Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
(CDB 3052)
EXPERIMENT 2:
ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION ISOTHERM
& KINETICS
GROUP 1 MEMBERS
18996
19323
19417
18806
5) KOI ZI KANG
18868
LAB DEMONSTRATOR
DATE
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION
3. DISCUSSION
14
4. CONCLUSION
17
5. REFERENCES
18
6. APPENDICES
19
2|Page
1. INTRODUCTION
Adsorption is a process of removing surface-active material (atom, ions, and molecules) from a
gas/solid by using a porous material as the absorbent. This process creates a film of the
adsorbate on the surface of the adsorbent. Basically, adsorption is a surface-based process
differs from absorption that is volume-based.
The process is widely applied in environmental engineering field and treatment process such as
removal of soluble organics, dyes, pesticides, lignin, etc., from wastewaters. Besides, it is also
widely used in removing colour, taste and odor-producing substances from natural waters that
are to be used as potable water supplies.
The adsorbent used for this experiment is activated carbon. Activated carbon is basically carbon
that has been heated or treated in order to increase its adsorptive power. Charcoal and high
porosity bio-char are usually used to produce activated carbon and that is the reason why it is
usually called as activated coal also. Activated carbon are famous as adsorbent because it has
high porosity and high ratio of surface are to unit weight up to 100 acres per pound, enable it to
have high capacity for adsorption process.
The main objective of this experiment is to archive a 70% removal of methylene blue using
activated carbon. In order to analyze the removal process, three methylene blue solution with
concentration of 50 mg/L , 100 mg/L and 150 mg/ L are prepared. To identify the absorption
capacity of the activated carbon, the amount of activated carbon is fixed to 100 g in each
beaker. The stirrer speed is kept constant for those 3 beakers at 150 rpm.
3|Page
The data was analyzed by studying equilibrium isotherms, determine the adsorption kinetics
(Pseudo-first-order or Pseudo-second-order) and its respective kinetic constant(s) and
operational characteristics of a lab-scale packed-bed reactor.
4|Page
PROCEDURE
1. Three methylene blue solution are prepared by weighing methylene powder with the
mass of 50mg, 100mg, and 150mg respectively and diluted into three 1L distill water to
obtain 50mg/L, 100mg/L & 150mg/L solution.
2. A sample of the solution are taken from each beaker and put into sampling bottle.
3. The bottle are all put into spectrometer and the initial intensity readings are recorded
before putting it back into the beaker.
4. 100 g of activated carbon are weighted and put into the each and every beaker.
5. The beaker is put under a stirrer with a speed of 150 rpm and the time was recorded.
6. In 5 minutes time interval, the stirrer is stopped and a samples are taken from each
beaker.
7. The reading from the spectrometer are recorded and the solution are put back into the
beaker.
8. The reading are continuously taken with 5 minutes interval until it become constant or
70% removal efficiency are achieved.
5|Page
Absorbance
Concentration (mg/L)
TIME(min)
50
100
0
0.5450
1.1520
5
0.9000
0.9850
10
1.0810
1.0690
15
1.1740
1.1680
20
1.2280
1.2440
25
1.2560
1.3480
Table 2.1.1: Data of absorbance at time t
150
1.6240
1.0820
0.9740
0.7070
1.0130
1.0200
ABSORBANCE vs CONCENTRATION
1.8
y = 0.011x
1.6
Absorbance
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
Linear (1)
0.4
0.2
0
0
50
100
150
200
Concentration (mg/L)
Concentration
of Methylene
Blue (mg/L)
0
5
10
15
20
25
100 mg/L
150 mg/L
Concentration
Concentration
Concentration
Absorbance
(mg/L)
Absorbent
(mg/L)
Absorbent
(mg/L)
0.5450
50.0000
1.1520
100.0000
1.6240
150.0000
0.9000
81.8182
0.9850
89.5455
1.0820
98.3636
1.0810
98.2727
1.0690
97.1819
0.9740
88.5455
1.1740
106.727
1.1680
106.1820
0.7070
64.2727
1.2280
111.636
1.2440
113.0910
1.0130
92.0909
1.2560
114.182
1.3480
122.545
1.0200
92.7273
Table 2.1.2: Table of adsorbance and concentration
Concentration vs Time
160
140
Concentration (mg/L)
TIME
50mg/L
120
100
80
50
60
100
40
150
20
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time(min)
7|Page
= ( )
[Eq 2.2]
where
ct = concentration of methylene blue solution at certain times
c0 = concentration of methylene blue solution at initial time
TIME (min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Time
(min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Removal Efficiency(%)
C=100mg/L
C=150mg/L
0.0000
0.0000
10.4545
34.4242
2.8181
40.9696
-6.1818
57.1515
-13.0909
38.6060
-22.5454
38.1818
Table 2.2.2: Table of removal efficiency
8|Page
60
50
40
30
20
100
10
150
0
-10 0
10
15
20
25
30
-20
-30
Time(min)
Time (min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
C=50mg/L
0.0000
-0.3181
-0.4827
-0.5672
0.6427
-0.6418
C=100mg/L
0.0000
0.1045
0.0281
-0.0618
-0.1309
-0.2254
C=150mg/L
0.0000
0.5163
0.6145
0.8572
0.5790
0.5727
9|Page
qt vs t
1
0.8
qe=0.62
0.6
0.4
qt
100
0.2
qe=0.15
150
0
-0.2
10
-0.4
15
20
25
30
Time (min)
ln(1
) = ln K1 t
+ ( )
[Eq 2.4.1]
[Eq 2.4.2]
10 | P a g e
where
K1 = kinetic constant for pseudo-first order (min-1)
K2 = kinetic constant for pseudo-second order (gmg1min1)
qt = concentration of adsorbate on adsorbent at time t
qe = equilibrium concentration of adsorbate on adsorbent at time t
Time(min)
0
5
20
25
ln(1-qt/qe)
0.0000
-1.7888
-2.7183
-2.5737
Ln(1-qt/qe) vs t
0
0
10
20
30
Ln(1-qt/qe)
-0.5
-1
-1.5
Ln(1-qt/qe)
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
Linear (Ln(1-qt/qe))
y = -0.0921x - 0.619
R = 0.7706
Time (min)
11 | P a g e
Time (min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
t/qt
0.0000
9.6830
16.2721
17.4973
34.5368
43.6507
t/qt vs t
50
45
y = 1.6802x - 0.7295
R = 0.9524
40
35
t/qt
30
25
t/qt
20
Linear (t/qt)
15
10
5
0
-5 0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (min)
Pseudo-first-order
Pseudo-second-order
R
0.7706
0.9524
0.5385
0.5952
y-intercept
-0.619
-0.7295
1
0.0921
-
2
-3.8694
Table 2.4.3: Table of values of R, y-intercept, and K for pseudo 1st and pseudo 2nd order
12 | P a g e
13 | P a g e
3. DISCUSSION
For this experiment, we chose Task B and so we have two objectives which are to
achieve a 70% removal efficiency of methylene blue and also to determine the adsorption
kinetics (pseudo-first-order or pseudo-second-order). Activated carbon was used as the
adsorbent and methylene blue which is a dye was used as adsorbate. 50mg, 100mg and 150mg
of methylene blue were added to three 1L beaker of distilled water respectively to obtain 3
different concentration: 50mg/L, 100mg/L and 150mg/L. 100g of activated carbon was added to
each beaker and all beakers were then agitated with mechanical stirrer at the speed of 150rpm.
The absorbance of methylene blue sample of each beaker were measured every 5 minutes for
25 minutes.
The concentration was calculated using the linear equation obtained from the
calibration curve (absorbance vs concentration) whereby y=0.011x. From the concentration
graph, it shows an increasing trend for 50mg/L sample which opposes our goal. For 100mg/L
sample, It decreases and increases which also opposes our goal. One of the reasons for both
increasing trend can be due to the disintegration of the activated carbon which affects the
reading of absorbance using spectrophotometer. Another reason can be that the adsorption
happens in a very short duration and the activated carbon reaches its breakthrough very soon.
For 150mg/L sample, it shows a decrease in its concentration overall.
Therefore, only 100mg/L and 150mg/L sample data are used for calculation of removal
efficiency. Based on the removal efficiency vs time graph, it shows that the 150mg/L sample
managed to achieve an approximately 41% removal efficiency. One of the reasons that it
14 | P a g e
cannot reach 70% removal efficiency is because the activated carbon used are not fully
regenerated. Also, it can be due to its early breakthrough point and the disintegration of
activated carbon which causes the reduction of active adsorption sites. From the graph of vs
time, we managed determine the value of which is 0.62 when it is at equilibrium state.
For adsorption kinetics, we only use the data of 150mg/L to plot ln(1 )vs time and
( ) vs time graph. From both the graphs, we can deduce that the adsorption kinetics follows
pseudo-second-order (Ho and McKay model) rate reaction because the ( ) vs time graph
yields a good straight line and has a higher 2 value (0.9524) and a closer value of (0.5952) to
the (0.62) obtained from the graph of vs time as compared to ln(1 ) vs time graph.
This relies on the assumption that chemisorption may be the rate limiting step. In
chemisorption (chemical adsorption), the metal ions stick to the adsorbent surface by forming a
chemical (usually covalent) bond and tend to find sites that maximize their coordination
number with the surface. The kinetic constant for pseudo-first-order graph is 0.0921 while for
pseudo-second-order graph is -3.8694.
smoothly. As this experiment needs to identify the absorption capacity of the activated carbon,
we need to prepare a fixed amount of activated carbon. However, in order to achieve a better
adsorption of methylene blue by activated carbon, the amount of carbon need to correspond to
the three concentrations of methylene blue solutions. As for our experiment, the amount of
carbon used is not convenient to the concentration of methylene blue solution. The first step to
do is to estimate some amount of carbon to put in the methylene blue solution. If adsorption
goes smoothly at the first trial, then we can proceed with the fixed amount of carbon for all the
three methylene blue solutions and take the reading from spectrophotometer for each interval
of 5 minutes. The spectrophotometer reading might vary due to some factors and thus, we
need to calibrate it to zero reading before using it. The measurement surfaces of
spectrophotometer must be cleaned and when taking the samples of methylene blue solution,
use calibrated pipettes and make sure there is no carbon in the sample so that no error occur
when taking the readings. In our experiment, there is some errors when taking readings from
spectrophotometer so, when stirring the solution of methylene blue with carbon, make sure
that the stirrer speed is not too high so that the carbon will not disintegrate and affect the
solution.
16 | P a g e
4. CONCLUSION
In this experiment, we were not able to achieve a removal efficiency of 70% due to the
disintegration of activated carbon, usage of not fully regenerated activated carbon and early
breakthrough point of activated carbon. Instead, we only managed to achieve a removal
efficiency of 41%. In terms of adsorption kinetics, we deduce that the adsorption kinetics
follows a pseudo-second-order (Ho and McKay model) rate equation because because the ( )
vs time graph yields a good straight line and has a higher 2 value and a closer value of to the
obtained from the graph of vs time as compared to ln(1 ) vs time graph. Therefore,
the assumption that chemisorption or chemi-adsorption took place in the experiment is valid
and the adsorption kinetics is determined.
17 | P a g e
5. REFERENCES
B.H. Hameed, A.T.M. Din & A.L. Ahmad. (2007). Adsorption of methylene blue onto bamboo-based
activated carbon: Kinetics and equilibrium studies. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 141(3), 819825. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389406008739
Fogler, H.S., Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall PTR, 1999.
Norit. (n.d.). CABOT. Retrieved from Norit Activated Carbon: http://www.norit.com/carbonacademy/introduction/
18 | P a g e
6. APPENDICES
1. Absorbance vs concentration
From the data obtained from experiment, graph of absorbance vs concentration are
plotted. The relation obtained are as follows:
= 0.011
Where y=absorbance and x= concentration. In order to determine the concentration at
time t, the equation are re-arranged as:
() =
()
0.011
(5 ) =
(5 )
0.011
(5 ) =
1.082
= 98.3636 /
0.011
(10 ) =
(10 )
0.011
(10 ) =
0.974
= 88.5454 /
0.011
19 | P a g e
= (1 ) 100
0
= (1
=5
0
) 100
98.3636
150
) 100 = 34.42 %
= (1
=10
0
) 100
88.5454
150
) 100 = 40.97 %
20 | P a g e
= (0 =5 ) 1
= (150 98.3636) 1 = 51.6364 mg
At t=10, concentration methylene blue = 150mg/L:
= (0 =10 ) 1
= (150 88.5454) 1 = 61.4546 mg
=5 =
=5 =
= 5
51.6364 mg
100
= 0. 516364
=5 =
=5 =
= 10
61.4546 mg
100
= 0. 614546
21 | P a g e
ln( ) = ln K1 t
22 | P a g e
+ ( )
R2 = 0.9524
23 | P a g e