Modelling of the Cr(VI) transport in typical soils of the North of Portugal

BRUNA FONSECA; ALINE SCHNEIDER TEIXEIRA; HUGO FIGUEIREDO; TERESA TAVARES

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV

Año: 2009 vol. 167 p. 756 - 762

0304-3894

Adsorption of hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] onto a loamy sand soil was studied using batch and steady flow tests with contaminant solutions at pH 2, 5 and 7. In all the cases the adsorption of Cr(VI) decreased with increasing pH. The hexavalent chromium speciation and its presence as different oxyanions, according to the solution pH,were the main variables affecting the adsorption process. The influence of the ratio soil/solution concentrationwas also studied in flowsystems at pH 2. Chromium retention increased with the increasing of its concentration in the influent solution. A two-site adsorption model was fitted to the breakthrough curves of hexavalent chromium solutions in order to estimate the Freundlich (kF) and Langmuir (Smax) adsorption parameters, using CXTFIT code. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified. kF) and Langmuir (Smax) adsorption parameters, using CXTFIT code. These values were compared to those determined by batch tests and it was concluded that batch tests tended to underestimate these parameters. Nevertheless, they followed the same trend as the parameters determined in opened system, even when the pH of the initial solution was modified.