Table II. Comparison of Experimentally Determined with Calculated Adsorption Parameters vapor
cc14 chloroform benzene pdioxane sec-butylamine 1,2-dichIoroethane chlorobenzene acrylonitrile
adsorption capacity, We ( W g ) exptl calcd % dev
0.741 0.728 0.404 0.476 0.331 0.616 0.545 0.404
0.693 0.409 0.483 0.337 0.583 0.527 0.375
+5.1 -1.2 -1.4 -1.8 $5.7 -3.4 4-7.7
adsorption rate constant, kV (rnin-') exptl caicd % dev
735 780 1029 1083 928 1048 799 1160
834 1031 971 1066 916 859 1251
-6.5 -0.2 +11.5 -12.9 +14.4 -7.0 -7.3
(cal/mol)-*. cm.i/gand a structural constant k of 1.5 X Thus, a t a relative pressure, PIP", of 0.0936 the adsorption space W , was 0.467 cm;'/g, and a t a PIP0 of 0.3448, W, was 0.478 cm:'/g. Values for the kinetic adsorption capacity W ewere calculated for the various vapors by using Equation 7, inserting into it the known liquid densities and the W , value for the relative pressure used in the test. Comparisons of experimental and calculated adsorption capacity values for the various vapors are shown in Table 11. The experimental values deviated from those calculated over B range of from -1.8 to +7.7%, with a mean deviation of 3.8%. Values for the adsorption rate constant k , were calculated for the various vapors by using Equation 8, inserting into it the square root of the known molecular weight for the vapor. Comparisons of experimental and calculated adsorption rate constant values are also shown in Table 11. The experimental values deviated from those calculated over a range of from
-12.9 to +14.4%, with a mean deviation of8.,5%. In summary, we have characterized a Rarnebey-Cheney activated carbon using carbon tetrachloride as the reference vapor. Using these data, and applying the theories detailed above, the two basic adsorption parameters of the carbon were obtained. From these basic parameters the expected adsorption behavior of the carbon for seven other vapors was predicted. The mean deviation of the experimental from the predicted values was 8.5%. Insertion of the predicted values into the Wheeler adsorption equation (Equation 1)provides an estimate of the length of time an adsorbent can be expected to operate effectively in removing contaminant vapors from an air stream. On the basis of these results, we believe that the methodology described can be extended to other activated carbons and other vapors.
Literature Cited ( 1 1 Hirster, i1952 1,
N. K., Vermeulen, T., Chcm. Eng. Progr., 48, 5Oij-16
( 2 ) Masamune, S.. Smith, J. M., AIChE J . , 10, 246-52 (1964) (:1) .Jonas. I,. A,. Svirbely, LV. J., J . Catai., 21,446-59 i1972i. (4) LVheeler, A,, Robell, A. J., J . C'atai., 13, 299-305 11969). (.-I) .Jonas, I,. A , , Rehrmann, J . A,. Carbon. 10, 657-63 11972). (6) Dubinin, M.M., Prog. Surf. Membr. Sci., 9, 1-70 (1975). ( 7 ) Reucroft, P. J . , Simpson. W.,J.,
