A DOE Study of Ultrasound Intensified Removal of Phenol

Authors: P. R. Rahul, A. Kannan

Abstract:

Ultrasound-aided adsorption of phenol by Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) was investigated at different frequencies ranging from 35 kHz, 58 kHz, and 192 kHz. Other factors influencing adsorption such as Adsorbent dosage (g/L), the initial concentration of the phenol solution (ppm) and RPM was also considered along with the frequency variable. However, this study involved calorimetric measurements which helped is determining the effect of frequency on the % removal of phenol from the power dissipated to the system was normalized. It was found that low frequency (35 kHz) cavitation effects had a profound influence on the % removal of phenol per unit power. This study also had cavitation mapping of the ultrasonic baths, and it showed that the effect of cavitation on the adsorption system is irrespective of the position of the vessel. Hence, the vessel was placed at the center of the bath. In this study, novel temperature control and monitoring system to make sure that the system is under proper condition while operations. From the BET studies, it was found that there was only 5% increase in the surface area and hence it was concluded that ultrasound doesn’t profoundly alter the equilibrium value of the adsorption system. DOE studies indicated that adsorbent dosage has a higher influence on the % removal in comparison with other factors.

Keywords: Ultrasound, adsorption, granulated activated carbon, phenol.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1127910

References:

[1] A. Bhatnagar., “Removal of bromophenols from water using industrial wastes as low-cost adsorbents,” J. Hazard. Mater., 139, 93–102 (2007).
[2] P. Cañizares, Carmona, M., Baraza, O., Delgado, A., Rodrigo, M.A., “Adsorption equilibrium of phenol onto chemically modified activated carbon F400”, J.Hazard.Mater.,131, 243–248 (2006).
[3] V. Fierro, Torne-Fernandez, V., Montane, D., Celzard, A., “Adsorption of phenol onto activated carbons having different textural and surface properties,” Microporous Mesoporous Mater., 111, 276–284 (2008).
[4] U. Beker, Ganboldb, B., Dertlic, H., Gülbayira, D.D., “Adsorption of phenol by activated carbon: Influence of activation methods and solution pH,” Energy Convers. Manage., 51, 35–240 (2010)
[5] A. T. M. Din, Hameed, B.H., Ahmad, A.L., “Batch adsorption of phenol onto physiochemical-activated coconut shell,” J.Hazard.Mater. 161, 1522–1529 (2009).
[6] R. S. Juang , S. H. Lin , C.H. Cheng, “Liquid-phase adsorption and desorption of phenol onto activated carbons with ultrasound,” Ultrason Sonochem,13, 251–260 (2006).
[7] O. Hamdaoui, E. Naffrechoux, L. Tifouti, C.Petrier, “Effects of ultrasound on adsorption–desorption of p-chlorophenol on granular activated carbon,” Ultrason Sonochem,10, 109–114 (2003).
[8] B. Breitbach, D.Bathen, “Influence of ultrasound on adsorption processes,” UltrasonSonochem, 8, 277-283 (2001)
[9] B. S. Schueller, and R. T. Yang, “Ultrasound Enhanced Adsorption and Desorption of Phenol on Activated Carbon and Polymeric Resin,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 40, 4912-4918 (2001).
[10] J. B. Ji, X. H. Lu, Z.C. Xu, “Effect of ultrasound on adsorption of Geniposide on polymeric resin,” UltrasonSonochem, 13, 463–470 (2006).
[11] K. H. Park, M. S. Balathanigaimani, W. G. Shim, J. W. Lee, H. Moon, “Adsorption characteristics of phenol on novel corn grain-based activated carbons,” Microporous Mesoporous Mater.,127, 1–8 (2010).
[12] C. Guo, K.J. Stine, J.F. Kauffman, W.H. Doub, “Assessment of the influence factors on in vitro testing of nasal sprays using Box-Behnken experimental design,” Eur J Pharm Sci,35, 417–426 (2008).