Advertisement

Modeling of a photocatalytic batch reactor for pollutant removal using photocatalyst nanoparticles: an analytical solution development

  • N. Rahimpour
  • F. Rashidi
Original Paper
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

Photocatalytic batch reactors (PCBR) have been widely used for photodegradation of organic pollutants due to their simplicity, high efficiency, and flexibility. To improve the performance of these types of reactor, mathematical models can be employed along with the experimental data to study the impacts of involved factors such as UV light intensity, photocatalyst size, and initial concentration of the pollutant. In this study, a PCBR was modeled based on the mass conservation law for pollutant in both solution and catalyst phase. An analytical solution to the obtained partial differential equations is reported for the first time, which enables the calculation of photocatalytic performance versus time for low to moderate pollutant concentrations. The analytical solution was verified with the published experimental data for Pb2+ reduction by WO3/TiO2 nanoparticles. In addition, the analytical solution was used to investigate the effect of photocatalyst size, photocatalyst concentration, and UV intensity on the degradation performance.

Keywords

Photocatalytic batch reactor Mass transfer modeling Analytical solution 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank all who assisted in conducting this work.

References

  1. Almagrbi AM, Hatami T, Glišić SB, Orlović AM (2014) Determination of kinetic parameters for complex transesterification reaction by standard optimisation methods. Hem Ind 68(2):149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennemla M, Chabani M, Amrane A (2016) Photocatalytic degradation of oxytetracycline in aqueous solutions with TiO2 in suspension and prediction by artificial neural networks. Int J Chem Kinet 48:464–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buyukada M (2017) Data-driven nonlinear modeling studies on removal of Acid Yellow 59 using Si-doped multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Int J Environ Sci Technol 14:2215–2228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chang HT, Wu N-M, Zhu F (2000) A kinetic model for photocatalytic degradation of organic contaminants in a thin-film TiO2 catalyst. Water Res 34:407–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ebrahimi B, Hatami T, Vera JH (2013) Use of a hybrid optimization method to reduce vapor–liquid equilibrium data of maverick systems: the case of carbon dioxide with 2-methoxyethanol and 2-ethoxyethanol using cubic equations of state. Fluid Phase Equilibria 338:46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. EL-Mekkawi DM, Galal HR, Abd EL, Wahab RM, Mohamed WAA (2016) Photocatalytic activity evaluation of TiO2 nanoparticles based on COD analyses for water treatment applications: a standardization attempt. Int J Environ Sci Technol 13:1077–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Farlow SJ (1993) Partial differential equations for scientists and engineers. Courier Corporation, North ChelmsfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Finlayson B (1972) The method of weighted residuals and variational principles. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Gao Y, Li S, Li Y, Yao L, Zhang H (2017) Accelerated photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutant over metal-organic framework MIL-53 (Fe) under visible LED light mediated by persulfate. Appl Catal B 202:165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gupta VK, Atar N, Yola ML, Üstündağ Z, Uzun L (2014) A novel magnetic Fe@Au core–shell nanoparticles anchored graphene oxide recyclable nanocatalyst for the reduction of nitrophenol compounds. Water Res 48:210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gupta VK, Eren T, Atar N, Yola ML, Parlak C, Karimi-Maleh H (2015) CoFe2O4@TiO2 decorated reduced graphene oxide nanocomposite for photocatalytic degradation of chlorpyrifos. J Mol Liq 208:122–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hatami T, Rahimi M, Vera JH (2011) On the compatibility between vapor pressure data and the critical constants: use of the van der Waals family of cubic equations of state to study the cases of 2-methoxyethanol and 2-ethoxyethanol. Fluid Phase Equilibria 303(2):201–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hatami T, Glisic SB, Orlovic AM (2012) Modelling and optimization of supercritical CO2 extraction of St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) using genetic algorithm. J Supercrit Fluid 62:102–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hatami T, Moura LS, Khamforoush M, Meireles MAA (2014) Supercritical fluid extraction from Priprioca: extraction yield and mathematical modeling based on phase equilibria between solid and supercritical phases. J Supercrit Fluid 85:62–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hindmarsh AC (1987) ODEPACK, a systemized collection of ODE solvers in scientific computing. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. Khamforoush M, Bijan-Manesh MJ, Hatami T (2013) Application of the Haug model for process design of petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil bioremediation by composting process. Int J Env Sci Technol 10(3):533–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khamforoush M, Moosavi R, Hatami T (2014) Compressed natural gas behavior in a natural gas vehicle fuel tank during fast filling process: mathematical modeling, thermodynamic analysis, and optimization. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 20:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Khataee A, Kasiri M, Alidokht L (2011) Application of response surface methodology in the optimization of photocatalytic removal of environmental pollutants using nanocatalysts. Environ Technol 32:1669–1684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Krivec M, Pohar A, Likozar B, Dražić G (2015) Hydrodynamics, mass transfer, and photocatalytic phenol selective oxidation reaction kinetics in a fixed TiO2 microreactor. AIChE J 61:572–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leblebici ME, Rongé J, Martens JA, Stefanidis GD, Gerven TV (2015) Computational modelling of a photocatalytic UV-LED reactor with internal mass and photon transfer consideration. Chem Eng J 264:962–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lenzi G, Evangelista R, Duarte E, Colpini L, Fornari A, Neto RM, JorgeL SO (2016) Photocatalytic degradation of textile reactive dye using artificial neural network modeling approach. Desalin Water Treat 57:14132–14144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mirghani M, Al-Mubaiyedh U, Nasser M, Shawabkeh R (2015) Experimental study and modeling of photocatalytic reduction of Pb2+ by WO3/TiO2 nanoparticles. Sep Purif Technol 141:285–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Monfort O, Sfaelou S, Satrapinskyy L, Plecenik T, Roch T, Plesch G, Lianos P (2017) Comparative study between pristine and Nb-modified BiVO4 films employed for photoelectrocatalytic production of H2 by water splitting and for photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutants under simulated solar light. Catal Today 280:51–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rasoulifard M, Dorraji MS, Amani-Ghadim A, Keshavarz-Babaeinezhad N (2016) Visible-light photocatalytic activity of chitosan/polyaniline/CdS nanocomposite: kinetic studies and artificial neural network modeling. Appl Catal A 514:60–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Salehi K, Bahmani A, Shahmoradi B, Pordel MA, Kohzadi S, Gong Y, Guo H, Shivaraju HP, Rezaee R, Pawar RR, Lee SM (2017) Response surface methodology (RSM) optimization approach for degradation of Direct Blue 71 dye using CuO–ZnO nanocomposite. Int J Environ Sci Technol 14:2067–2076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shabanian SR, Lashgari S, Hatami T (2016) Application of intelligent methods for the prediction and optimization of thermal characteristics in a tube equipped with perforated twisted tape. Numer Heat Transf Part A Appl 70(1):30–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Singh S, Srivastava VC, Lo SL (2016) Surface modification or doping of WO3 for enhancing the photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutant containing wastewaters: a review. Mater Sci Forum 855:105–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Singla P, Pandey OP, Singh K (2016) Study of photocatalytic degradation of environmentally harmful phthalate esters using Ni-doped TiO2 nanoparticles. Int J Environ Sci Technol 13:849–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Suárez-Escobar A, Pataquiva-Mateus A, López-Vasquez A (2016) Electrocoagulation—photocatalytic process for the treatment of lithographic wastewater Optimization using response surface methodology (RSM) and kinetic study. Catal Today 266:120–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Viotti P, Luciano A, Mancini G, Torretta V (2014) A wastewater treatment using a biofilm airlift suspension reactor with biomass attached to supports: a numerical model. Int J Environ Sci Technol 11:571–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xiao Y, Song X, Liu Z, Li R, Zhao X, Huang Y (2017) Photocatalytic removal of cefazolin using Ag3PO4/BiOBr under visible light and optimization of parameters by response surface methodology. J Ind Eng Chem 45:248–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yola ML, Eren T, Atar N (2014a) A novel efficient photocatalyst based on TiO2 nanoparticles involved boron enrichment waste for photocatalytic degradation of atrazine. Chem Eng J 250:288–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yola ML, Eren T, Atar N, Wang S (2014b) Adsorptive and photocatalytic removal of reactive dyes by silver nanoparticle-colemanite ore waste. Chem Eng J 242:333–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zeghioud H, Khellaf N, Djelal H, Amrane A, Bouhelassa M (2016) Photocatalytic reactors dedicated to the degradation of hazardous organic pollutants: kinetics, mechanistic aspects, and design—a review. Chem Eng Commun 203:1415–1431CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemical Engineering DepartmentAmirkabir University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations