| Literature DB >> 35540053 |
Gauri Shelar-Lohar1,2, Satyawati Joshi1.
Abstract
Uranium and thorium ions were selectively removed from aqueous solution using synthesized gum ghatti grafted poly(acrylamide) gum-g-poly(AAm) composite. A gamma radiation induced free radical copolymerization technique was used to synthesize the copolymer composite of gum-g-poly(AAm). Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), thermogravimetric analysis (TG), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) were used to characterize the graft copolymer gum-g-poly(AAm). The adsorption of uranium ions and thorium ions using the gum-g-poly(AAm) copolymer composites has been investigated in batch mode. The adsorptive characteristics were investigated by varying the pH, concentration and time for both ions. The adsorption method depends on the pH of each metal ion, and the highest adsorption percentage was achieved at pH 6.0. The adsorption statistics were justified by isotherm, kinetic and thermodynamic models. The Langmuir adsorption model was revealed to be the best fitted monolayer arrangement, with a maximum adsorption capacity of 367.65 mg g-1 for the uranium ions and 125.95 mg g-1 for the thorium ions. The adsorption of metal ions occurred by the ion exchange process, which was specified through the rate controlling step with a best-fitted pseudo-second order kinetic rate model. Thermodynamic analysis shows that the ΔH and ΔS values for the uranium ions and thorium ions were positive. The negative ΔG values decreased with an increase in temperature, suggesting that the metal ion adsorption process was endothermic and spontaneous in behaviour. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 35540053 PMCID: PMC9076367 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra08212c
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1FTIR of (a) gum ghatti and (b) gum-g-poly(AAm).
Fig. 2TGA of (a) gum ghatti and (b) gum-g-poly(AAm).
Fig. 3FESEM of (a) gum ghatti and (b) gum-g-poly(AAm).
Fig. 4Effect of pH on the adsorption of uranium and thorium ions.
Fig. 5Effect of initial concentration on the adsorption of uranium and thorium ions.
Fig. 6(a) Langmuir adsorption isotherm, (b) Freundlich adsorption isotherm, and (c) Temkin adsorption isotherm.
Isotherm and kinetic parameters for uranium and thorium ion adsorption by gum-g-poly(AAm)
| Adsorption isotherm models | Linear equation forms | Parameter description | Values for uranium ions | Values for thorium ions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Langmuir isotherm model[ |
|
| 367.65 | 125.95 | |
|
| 1.253 × 10−1 | 1.145 ×10−1 | |||
|
| 0.138 | 0.148 | |||
|
| 0.997 | 0.998 | |||
| Freundlich isotherm model[ |
|
| 57.111 | 95.583 | |
|
| 2.833 | 5.139 | |||
|
| 0.926 | 0.952 | |||
| Temkin isotherm model[ |
|
| 20.470 | 26.986 | |
|
| 0.168 | 0.154 | |||
|
| 0.984 | 0.971 | |||
| Pseudo-first order kinetic model[ | ln( |
| 1.38 ×10 −2 | 2.04 ×10 −2 | |
|
| 210.81 | 358.252 | |||
|
| 0.968 | 0.988 | |||
| Pseudo-second-order kinetic model[ |
|
| 1.095 × 10 −4 | 3.436 × 10 −4 | |
|
| 353.35 | 172.41 | |||
|
| 0.998 | 0.993 | |||
| Weber Morris model[ |
|
| Step 1 | 27.528 | 0.262 |
| Step 2 | 12.642 | 0.087 | |||
| Step 3 | 0.592 | 0.019 | |||
|
| Step 1 | 72.384 | 3.845 | ||
| Step 2 | 218.227 | 5.759 | |||
| Step 3 | 319.084 | 6.888 | |||
|
| Step 1 | 0.986 | 0.996 | ||
| Step 2 | 0.945 | 0.936 | |||
| Step 3 | 0.998 | 0.979 | |||
Fig. 7Effect of agitation time for the adsorption of uranium and thorium ions.
Fig. 8Kinetics model (a) pseudo-first order, (b) pseudo-second order, and (c) Weber Morris model.
Thermodynamic parameters for uranium and thorium ion adsorption by Gum-g-poly(AAm)
| Parameter | Δ | Δ | Δ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 303 K | 313 K | 323 K | 333 K | |||
| Values for uranium ions | 85.48 | 0.284 | −0.568 | −3.408 | −6.248 | −9.088 |
| Values for thorium ions | 112.19 | 0.377 | −2.041 | −5.811 | −9.581 | −13.351 |
Fig. 9(a) FTIR of uranium and thorium ions adsorbed on gum-g-poly(AAm); (b), (c) and(d) EDX, FESEM and elemental analysis of uranium ion adsorbed on gum-g-poly(AAm); (e), (f) and (g) EDX, FESEM and elemental analysis of thorium ions adsorbed on gum-g-poly(AAm).
Fig. 10(a) Desorption study and (b) regeneration study.
Comparison of maximum adsorption capacity of uranium and thorium ions using various adsorbents
| Metal ions | Adsorbents | Maximum adsorption capacity (mg g−1) |
|---|---|---|
| Uranium ions | Gum- | 367.65 |
| Layered double oxide/carbon dot nanocomposites[ | 354.2 | |
| MAO-chitosan beads[ | 117.65 | |
| Polyaniline (PANI) modified bentonite[ | 14.1 | |
| TMP- | 35.37 | |
| Thorium ions | Gum- | 125.95 |
| PVA/Fe3O4/SiO2/APTES nanohybrid adsorbent[ | 62.5 | |
| Tannin modified poly(glycidyl methacrylate) grafted zirconium oxide densified cellulose (TMPGZDC)[ | 96.69 |