화학공학소재연구정보센터
홈 로그인 로그아웃 연락처 사이트맵
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol.36, No.6, 894-902, June, 2019
DOI10.1007/s11814-019-0277-z  Export Citation
Performance evaluation of graphene oxide coated on cotton fibers in removal of humic acid from aquatic solutions
Farnaz Tahmasebi1, Mahmood Alimohammadi1, 2, †, Ramin Nabizadeh1, Mehdi Khoobi3, 4, Kamaledin Karimian1, and Ahmad Zarei5
  • 1Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • 2Center for Water Quality Research (CWQR), Institute for Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • 3Biomaterials Group, The Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (TIPS), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 1417614411, Iran
  • 4Department of Pharmaceutical Biomaterials and Medicinal Biomaterials Research Center, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • 5Department of Environmental Health Engineering, Faculty of Health, Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran
E-mail:
We investigated the removal efficiency of humic acid from aqueous solutions by cotton coated with graphene oxide. This research has been conducted as batch on an experimental scale. A self-arrangement approach was introduced in fabrication of the cotton adsorbent coated with graphene oxide. To determine the effect of parameters, including initial concentration, pH, adsorbent dosage and contact time, central composite design (CCD) was employed in response surface method (RSM). The adsorption kinetics were determined based on different times of adsorption of humic acid. Further, the adsorption isotherms were also examined using different concentrations of humic acid. The results obtained showed that with increasing adsorbent dosage and contact time, the removal efficiency increased, while with increasing pH and initial concentration of humic acid, the removal efficiency decreased. The optimal values based on RSM method were obtained as the following: humic acid initial concentration=13.61mg/L, pH=3.87, adsorbent dosage=0.61 g, and contact time=168.43min. Langmuir isotherm with R2=0.9987 has been the most suitable model for explaining the adsorption process. Investigation of the adsorption kinetics indicated that humic acid adsorption follows pseudo-second-order model (R2=0.9822). The results indicated that the cotton adsorbent coated with graphene oxide has a good potential for removal of humic acid from aqueous solutions. Mechanical flexibility, availability, and low operational energy costs are among the advantages of this method for fabrication of this adsorbent, which can be developed and used for reducing environmental contaminants.
Keywords:Humic Acid;Adsorption;Graphene Oxide-coated Cotton;RSM
  1. Saeedi R, Naddafi K, Nabizadeh R, Mesdaghinia A, Nasseri S, Alimohammadi M, Nazmara S, Environ. Eng. Sci., 29, 93 (2012)
  2. Song SA, Huang SY, Zhang R, Chen ZS, Wen T, Wang SH, Hayat T, Alsaedi A, Wang XK, Chem. Eng. J., 325, 576 (2017)
  3. Huang S, Song S, Zhang R, Wen T, Wang X, Yu S, Song W, Hayat T, Alsaedi A, Wang X, ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., 5, 11268 (2017)
  4. Wen T, Wang J, Yu S, Chen Z, Hayat T, Wang X, ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., 5, 4371 (2017)
  5. Wen T, Fan Q, Tan X, Chen Y, Chen C, Xu A, Wang X, Polym. Chem., 7, 785 (2016)
  6. De la Rubia A, Rodriguez M, Leon VM, Prats D, Water Res., 42, 714 (2008)
  7. Hartono T, Wang SB, Ma Q, Zhu ZH, J. Colloid Interface Sci., 333(1), 114 (2009)
  8. Askari M, Alimohammadi M, Dehghani MH, Emamjomeh MM, Nazmara S, J. Adv. Environ. Health Res., 2 (2014)
  9. Alimohammadi M, Askari M, Dehghani M, Dalvand A, Saeedi R, Yetilmezsoy K, Heibati B, McKay G, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 14, 2125 (2017)
  10. Shutova Y, Karna BL, Hambly AC, Lau B, Henderson RK, Le-Clech P, Desalination, 383, 12 (2016)
  11. Song JJ, Huang Y, Nam SW, Yu M, Heo J, Her N, Flora JRV, Yoon Y, Sep. Purif. Technol., 144, 162 (2015)
  12. Kumar M, Gholamvand Z, Morrissey A, Nolan K, Ulbricht M, Lawler J, J. Membr. Sci., 506, 38 (2016)
  13. Ren Z, Graham N, Environ. Eng. Sci., 32, 175 (2015)
  14. Shuang C, Wang M, Zhou Q, Zhou W, Li A, Water Res., 47, 6406 (2013)
  15. Bhatnagar A, Sillanpaa M, Chemosphere, 166, 497 (2017)
  16. Cai N, Peak D, Larese-Casanova P, Chem. Eng. J., 273, 568 (2015)
  17. Tavengwa NT, Chimuka L, Tichagwa L, Desalination Water Treatment, 57, 16843 (2016)
  18. Velten S, Knappe DR, Traber J, Kaiser HP, Von Gunten U, Boller M, Meylan S, Water Res., 45, 3951 (2011)
  19. Ding C, Shang C, Water Res., 44, 3651 (2010)
  20. Zhang Y, Li M, Wu S, Zhang Q, Desalination Water Treatment, 57, 1940 (2016)
  21. Wang X, Yu S, Jin J, Wang H, Alharbi NS, Alsaedi A, Hayat T, Wang X, Sci. Bulletin, 61, 1583 (2016)
  22. Wang X, Yu S, Chen Z, Zhao Y, Jin J, Wang X, Sci. China Chem., 60, 1149 (2017)
  23. Zhu YW, Murali S, Cai WW, Li XS, Suk JW, Potts JR, Ruoff RS, Adv. Mater., 22(35), 3906 (2010)
  24. Zhao G, Li J, Ren X, Chen C, Wang X, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 10454 (2011)
  25. Montesinos I, Sfakianaki A, Gallego M, Stalikas CD, J. Sep. Sci., 38, 836 (2015)
  26. Shahriary L, Athawale AA, Int. J. Renew. Energy Environ. Eng., 2, 58 (2014)
  27. Hummers WS, Offeman RE, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 80, 1339 (1958)
  28. Duan L, Hao R, Xu Z, He X, Adeleye AS, Li Y, Chemosphere, 168, 1051 (2017)
  29. Khaloo SS, Marzaleh MA, Kavousian M, Gendeshmin SB, Sep. Sci. Technol., 51(1), 1 (2016)
  30. Dehghan A, Zarei A, Jaafari J, Shams M, Khaneghah AM, Chemosphere, 217, 250 (2019)
  31. Aquino JM, Rocha-Filho RC, Bocchi N, Biaggio SR, J. Environ. Chem. Eng., 1, 954 (2013)
  32. Rezaee R, Maleki A, Jafari A, Mazloomi S, Zandsalimi Y, Mahvi AH, J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng., 12, 67 (2014)
  33. Wu J, Zhang H, Oturan N, Wang Y, Chen L, Oturan MA, Chemosphere, 87, 614 (2012)
  34. Mazloomi S, Yousefi M, Nourmoradi H, Shams M, J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng., 1 (2019).
  35. Dehghani MH, Kamalian S, Shayeghi M, Yousefi M, Heidarinejad Z, Agarwal S, Gupta VK, Microchem. J., 145, 486 (2019)
  36. Dehghani MH, Tajik S, Panahi A, Khezri M, Zarei A, Heidarinejad Z, Yousefi M, MethodsX, 5, 1148 (2018)
  37. Tissera ND, Wijesena RN, Perera JR, de Silva KMN, Amaratunge GAJ, Appl. Surf. Sci., 324, 455 (2015)
  38. Sahito IA, Sun KC, Arbab AA, Qadir MB, Jeong SH, Carbohydr. Polym., 130, 299 (2015)
  39. Oskoei V, Dehghani M, Nazmara S, Heibati B, Asif M, Tyagi I, Agarwal S, Gupta VK, J. Mol. Liq., 213, 374 (2016)
  40. Song W, Shao D, Lu S, Wang X, Sci. China Chem., 57, 1291 (2014)
  41. Liu Z, Wang X, Luo Z, Huo M, Wu J, Huo H, Yang W, PloS One, 10, e01438 (2015)
  42. Hur J, Shin J, Yoo J, Seo YS, The Scientific World J., 2015 (2015)
  43. Nuengmatcha P, Mahachai R, Chanthai S, Oriental J. Chem., 30, 1463 (2014)
  44. Dehghani MH, Mesdaghinia A, Nabizadeh R, Alimohammadi M, Afsharnia M, McKay G, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 140, 102 (2014)
  45. Tan L, Tan X, Fang M, Wang X, Wang J, Xing J, Ai Y, Wang X, Environ. Pollut., 246, 999 (2019)
  46. Zulfikar M, Novita E, Hertadi R, Djajanti S, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 10, 1357 (2013)
  47. Foo KY, Hameed BH, Chem. Eng. J., 156(1), 2 (2010)
  48. Qasemi M, Zarei A, Afsharnia M, Salehi R, Allahdadi M, Farhang M, Data Brief, 20, 1115 (2018)
  49. Shams M, Dehghani MH, Nabizadeh R, Mesdaghinia A, Alimohammadi M, Najafpoor AA, J. Mol. Liq., 224, 151 (2016)
  50. Qasemi M, Afsharnia M, Zarei A, Najafpoor AA, Salari S, Shams M, Data Brief, 18, 620 (2018)
  51. Khosravi R, Eslami H, Zarei A, Heidari M, Baghani AN, Safavi N, Mokammel A, Fazlzadeh M, Adhami S, Desalination Water Treatment, 116, 119 (2018)