphology
of MOF-5@GO nanocomposite with appropriate analytical techniques,
it was prepared in large amount.
Effect
of Metal Concentration on RhB
The effect of metal ion concentration
also played a crucial role
in the remediation of RhB. The effect of metal ions Ni2+ and Cu2+ at different concentrations (5–100 ppm)
on the removal of RhB on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites has been studied.
In the presence of Cu2+, the percentage removal efficiency
of RhB on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites decreases with an increase in the
concentration of a metal ion, but in the case of Ni2+ ion,
the percentage removal of RhB on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites slightly
decreases with increasing the concentration of a metal ion in aqueous
solution.[55] In the presence of heavy metals,
the adsorption capacity of dyes onto the MOF-5@GO surface decreases
due to the preferential adsorption of these metal ions onto the active
site of the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite shown in Figure b.
Description
of Adsorption Kinetics and Isotherms
Chemical kinetics deals
with the rate of reaction, as well as its
mechanism, which is given in the Supporting Information. In the adsorption process, there are three types of adsorption
kinetics. Pseudo-first-order kinetics is defined by Lagergren in which
the plot between log qe–q against t gives a straight
line as shown in Figure S1a, pseudo-second-order
kinetics is described by Ho and McKay in which the plot between t/q against t gives a straight line (Figure S1b), and
the intraparticle diffusion (ID) model given by Weber and Morris in
which the plot between q against gives
a straight line (Figure S1c) in which the
correlation coefficient R2 is found to
be 0.7779. The experimental parameters of pseudo-first-order and pseudo-second-order
kinetics are listed in Table . From the experimental parameter based on the correlation
coefficient value, it is observed that pseudo-second-order kinetics
is best fitted as compared to pseudo-first-order kinetics.
Table 1
Parameters of the Kinetic and Adsorption
Isotherm
pseudo-first-order
kinetics
pseudo-second-order
kinetics
K1 (min–1)
qe (mg/g)
R2
K2 [g/mg·min)]
qe (mg/g)
R2
0.4470
9.6272
0.4025
0.0367
26.7379
0.9908
The
adsorption capacity of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites for RhB is also
determined by the equilibrium adsorption study. There are three types
of adsorption isotherm. Langmuir adsorption isotherm defines the development
of the monolayer surface of RhB quantitatively around the adsorbent
in which the plot between Ce/qe against Ce gives a straight
line as shown in Figure S1d, and it can
also be defined in terms of a dimensionless constant known as Hall
separation factor (RL) shown in Figure b, which is found
to be 0.1418. Freundlich adsorption isotherm explains the adsorption
process in the heterogeneous systems and the formation of multilayer
adsorption in which the plot between log qe against log Ce gives a straight line
as shown in Figure S1e. Temkin adsorption
isotherm explains the heat of adsorption of the entire molecule in
the adsorbent–adsorbate interaction in which the plot between qe against Ce gives
a straight line as shown in Figure S1f.Experimental parameters of the Langmuir and Freundlich adsorption
isotherm are listed in Table . From the experimental parameter based on the correlation
coefficient value, it is observed that the Langmuir adsorption isotherm
is best fitted as compared to the Freundlich adsorption isotherm in
the adsorption of RhB on to the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite.
Natural Degradation of RhB Concerning pH
Self-degradation
studies of RhB were done to see the degradation
efficiency process naturally at different pH values (pH 1–12)
at a time duration of 1–120 days and are shown in Figure a–l. In acidic
conditions, at pH 1, 12.40% (Figure a), there is a small degradation that takes place,
but in pH 2, 35.87% (Figure b) degraded within 60 days and it remains constant up to 120
days. In pH 3, there is no degradation up to 60 days but 21.59% (Figure c) degradation within
90 days takes place and it remains constant up to 120 days, but in
the case of pH 4 and pH 5, there is no degradation up to 90 and 30
days, respectively, but in both cases, 30.25% (Figure d) and 21.72% (Figure e) degraded up to 120 days. In the case of
pH 6, there are slight decreases after 30 days (Figure f). From pH 7 to pH 11, there is no degradation
of RhB that was found up to 120 days (Figure g–k), but in the case of the strong
basic medium at pH 12, slight degradation was found, which is 36.16%
(Figure l) from 15
to 120 days.
Figure 8
Degradation of RhB for 1–120 days at various pH
values:
(a) pH 1, (b) pH 2, (c) pH 3, (d) pH 4, (e) pH 5, (f) pH 6, (g) pH
7, (h) pH 8, (i), pH 9, (j) pH 10, (k) pH 11, and (l) pH 12.
Degradation of RhB for 1–120 days at various pH
values:
(a) pH 1, (b) pH 2, (c) pH 3, (d) pH 4, (e) pH 5, (f) pH 6, (g) pH
7, (h) pH 8, (i), pH 9, (j) pH 10, (k) pH 11, and (l) pH 12.According to the available reports,[56,57] the pH of
the seawater, river, sewage, and lake water may exist from pH 6 to
pH 8, and from experimental data, it is evidenced that RhB does not
undergo any degradation in this region. It can be concluded that the
RhB exists for a long time in an aqueous medium and it is imperative
to remediate RhB.(a) Removal efficiency of RhB on MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites in different
cycles. (b) SEM image of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites after the fifth run.
Adsorption Mechanism of
RhB on MOF-5@GO Nanocomposites
The adsorption of RhB on the
surface and the cavity of MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites can be due to different factors such as electrostatic/ionic
interactions, hydrogen bonding, and π–π interactions.[58−60] Keeping this in mind, it can be proposed that electrostatic attraction
takes place between positively charged RhB molecules and negatively
charged −OH groups of the surface of the MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
The MOF-5@GO nanocomposite has great advantages, such as high surface
area, variable pore sizes, and different functionalities. Figure a(v) shows the FTIR
spectrum for the comparison of MOF-5@GO nanocomposite before and after
adsorption of RhB. The shifted peak position is because of the hydrogen
bonding, π–π interactions, and electrostatic attraction.
The removal of dye is usually based on the effect of size and the
importance of ionic selectivity. Lan et al. created a mesoporousMOF
of about 38 Å size-tunable cages and investigated that the size-exclusion
effect depends on the separation of large dye molecules.[61] The widely accepted theories accounting for
the adsorption mechanism of adsorbents are based on their ionic selectivity
and size effect. It may also be possible that the cause is due to
the filling of pores occurring in the MOF-5 and GO, which is the inhibition
of the adsorption of RhB to that of the synthesized MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
Including the high pore volume also allows them to absorb a greater
amount of RhB in an aqueous solution. The mechanism for the adsorption
of RhB on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites can be ionic interactions due to
presence of unsaturated bonds (C=C, O−C=O) in
MOF-5, negatively charged GO surface, and positive charge of RhB.[62] Furthermore, π–π interaction
also plays as active binding sites for the adsorption of the RhB molecule
with MOF-5@GO nanocomposites. Since RhB contains C=C double
bonds and π-electrons, this π-electron can easily interact
with the π-electrons of benzene rings on the MOF-5 and GO surface
via π–π interactions. Based on the above facts
of interactions, RhB easily got adsorbed on the surface of MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites. A schematic representing the proposed mechanism of
RhB adsorption is shown in Figure .
Figure 9
(a) Removal efficiency of RhB on MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites in different
cycles. (b) SEM image of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites after the fifth run.
Comparison Study
RhB removal capacities
by the synthesized nanocomposites showing greater effectiveness as
compared with previously reported studies are shown in Table . The synthesized nanocomposites
demonstrate a strong cationic dye with highly efficient adsorbents
MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
Table 2
Adsorption Capacity
of RhB onto MOF-5@GO
Nanocomposites as Compared with Previous Studiesa
adsorption
adsorbate
Qe (mg/g)
conditions (°C)
ref
CoOF
RhB
72.15
20 °C
(63)
RGO
RhB
13.15
25 °C
(64)
sodium montmorillonite
RhB
42.19
30 °C
(65)
CNSs
RhB
01.95
25
°C
(66)
MCM-22
RhB
01.05
30 °C
(67)
Perlite
RhB
08.72
30 °C
(68)
Nano-NiO
RhB
111.0
20 °C
(69)
MOF-5@GO nanocomposite
RhB
151.5
RT
PW
PW, present work; RT, room temperature.
PW, present work; RT, room temperature.
Cyclability
The
recycling ability
of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites is also established where it is renewed
by centrifugation after the batch experiment followed by excessive
washing with ethanol and dried at 75 °C before further use in
the next cycle. The recycling performance of regenerated MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites is shown in Figure a. An insignificant decrease in adsorption percentage
is observed after the first three cycles, however remaining constant
for the last two cycles.
Figure 10
Schematic possible interaction in the adsorption
mechanism of RhB
on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.
Schematic possible interaction in the adsorption
mechanism of RhB
on MOF-5@GO nanocomposites.This slight decrement in adsorption efficiency of nanocomposites
might be due to the movement of the RhB molecule toward the interior
cavities of the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite and it could not be washed
out easily. The SEM image of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites depicted in Figure b after the fifth
cycle also shows that there are no significant changes occurring in
the morphology. These results demonstrated quicker adsorption integrated
with excellent reversibility, thus making it a promising candidate
for RhB adsorption in real applications. Furthermore, as compared
with previous studies, the MOF-5@GO nanocomposite displays the highest
adsorption capacity, which is listed in Table .
Conclusions
We have successfully developed MOF-5@GO nanocomposites employed
for the removal of toxic dye. Due to electrostatic interactions between
the positively charged metal center of MOF-5 and negative charge on
GO surface, MOF-5 and GO resulted in MOF-5@GO nanocomposite. MOF-5@GO
nanocomposites have an excellent adsorption capacity at a ratio of
1:1 for RhB, proving its application in the remediation of toxic dye.
The physicochemical properties of nanocomposites were explained with
different structural and morphological characterization techniques.
The morphology of RhB-adsorbed MOF-5@GO nanocomposites reveals the
growth of irregular form MOF-5 nanoparticles with sizes varying between
50 and 200 nm. Results of XPS and EDS spectra revealed the presence
of carbon, oxygen, and zinc
metal cluster. The adsorption kinetics data reveals pseudo-second-order
(R2 = 0.9908), although the adsorption
isotherm model was well defined by the Langmuir adsorption isotherm
(R2 = 0.9703). The effect of adsorption
capacity in the presence of heavy metal ions, i.e., Ni2+ and Cu2+, shows a decrease in the presence of Cu2+ ion but insignificant in the presence of Ni2+ ion. The adsorption capacity of MOF-5@GO nanocomposites was found
to be 99.58% with 20 ppm at pH 2. In conclusion, MOF-5@GO nanocomposite
is synthesized in one step, it is environmentally friendly, and cost-effective
with high adsorption efficiency and outstanding reusability, which
makes it a better adsorbent material for the removal of RhB from waste
water.
Experimental Section
Synthesis
of Graphene Oxide
GO was
synthesized according to previous reports,[70−72] with some modifications via the improved Hummer’s method. In brief, 90:10
mL of concentrated H2SO4:H3PO4 and graphite powder (1.5 g) were added with constant stirring
for 15 min. Afterward, potassium permanganate (8 g) was added slowly
into the above mixture and was heated at 50–55 °C with
constant stirring for 12 h. The reaction was cooled to room temperature
and poured into ice-cold water followed by the addition of hydrogenperoxide (3.5 mL) and stirred for 1 h, yielding the bright yellow
precipitate. The mixture was kept overnight and centrifuged for 20
min at 7000 rpm (Sigma, Laboratory Centrifuges 3K30 Sartorius). The
remaining solid material was then washed with hydrogen chloride, ethanol
(2x), and diethyl ether (2x) twice for purification. The final solid
brownish color GO sample was vacuum dried at 45 °C for 10 h.
Synthesis of MOF-5 and MOF-5@GO Nanocomposite
Zinc acetate (4.24 g) and benzene dicarboxylic acid (1.26 g) were
dissolved in N,N-dimethylformamide
(DMF) in a beaker with constant stirring up to 2 h to obtain a homogeneous
mixture and placed in an oven at 125 °C for 24 h in a Teflon-lined
sealed solvothermal vessel, resulting in a solid colorless precipitate.
It was gradually cooled to room temperature and centrifuged at 7000
rpm for 15 min. The product was washed with N,N-dimethylformamide (100 x 2), dried under vacuum at room
temperature, and stored under a desiccator.MOF-5 was synthesized
according to a previously reported method[73,74] with minor modifications. MOF-5@GO nanocomposites were synthesized
by a grinding method at different ratios (1:1, 1:2, and 2:1). The
mixture was then dried at room temperature for 12 h and used as an
adsorbent, and the synthesis is schematically depicted in Scheme .
Scheme 1
Simple Representation
of the Synthesis of MOF-5@GO Nanocomposites
Authors: P Panneer Selvam; S Preethi; P Basakaralingam; N Thinakaran; A Sivasamy; S Sivanesan Journal: J Hazard Mater Date: 2007-11-19 Impact factor: 10.588