2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jece.2017.07.069
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Advanced oxidation of orange G using phosphonic acid stabilised zerovalent iron

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The diameter of all four types of nanoparticles is ∼100 nm according to electron microscopy image analysis, and this result agrees well with the data obtained from DLS. As shown in our previous publications, XRD patterns of CMC, ATMP, and DTPMP functionalized nanoparticles indicate the presence of the same crystal phases irrespective of the ligand. , In addition, the functionalized nanoparticles show broader XRD peaks compared to unfunctionalized samples. This result indicates the presence of small crystallites within the particles and/or amorphous particles. , The most intense XRD peak was identified at 2θ = 45° for both CMC and phosphate ligands and corresponds to Fe (110) of metallic iron. , Other low-intensity peaks correspond to the oxides of iron, Fe 3 O 4 (magnetite), and γ-Fe 2 O 3 (maghemite) of the native oxide shell. , Phosphonate stabilization resulted in unique phosphate phases thought to be at the surface of the ZVI nanoparticles; this result suggests that phosphonate ligands are directly involved in ZVI passivation.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The diameter of all four types of nanoparticles is ∼100 nm according to electron microscopy image analysis, and this result agrees well with the data obtained from DLS. As shown in our previous publications, XRD patterns of CMC, ATMP, and DTPMP functionalized nanoparticles indicate the presence of the same crystal phases irrespective of the ligand. , In addition, the functionalized nanoparticles show broader XRD peaks compared to unfunctionalized samples. This result indicates the presence of small crystallites within the particles and/or amorphous particles. , The most intense XRD peak was identified at 2θ = 45° for both CMC and phosphate ligands and corresponds to Fe (110) of metallic iron. , Other low-intensity peaks correspond to the oxides of iron, Fe 3 O 4 (magnetite), and γ-Fe 2 O 3 (maghemite) of the native oxide shell. , Phosphonate stabilization resulted in unique phosphate phases thought to be at the surface of the ZVI nanoparticles; this result suggests that phosphonate ligands are directly involved in ZVI passivation.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 63%
“…Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) with EDX and TEM was used to characterize the size, shape, and elemental composition of the different ZVI nanoparticles. Extensive characterization information about CMC and ATMP functionalized nanoparticles is given in our previous publications. , As seen with FESEM images in Figure , as-synthesized nanoparticles functionalized with all four ligands are spherical in shape. The diameter of all four types of nanoparticles is ∼100 nm according to electron microscopy image analysis, and this result agrees well with the data obtained from DLS.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analyses on collected degradation samples were conducted using a Shimadzu Prominence-i LC 2030C liquid chromatograph with UV detector at 280 nm. Details of the chromatographic procedure may be found in a previous publication . The pH of solutions was measured using a Hanna H1 2211 pH/ORP meter.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Details of the chromatographic procedure may be found in a previous publication. 22 The pH of solutions was measured using a Hanna H1 2211 pH/ORP meter. Where applicable, average values of duplicate experiments are reported with error bars indicating standard errors of measurements.…”
Section: •−mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both reactive degradation and adsorption are expected to occur during Orange G removal and are likely interconnected in terms of the overall removal mechanism (i.e., Orange G degradation largely occurs at the surface of the nanoparticles during or after Orange G adsorption). Additional factors that could contribute to variation in Orange G removal efficiency include differences in nanoparticle size [59] and the impact of the stabilizer ligands [60], which are parameters that were not specifically studied in this work. While these parameters may also impact Orange G removal, it is clear that the molar ratio of Ni to Fe in the nanoparticles is an important parameter to control and understand when evaluating the removal efficiency of a target contaminant such as Orange G.…”
Section: Orange G Removal From Synthetic Watermentioning
confidence: 99%