HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by López-Periago, J. E. Articles by Simal-Gándara, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by López-Periago, J. E. Articles by Simal-Gándara, J. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by López-Periago, J. E. Articles by Simal-Gándara, J. Related Collections Soil Kinetics Toxic Trace Metals Sorption/Exchange

Copper Retention Kinetics in Acid Soils

Faculty of Sciences, Univ. of Vigo, As Logoas Ourense, Ourense 32004, Spain

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Schematic depiction of the stirred-flow chamber.

View larger version (11K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Kinetics of Cu adsorption on soils at an added concentration of 0.787mM. Soils: (A) Amph1, (B) Gra1.

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Equilibrium adsorption isotherms. Symbols represent experimental data and the line the Langmuir model. Soils: (A) Amph1, (B) Amph2, (C) Gra1, and (D) Gra2.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Results of the retention tests in the stirred-flow chamber. Observed breakthrough curves (BTCs) (symbols) obtained: (a) with no soil; (b) displacement of Ca+2 and pH variation during Cu+2 retention in Amph1; and (c) and (d), respectively, Amph1 and Gra1 at a variable flow rate under the same conditions. Lines represent the BTCs calculated by using the first-order model.

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Breakthrough curves obtained in the stopped-flow tests. Jw = 0.56 mL min–1. The symbols represent observed data and lines the concentrations calculated from Eq. [4].

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. BTCs for the four studied soils after one retention cycle. Jw = 0.56 mL min–1. Cin = 0.0787 mM. Symbols represent experimental data and lines the first-order model.

View larger version (21K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Experimental BTCs (symbols) obtained following application of three successive pulses to soil Amph2 in the retention step. Jw = 0.56 mL min–1. Cin = 0.0787 mM. Lines represent the first-order model. The BTC for the fourth pulse has been omitted for clarity as it overlapped with that for the third.

View larger version (20K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Copper concentration retained over three (A, C, and D) and four (B) consecutive retention–release cycles in soils Amph1 (A), Amph2 (B), Gra1 (C) and Gra2 (D). Symbols represent data calculated from Eq. [2] and lines the first-order kinetic model. Jw = 0.56 mL min–1. Cin = 0.0787 mM.

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Breakthrough curves for Cu release from soil Amph2 in four successive cycles (1–4). Jw = 0.56 mL min–1. Cin = 0.

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Copper concentration retained over three (A, C, and D) and four (B) consecutive release cycles in soils Amph1 (A), Amph2 (B), Gra1 (C) and Gra2 (D). Symbols represent data calculated from Eq. [2] and lines the first-order kinetic model. Jw = 0.56 mL min–1. Cin = 0.0787 mM.