- Email: [email protected]
Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon
Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
1 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 2 3 4 5 6 journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dib 7 8 9 Data Article 10 11 12 Q1 13 14 15 16 17 Mokhtar Mahdavi a,b, Afshin Ebrahimi c,d, 18 Amir Hossein Mahvi e,f, Ali Fatehizadeh c,d, Farham Karakani g, 19 Hossein Azarpira a,b,n 20 21 Q2 a Environmental Health Engineering, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran b 22 Q3 c Social Determinates of Health Research Center, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 23 Isfahan, Iran d 24 Environment Research Center, Research Institute for Primordial Prevention of Non-communicable Disease, 25 Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran e School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran 26 f Center for Solid Waste Research, Institute for Environmental Research, Tehran University of Medical Science, 27 Tehran, Iran 28 g Defense of Water & Wastewater Engineering Company, Tehran, Iran 29 30 31 a r t i c l e i n f o abstract 32 33 Article history: This dataset deals with the modification of granular activated 34 Received 9 December 2017 carbon (GAC) with FeCl3 under basic conditions (pH E 12) for Received in revised form 35 removal of aluminium (Al) from aqueous solution. The structural 18 January 2018 36 properties and operational parameters including Al ion conAccepted 22 January 2018 37 centration (2.15 and 10.3 mg/L), pH solution (2–10), adsorbent dosage (0.1–5 g/L), and contact time (0–10 h) was investigated for 38 Keywords: raw and modified GAC. This dataset provides information about Al 39 Aluminium removal removal by GAC and modified GAC at conditions including: 40 Adsorption pH ¼ 8, contact time ¼ 6 h, initial Al concentration ¼ 2.15 mg/L. 41 Iron-modified GAC The characterization data of the adsorbents was analysed by Water treatment 42 Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, scanning electron 43 microscopy (SEM) and Brunauer, Emmett and Teller (BET) test. The 44 data showed that Freundlich isotherm with and Pseudo second 45 order kinetic model were the best models for describing the Al 46 adsorption reactions. The acquired data indicated that the 47 48 n 49 Corresponding author at: Environmental Health Engineering, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M. Mahdavi), [email protected] (A. Ebrahimi), 50 [email protected] (A.H. Mahvi), [email protected] (F. Karakani), [email protected] (H. Azarpira). 51 52 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063 53 2352-3409/& 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license 54 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Data in Brief
Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
2
55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108
maximum adsorption capacity of GAC and modified GAC to uptake Al (C0 ¼ 10.3 mg/L) was 3 and 4.37 mg/g respectively. & 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Specifications Table Subject area More specific subject area Type of data How data was acquired
Data format Experimental factors Experimental features
Environmental Engineering Adsorption Table, image and figure – GAC was oxidized by nitric acid and concentrated sulphuric acid. Then it was modified by FeCl3. 6H2O under basic condition according to a designed procedure. – Experiments were conducted according to a designed procedure of analytical test and were investigated in order to perform an analysis of adsorption process. All adsorption tests were done in batch mode. – Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (Shimadzu 4300), scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Hitachi, SU 70) and Brunauer, Emmett and Teller (BET) tests were used to determine the characteristics of the adsorbent. – The aluminium concentration was measured by DR5000 Spectrophotometer (Method 8012) that was adapted from Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Raw and analysed Studying variables including pH, contact time, Al concentration, adsorbent dosage and characterisation of raw and modified GAC which were investigated for Al removal by adsorption. – Characterization data of raw and modified GAC obtained from FTIR, BET and SEM are given. – Optimization of Al adsorption onto raw and modified GAC adsorbent by modification. Saveh University of Medical Sciences.
Data source location Data accessibility The data presented in this article is not published anywhere else.
Value of the data
The data are beneficial for determination of the isotherm and kinetic for predicting and modelling the adsorption capacity and mechanism of Al removal by the iron-modified GAC.
These data show the efficacy of modified GAC in comparison to raw GAC on Al removal. The dataset will be useful for Al removal from aqueous solution.
1. Data Presented data in this article comprise the characterization of raw and modified GAC (in this paper modified GAC under basic condition nominated as BGAC) with analytical methods like FTIR, SEM, BET and iron content, as well as experimental data including studying different variables (pH, contact time, Al concentration and adsorbent dosage), isotherm and kinetic. One of the best available technologies for Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162
3
pollutants removal from aqueous solutions is adsorption which has a very good efficiency [1,2]. Table 1 shows the iron content, BET surface area and other related data about the raw and modified GAC. Figs. 1–3 show the data for SEM and FTIR for raw and modified GAC and Fig. 4 represents the experimental procedures. Kinetics and Isotherms equations presented in Tables 2 and 3 and Kinetics data for Al adsorbed onto raw and modified GAC was presented in Table 4. Figs. 5–8 show the removal of Al with raw and modified GAC by different parameters. Figs. 9 and 10 shows the adsorption isotherm for Al removal with raw and modified GAC (BGAC).
2. Experimental design, materials and methods In this work the removal of Al from water was carried out by raw GAC (supplied by the Merck Company) and modified GAC by FeCl3 under basic pH condition (BGAC). Some wastewater like spent filter backwash water from water treatment plant was discharged to surface or groundwater without any treatment and it was endangered soil, water body and environment [3–8]. So it was necessary for all water treatment plants that treat their wastewater before entering to environment.
2.1. Materials Analytical grade ferric chloride (FeCl3·6H2O), GAC, sulfuric acid, nitric acid and sodium hydroxide were purchased from Merck Company. Also, AlK(SO4)2·12H2O was used for aluminium stock solution. Table 1 Specification of surface area and pore volume of raw and modified GAC with BET test. Adsorbent
Total volume (cm3/g)
BET surface area (m2/g)
Total pore volume (cm3/g)
Average pore diameter (nm)
Fe contenta (mg/g)
Raw GAC Modified GAC (BGAC)
217/09 136/43
944/89 593/81
0/4621 0/3114
1/9564 2/0979
2.5 81.2
a
Ironcontent ¼
massofiron ñ100. massofGAC þ massofiron
Fig. 1. SEM image of raw GAC (A) and modified GAC (B).
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
4
163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
Fig. 2. FTIR spectra for raw GAC.
Fig. 3. FTIR spectra for modified GAC.
Fig. 4. Experimental procedure for GAC modification. GAC Modification was including 1: oxidation by both 65% nitric acid and concentrated sulfuric acid, 2: coating of oxidized GAC by FeCl3. 6H2O solution containing 2.5% of Fe3 þ (pH was adjusted to 12 and coating conducted at 80 °C for 24 h), 3: calcination at 300 °C under a N2 atmosphere for 3 h, 4: production of modified GAC (BGAC). 5: Batch approach.
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
Table 2 Kinetic equations and linear forms used in this work. Kinetic
Equation
Pseudo first order
dqt dt dqt dt
¼ k1 ðqe −qt Þ ¼ k2 ðq −q ÞÇ
dqt dt
¼ αexpð−βqt ÞÇ
Pseudo second order Elovich
Linear form
e
k1 logk1 qe −qt ¼ log qe − 2:303 t t 1 1 ¼ Þt þ ð qt 1 qe k2 qeÇ qe ¼ 1β lnðαβÞ þ 1β lnt
t
Table 3 Isotherms equations and linear forms used in this work. Type of isotherm
Equation
Freundlich
qe ¼ K f ñðC e Þ1=n
Langmuir
qe ¼
Linear form logqe ¼ logK f þ 1n logC e Ce 1 1 q ¼ Kl Q m þ Q m Ce
Q m ñK l C e 1 þ K l Ce
e
Table 4 Kinetics data for Al adsorbed on raw and modified GAC (BGAC). Al concentration was 19.5 mg/L and adsorbents dose was 2 g/L. Parameter
GAC
BGAC
Pseudo first order
qe k1 R2
9.8 0.009 0.83
10.66 0.01 0.8
Pseudo second order
qe k2 R2
10.07 0.0008 0.943
10.42 0.0012 0.955
Elovich
α β R2
0.566 0.262 0.916
0.53 0.39 0.932
qe GAC Removal GAC
8.00
qe BGAC Removal BGAC
100.0
6.00
75.0
4.00
50.0
2.00
25.0
0.00
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12
0.0
Removal efficiency (%)
Kind of Kinetic
qe (mg/g)
217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270
5
pH Fig. 5. Al removal efficiency and adsorption capacity of raw and modified GAC (BGAC) at different pH. Adsorbents dosage: 2 g/L, Al concentration: 10.3 mg/L, contact time: 24 h and mixing speed: 250 rpm.
2.2. Experiment protocol 2.2.1. Preparation of modified GAC 40 g of the oxidized GAC was mixed with 200 mL of FeCl3·6H2O solution containing. 2.5% of Fe3 þ and pH was adjusted to12 by the addition of 1 N NaOH solution. The impregnation of Fe was carried out at 80 °C for 24 h on shaker with 150 rpm rotation [9]. Impregnated GAC was Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
6
Removal efficiency (%)
100.00 80.00 60.00 GAC
40.00
BGAC
20.00 0.00 0
200
400
600
800
Time (min)
Removal efficiency (%)
Fig. 6. The removal efficiency of Al by raw and modified GAC (BGAC) under different contact time. adsorbents dosage: 2 g/L, Al concentration: 10.3 mg/L, contact time: 24 h and mixing speed: 250 rpm. 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 Al, 10.3 mg/L
20.00 Al, 2.15 mg/L
0.00 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
GAC dose (g/L) Fig. 7. Al removal efficiency by different dosage of raw GAC (0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L).
Removal efficiency (%)
271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324
100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00
Al, 10.3 mg/L
20.00
Al, 2.15 mg/L
0.00 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Modified GAC dose (g/L) Fig. 8. Al removal efficiency by different dosage of modified GAC (0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L).
calcined at 300 °C under a N2 atmosphere for 3 h. Then it was washed with distilled water for several times and dried at 110 °C during 24 h [10]. 2.2.2. Adsorption experiments Adsorption experiments were conducted by batch method in a 200 mL Erlenmeyer flask and stirred at 250 rpm in a shaker–incubator instrument. Experiments included determination of optimum pH, equilibrium time, dose of adsorbents, Al concentration, the kinetic studies and adsorption isotherms. For optimum pH selection, 50 mL of Al solution (Co ¼ 10.3 mg/L) introduced in 200 mL Erlenmeyer flasks. Then 0.1 g of the adsorbents was put in contact with 50 mL of Al solution (dose of adsorbent was 2 g/L). The pH was adjusted to 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 by using 1 M HCl or 1 M NaOH (pH was measured by pH-meter model CG 824). The samples were placed in mechanical shaker for 24 h at the room temperature (20 7 1 °C) and after that, the combination of Al solution and adsorbents was filtered through Whatman paper (0.45 µm) and the concentration of the residual Al was determined by DR-5000. Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378
7
Fig. 9. Freundlich isotherm of raw and modified GAC (BGAC). For Part A and B, Al concentration was 2.15 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L. For Part D and E Al concentration was 10.3 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L.
Fig. 10. Langmuir isotherm of raw and modified GAC (BGAC). For Part A and B Al concentration was 2.15 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L. For Part D and E Al concentration was 10.3 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L.
Percentage removal of Al and adsorption capacity of adsorbent at time t (qt) were calculated as Eqs. (1) and (2): Percentage removal
Ce 100 % ¼ 1− C0
ð1Þ
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
8
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
379 where C0 and Ce (mg/L) are the initial and equilibrium solute concentrations, respectively. 380 C 0 −C e V ð2Þ qe ðmg=gÞ ¼ 381 M 382 where C0 and Ce (mg/L) are the initial and final concentration of Al at time t in the solutions, 383 respectively. M (g) is the amount of the adsorbent used and V (L) the volume of Al solution. 384 To obtain dataset for adsorption equilibrium isotherms, two initial concentrations of Al (2.15 and 385 10.3 mg/L) and several doses of adsorbents (0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L) were used at optimum pH (8) and 386 contact time (6 h). 387 388 389 Acknowledgements 390 391 Authors are grateful to the Environmental Health Engineering Department of Saveh University of 392 Medical Sciences, Saveh-Iran for their help to conduct this work. Also, thank for National Water & 393 Wastewater Engineering Company of Iran and Isfahan Water & Wastewater Company for all cooperation. 394 This article dedicated to my mother (Shawkat), my father (Mohammad khan) and my wife (Asrin). 395 396 397 398 Q4 Transparency document. Supplementary material 399 Transparency document associated with this article can be found in the online version at http://dx. 400 doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063. 401 402 403 References 404 405 [1] B. Kakavandi, R.R. Kalantary, M. Farzadkia, A.H. Mahvi, A. Esrafili, A. Azari, A.R. Yari, A.B. Javid, Enhanced chromium (VI) 406 removal using activated carbon modified by zero valent iron and silver bimetallic nanoparticles, J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 407 12 (2014) (Article number 115). 408 [2] M.A. Zazouli, A.H. Mahvi, S. Dobaradaran, M. Barafrashtehpour, Y. Mahdavi, D. Balarak, Adsorption of fluoride from aqueous solution by modified Azolla filiculoides, Fluoride 47 (2014) 349–358. 409 [3] A. Ebrahimi, M.M. Amin, Y. Hajizadeh, H. Pourzamani, M. Memarzadeh, A.H. Mahvi, M. Mahdavi, Filter backwash water 410 treatment by coagulation: a comparison study by polyaluminium ferric chloride and ferric chloride, Desalin. Water Treat. 411 66 (2017) 320–329. [4] M. Mahdavi, M.M. Amin, A.H. Mahvi, H. Pourzamani, A. Ebrahimi, Metals, heavy metals and microorganism removal from 412 spent filter backwash water by hybrid coagulation-UF processes, J. Water Reuse Desalin. (2017) (jwrd2017148). 413 [5] M. Mahdavi, M.M. Amin, Y. Hajizadeh, H. Farrokhzadeh, A. Ebrahimi, Removal of different NOM fractions from spent filter 414 backwash water by polyaluminium ferric chloride and ferric chloride, Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 42 (2017) 1497–1504. 415 [6] A. Ebrahimi, M.M. Amin, H. Pourzamani, Y. Hajizadeh, A.H. Mahvi, M. Mahdavi, M.H.R. Rad, Hybrid coagulation-UF processes for spent filter backwash water treatment: a comparison studies for PAFCl and FeCl3 as a pre-treatment, Environ. 416 Monit. Assess. 189 (2017) 387. 417 [7] M. Mahdavi, A. Ebrahimi, H. Azarpira, H.R. Tashauoei, A.H. Mahvi, Dataset on the spent filter backwash water treatment by 418 sedimentation, coagulation and ultra filtration, Data Brief 15 (2017) 916–921. [8] A. Ebrahimi, M. Mahdavi, M. Pirsaheb, F. Alimohammadi, A.H. Mahvi, Dataset on the cost estimation for spent filter 419 backwash water (SFBW) treatment, Data Brief 15 (2017) 1043–1047. 420 [9] P. Mondal, Ch Balomajumder, B. Mohanty, A laboratory study for the treatment of arsenic, iron, and manganese bearing 421 ground water using Fe3 þ impregnated activated carbon: effects of shaking time, pH and temperature, J. Hazard. Mater. 144 (2007) 420–426. 422 [10] Zh Li, Q. Yang, Yu Zhong, Xi Li, Li Zhou, Xi Li, G. Zeng, Granular activated carbon supported iron as a heterogeneous 423 persulfate catalyst for the pretreatment of mature landfill leachate, RSC Adv. 6 (2016) 987.
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
1 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 2 3 4 5 6 journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dib 7 8 9 Data Article 10 11 12 Q1 13 14 15 16 17 Mokhtar Mahdavi a,b, Afshin Ebrahimi c,d, 18 Amir Hossein Mahvi e,f, Ali Fatehizadeh c,d, Farham Karakani g, 19 Hossein Azarpira a,b,n 20 21 Q2 a Environmental Health Engineering, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran b 22 Q3 c Social Determinates of Health Research Center, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 23 Isfahan, Iran d 24 Environment Research Center, Research Institute for Primordial Prevention of Non-communicable Disease, 25 Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran e School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran 26 f Center for Solid Waste Research, Institute for Environmental Research, Tehran University of Medical Science, 27 Tehran, Iran 28 g Defense of Water & Wastewater Engineering Company, Tehran, Iran 29 30 31 a r t i c l e i n f o abstract 32 33 Article history: This dataset deals with the modification of granular activated 34 Received 9 December 2017 carbon (GAC) with FeCl3 under basic conditions (pH E 12) for Received in revised form 35 removal of aluminium (Al) from aqueous solution. The structural 18 January 2018 36 properties and operational parameters including Al ion conAccepted 22 January 2018 37 centration (2.15 and 10.3 mg/L), pH solution (2–10), adsorbent dosage (0.1–5 g/L), and contact time (0–10 h) was investigated for 38 Keywords: raw and modified GAC. This dataset provides information about Al 39 Aluminium removal removal by GAC and modified GAC at conditions including: 40 Adsorption pH ¼ 8, contact time ¼ 6 h, initial Al concentration ¼ 2.15 mg/L. 41 Iron-modified GAC The characterization data of the adsorbents was analysed by Water treatment 42 Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, scanning electron 43 microscopy (SEM) and Brunauer, Emmett and Teller (BET) test. The 44 data showed that Freundlich isotherm with and Pseudo second 45 order kinetic model were the best models for describing the Al 46 adsorption reactions. The acquired data indicated that the 47 48 n 49 Corresponding author at: Environmental Health Engineering, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M. Mahdavi), [email protected] (A. Ebrahimi), 50 [email protected] (A.H. Mahvi), [email protected] (F. Karakani), [email protected] (H. Azarpira). 51 52 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063 53 2352-3409/& 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license 54 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Data in Brief
Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
2
55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108
maximum adsorption capacity of GAC and modified GAC to uptake Al (C0 ¼ 10.3 mg/L) was 3 and 4.37 mg/g respectively. & 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Specifications Table Subject area More specific subject area Type of data How data was acquired
Data format Experimental factors Experimental features
Environmental Engineering Adsorption Table, image and figure – GAC was oxidized by nitric acid and concentrated sulphuric acid. Then it was modified by FeCl3. 6H2O under basic condition according to a designed procedure. – Experiments were conducted according to a designed procedure of analytical test and were investigated in order to perform an analysis of adsorption process. All adsorption tests were done in batch mode. – Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (Shimadzu 4300), scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Hitachi, SU 70) and Brunauer, Emmett and Teller (BET) tests were used to determine the characteristics of the adsorbent. – The aluminium concentration was measured by DR5000 Spectrophotometer (Method 8012) that was adapted from Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Raw and analysed Studying variables including pH, contact time, Al concentration, adsorbent dosage and characterisation of raw and modified GAC which were investigated for Al removal by adsorption. – Characterization data of raw and modified GAC obtained from FTIR, BET and SEM are given. – Optimization of Al adsorption onto raw and modified GAC adsorbent by modification. Saveh University of Medical Sciences.
Data source location Data accessibility The data presented in this article is not published anywhere else.
Value of the data
The data are beneficial for determination of the isotherm and kinetic for predicting and modelling the adsorption capacity and mechanism of Al removal by the iron-modified GAC.
These data show the efficacy of modified GAC in comparison to raw GAC on Al removal. The dataset will be useful for Al removal from aqueous solution.
1. Data Presented data in this article comprise the characterization of raw and modified GAC (in this paper modified GAC under basic condition nominated as BGAC) with analytical methods like FTIR, SEM, BET and iron content, as well as experimental data including studying different variables (pH, contact time, Al concentration and adsorbent dosage), isotherm and kinetic. One of the best available technologies for Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162
3
pollutants removal from aqueous solutions is adsorption which has a very good efficiency [1,2]. Table 1 shows the iron content, BET surface area and other related data about the raw and modified GAC. Figs. 1–3 show the data for SEM and FTIR for raw and modified GAC and Fig. 4 represents the experimental procedures. Kinetics and Isotherms equations presented in Tables 2 and 3 and Kinetics data for Al adsorbed onto raw and modified GAC was presented in Table 4. Figs. 5–8 show the removal of Al with raw and modified GAC by different parameters. Figs. 9 and 10 shows the adsorption isotherm for Al removal with raw and modified GAC (BGAC).
2. Experimental design, materials and methods In this work the removal of Al from water was carried out by raw GAC (supplied by the Merck Company) and modified GAC by FeCl3 under basic pH condition (BGAC). Some wastewater like spent filter backwash water from water treatment plant was discharged to surface or groundwater without any treatment and it was endangered soil, water body and environment [3–8]. So it was necessary for all water treatment plants that treat their wastewater before entering to environment.
2.1. Materials Analytical grade ferric chloride (FeCl3·6H2O), GAC, sulfuric acid, nitric acid and sodium hydroxide were purchased from Merck Company. Also, AlK(SO4)2·12H2O was used for aluminium stock solution. Table 1 Specification of surface area and pore volume of raw and modified GAC with BET test. Adsorbent
Total volume (cm3/g)
BET surface area (m2/g)
Total pore volume (cm3/g)
Average pore diameter (nm)
Fe contenta (mg/g)
Raw GAC Modified GAC (BGAC)
217/09 136/43
944/89 593/81
0/4621 0/3114
1/9564 2/0979
2.5 81.2
a
Ironcontent ¼
massofiron ñ100. massofGAC þ massofiron
Fig. 1. SEM image of raw GAC (A) and modified GAC (B).
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
4
163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
Fig. 2. FTIR spectra for raw GAC.
Fig. 3. FTIR spectra for modified GAC.
Fig. 4. Experimental procedure for GAC modification. GAC Modification was including 1: oxidation by both 65% nitric acid and concentrated sulfuric acid, 2: coating of oxidized GAC by FeCl3. 6H2O solution containing 2.5% of Fe3 þ (pH was adjusted to 12 and coating conducted at 80 °C for 24 h), 3: calcination at 300 °C under a N2 atmosphere for 3 h, 4: production of modified GAC (BGAC). 5: Batch approach.
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
Table 2 Kinetic equations and linear forms used in this work. Kinetic
Equation
Pseudo first order
dqt dt dqt dt
¼ k1 ðqe −qt Þ ¼ k2 ðq −q ÞÇ
dqt dt
¼ αexpð−βqt ÞÇ
Pseudo second order Elovich
Linear form
e
k1 logk1 qe −qt ¼ log qe − 2:303 t t 1 1 ¼ Þt þ ð qt 1 qe k2 qeÇ qe ¼ 1β lnðαβÞ þ 1β lnt
t
Table 3 Isotherms equations and linear forms used in this work. Type of isotherm
Equation
Freundlich
qe ¼ K f ñðC e Þ1=n
Langmuir
qe ¼
Linear form logqe ¼ logK f þ 1n logC e Ce 1 1 q ¼ Kl Q m þ Q m Ce
Q m ñK l C e 1 þ K l Ce
e
Table 4 Kinetics data for Al adsorbed on raw and modified GAC (BGAC). Al concentration was 19.5 mg/L and adsorbents dose was 2 g/L. Parameter
GAC
BGAC
Pseudo first order
qe k1 R2
9.8 0.009 0.83
10.66 0.01 0.8
Pseudo second order
qe k2 R2
10.07 0.0008 0.943
10.42 0.0012 0.955
Elovich
α β R2
0.566 0.262 0.916
0.53 0.39 0.932
qe GAC Removal GAC
8.00
qe BGAC Removal BGAC
100.0
6.00
75.0
4.00
50.0
2.00
25.0
0.00
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12
0.0
Removal efficiency (%)
Kind of Kinetic
qe (mg/g)
217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270
5
pH Fig. 5. Al removal efficiency and adsorption capacity of raw and modified GAC (BGAC) at different pH. Adsorbents dosage: 2 g/L, Al concentration: 10.3 mg/L, contact time: 24 h and mixing speed: 250 rpm.
2.2. Experiment protocol 2.2.1. Preparation of modified GAC 40 g of the oxidized GAC was mixed with 200 mL of FeCl3·6H2O solution containing. 2.5% of Fe3 þ and pH was adjusted to12 by the addition of 1 N NaOH solution. The impregnation of Fe was carried out at 80 °C for 24 h on shaker with 150 rpm rotation [9]. Impregnated GAC was Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
6
Removal efficiency (%)
100.00 80.00 60.00 GAC
40.00
BGAC
20.00 0.00 0
200
400
600
800
Time (min)
Removal efficiency (%)
Fig. 6. The removal efficiency of Al by raw and modified GAC (BGAC) under different contact time. adsorbents dosage: 2 g/L, Al concentration: 10.3 mg/L, contact time: 24 h and mixing speed: 250 rpm. 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 Al, 10.3 mg/L
20.00 Al, 2.15 mg/L
0.00 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
GAC dose (g/L) Fig. 7. Al removal efficiency by different dosage of raw GAC (0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L).
Removal efficiency (%)
271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324
100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00
Al, 10.3 mg/L
20.00
Al, 2.15 mg/L
0.00 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Modified GAC dose (g/L) Fig. 8. Al removal efficiency by different dosage of modified GAC (0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L).
calcined at 300 °C under a N2 atmosphere for 3 h. Then it was washed with distilled water for several times and dried at 110 °C during 24 h [10]. 2.2.2. Adsorption experiments Adsorption experiments were conducted by batch method in a 200 mL Erlenmeyer flask and stirred at 250 rpm in a shaker–incubator instrument. Experiments included determination of optimum pH, equilibrium time, dose of adsorbents, Al concentration, the kinetic studies and adsorption isotherms. For optimum pH selection, 50 mL of Al solution (Co ¼ 10.3 mg/L) introduced in 200 mL Erlenmeyer flasks. Then 0.1 g of the adsorbents was put in contact with 50 mL of Al solution (dose of adsorbent was 2 g/L). The pH was adjusted to 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 by using 1 M HCl or 1 M NaOH (pH was measured by pH-meter model CG 824). The samples were placed in mechanical shaker for 24 h at the room temperature (20 7 1 °C) and after that, the combination of Al solution and adsorbents was filtered through Whatman paper (0.45 µm) and the concentration of the residual Al was determined by DR-5000. Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378
7
Fig. 9. Freundlich isotherm of raw and modified GAC (BGAC). For Part A and B, Al concentration was 2.15 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L. For Part D and E Al concentration was 10.3 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L.
Fig. 10. Langmuir isotherm of raw and modified GAC (BGAC). For Part A and B Al concentration was 2.15 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L. For Part D and E Al concentration was 10.3 mg/L and adsorbents dose: 0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L.
Percentage removal of Al and adsorption capacity of adsorbent at time t (qt) were calculated as Eqs. (1) and (2): Percentage removal
Ce 100 % ¼ 1− C0
ð1Þ
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i
8
M. Mahdavi et al. / Data in Brief ∎ (∎∎∎∎) ∎∎∎–∎∎∎
379 where C0 and Ce (mg/L) are the initial and equilibrium solute concentrations, respectively. 380 C 0 −C e V ð2Þ qe ðmg=gÞ ¼ 381 M 382 where C0 and Ce (mg/L) are the initial and final concentration of Al at time t in the solutions, 383 respectively. M (g) is the amount of the adsorbent used and V (L) the volume of Al solution. 384 To obtain dataset for adsorption equilibrium isotherms, two initial concentrations of Al (2.15 and 385 10.3 mg/L) and several doses of adsorbents (0.1, 0.5, 2 and 5 g/L) were used at optimum pH (8) and 386 contact time (6 h). 387 388 389 Acknowledgements 390 391 Authors are grateful to the Environmental Health Engineering Department of Saveh University of 392 Medical Sciences, Saveh-Iran for their help to conduct this work. Also, thank for National Water & 393 Wastewater Engineering Company of Iran and Isfahan Water & Wastewater Company for all cooperation. 394 This article dedicated to my mother (Shawkat), my father (Mohammad khan) and my wife (Asrin). 395 396 397 398 Q4 Transparency document. Supplementary material 399 Transparency document associated with this article can be found in the online version at http://dx. 400 doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063. 401 402 403 References 404 405 [1] B. Kakavandi, R.R. Kalantary, M. Farzadkia, A.H. Mahvi, A. Esrafili, A. Azari, A.R. Yari, A.B. Javid, Enhanced chromium (VI) 406 removal using activated carbon modified by zero valent iron and silver bimetallic nanoparticles, J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 407 12 (2014) (Article number 115). 408 [2] M.A. Zazouli, A.H. Mahvi, S. Dobaradaran, M. Barafrashtehpour, Y. Mahdavi, D. Balarak, Adsorption of fluoride from aqueous solution by modified Azolla filiculoides, Fluoride 47 (2014) 349–358. 409 [3] A. Ebrahimi, M.M. Amin, Y. Hajizadeh, H. Pourzamani, M. Memarzadeh, A.H. Mahvi, M. Mahdavi, Filter backwash water 410 treatment by coagulation: a comparison study by polyaluminium ferric chloride and ferric chloride, Desalin. Water Treat. 411 66 (2017) 320–329. [4] M. Mahdavi, M.M. Amin, A.H. Mahvi, H. Pourzamani, A. Ebrahimi, Metals, heavy metals and microorganism removal from 412 spent filter backwash water by hybrid coagulation-UF processes, J. Water Reuse Desalin. (2017) (jwrd2017148). 413 [5] M. Mahdavi, M.M. Amin, Y. Hajizadeh, H. Farrokhzadeh, A. Ebrahimi, Removal of different NOM fractions from spent filter 414 backwash water by polyaluminium ferric chloride and ferric chloride, Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 42 (2017) 1497–1504. 415 [6] A. Ebrahimi, M.M. Amin, H. Pourzamani, Y. Hajizadeh, A.H. Mahvi, M. Mahdavi, M.H.R. Rad, Hybrid coagulation-UF processes for spent filter backwash water treatment: a comparison studies for PAFCl and FeCl3 as a pre-treatment, Environ. 416 Monit. Assess. 189 (2017) 387. 417 [7] M. Mahdavi, A. Ebrahimi, H. Azarpira, H.R. Tashauoei, A.H. Mahvi, Dataset on the spent filter backwash water treatment by 418 sedimentation, coagulation and ultra filtration, Data Brief 15 (2017) 916–921. [8] A. Ebrahimi, M. Mahdavi, M. Pirsaheb, F. Alimohammadi, A.H. Mahvi, Dataset on the cost estimation for spent filter 419 backwash water (SFBW) treatment, Data Brief 15 (2017) 1043–1047. 420 [9] P. Mondal, Ch Balomajumder, B. Mohanty, A laboratory study for the treatment of arsenic, iron, and manganese bearing 421 ground water using Fe3 þ impregnated activated carbon: effects of shaking time, pH and temperature, J. Hazard. Mater. 144 (2007) 420–426. 422 [10] Zh Li, Q. Yang, Yu Zhong, Xi Li, Li Zhou, Xi Li, G. Zeng, Granular activated carbon supported iron as a heterogeneous 423 persulfate catalyst for the pretreatment of mature landfill leachate, RSC Adv. 6 (2016) 987.
Please cite this article as: M. Mahdavi, et al., Experimental data for aluminum removal from aqueous solution by raw and iron-modified granular activated carbon, Data in Brief (2018), https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.063i