Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry

, Volume 322, Issue 2, pp 377–387 | Cite as

Preparation of potassium niobium sulfide and its selective adsorption properties for Sr2+ and Co2+

  • Chengqiang LiangEmail author
  • Mingchun Jia
  • Xiaowei Wang
  • Zhihui Du
  • Jinfeng Men
  • Hao Ding


A novel metal sulfide: potassium niobium sulfide (KNbS) was prepared by hydrothermal method. The morphology and composition of KNbS were characterized by scanning electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction. It was confirmed that the adsorption process of KNbS was carried out by exchange reaction of K+ with Co2+ and Sr2+. The effects of pH, contact time, coexisting ions and initial concentration of strontium and cobalt on the adsorption of Sr2+ and Co2+ by KNbS were studied by static adsorption experiments. Thus, the optimal adsorption conditions of KNbS for Co2+ and Sr2+ were determined. The results show that KNbS has a greater affinity for Sr2+ and Co2+ than other coexisting ions. In addition, the adsorption mechanism was analyzed by kinetic, Weber–Morris, Boyd and isothermal models. It was revealed that the adsorption of Co2+ and Sr2+ by KNbS was chemical adsorption of monolayer and the intraparticle diffusion was the main rate-control step.


Strontium Cobalt Adsorption Potassium niobium sulfide Kinetics Isotherm 



The work described in this paper was fully supported by a Grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51573208).


  1. 1.
    Li F, Zhang X, Zhao X (2017) Influence of ion exchange resin on the performance of continuous electrodeionization (cedi) treating low-level radioactive wastewater. J Nucl Sci Technol 54(12):1–6Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhang L, Wei JY, Zhao X, Li FZ, Feng J, Zhang M, Cheng XZ (2016) Competitive adsorption of strontium and cobalt onto tin antimonate. Chem Eng J 285:679–689Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kuo EY, Qin MJ, Thorogood GJ, Huai P, Ren CL, Lumpkin GR (2017) Transmutation of abo4 compounds incorporating technetium-99 and caesium-137. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 25(2):025011Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kwon S, Choi J, Cho S, Lee H, Oh W, Choi SJ (2017) A novel method for separating Cs+ from liquid radioactive waste using ionic liquids and a selective extractant. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 311(3):1605–1611Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gao YJ, Feng ML, Zhang B, Wu ZF, Song Y, Huang X (2018) An easily synthesized microporous framework material for the selective capture of radioactive Cs+ and Sr2+ ions. J Mater Chem A 6(9):S1–S23Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu L, Cao J, Wu Z, Jie Z, Yang Z (2017) The mechanism of radioactive strontium removal from simulated radioactive wastewater via a coprecipitation microfiltration process. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 314(8):1–9Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jang J, Mirana W, Divine SD, Nawaz M, Shahzad A, Woo SH (2018) Rice straw-based biochar beads for the removal of radioactive strontium from aqueous solution. Sci Total Environ 615:698–707PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hong HJ, Kim BG, Ryu J, Park IS, Chung KS, Sang ML (2018) Preparation of highly stable zeolite-alginate foam composite for strontium(90Sr) removal from seawater and evaluation of Sr adsorption performance. J Environ Manag 205:192–200Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang JM (2011) Study on competitive sorption capacity of Sr2+/Cs+ in zeolite and palygorskite. Adv Mater Res 347–353:2515–2518Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ning Z, Ishiguro M, Koopal LK, Sato T, Kashiwagi J (2018) Comparison of strontium retardation for kaolinite, illite, vermiculite and allophane. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 317(1):409–419Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kodama T, Harada Y, Ueda M, Shimizu Kenichi, Kenji Shuto A, Komarneni S (2001) Selective exchange and fixation of strontium ions with ultrafine Na-4-mica. Langmuir 17(17):4881–4886Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim G, Sim K, Kim S, Komarneni S, Cho Y (2017) Selective sorption of strontium using two different types of nanostructured manganese oxides. J Porous Mater 25(1):1–8Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Merceille A, Weinzaepfel E, Barré Y, Grandjean A (2012) The sorption behaviour of synthetic sodium nonatitanate and zeolite a for removing radioactive strontium from aqueous wastes. Sep Purif Technol 96(33):81–88Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Manos MJ, Ding N, Kanatzidis MG (2008) Layered metal sulfides: exceptionally selective agents for radioactive strontium removal. PNAS 105(10):3696–3699PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li XL, Liu BJ, Jian Y, Zhong WB, Mu WJ, He JH (2012) Ion-exchange characteristics of a layered metal sulfide for removal of Sr from aqueous solutions. Sep Sci Technol 47(6):896–902Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mertz JL, Fard ZH, Malliakas CD, Manos MJ, Kanatzidis AMG (2013) Selective removal of Cs+, Sr2+, and Ni2+ by K2xMgxSn3-xS6 (x = 0.5–1) (KMS-2) relevant to nuclearwaste remediation. Chem Mater 25(10):2116–2127Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sarma D, Malliakas CD, Subrahmanyam KS (2016) K2xSn4-xS8-x (x = 0.65–1): a new metal sulfide for rapid and selective removal of Cs+, Sr2+ and UO22+ ions. Chem Sci 7(2):1121PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang M, Ping G, Zhang Z, Jing L, Dong L, Zhang G (2018) Effective, rapid and selective adsorption of radioactive Sr2+ from aqueous solution by a novel metal sulfide adsorbent. Chem Eng J. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Manos MJ, Kanatzidis MG (2016) Metal sulfide ion exchangers: superior sorbents for the capture of toxic and nuclear waste-related metal ions. Chem Sci 7:4804–4824PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alby D, Charnay C, Héran Marc, Prelot B, Zajac J (2017) Recent developments in nanostructured inorganic materials for sorption of cesium and strontium: synthesis and shaping, sorption capacity, mechanisms, and selectivity—a review. J Hazard Mater 344:511PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Feng ML, Sarma D, Gao YJ, Qi XH, Li WA, Huang XY, Kanatzidis MG (2018) Efficient removal of [UO2]2+, Cs+ and Sr2+ ions by radiation-resistant gallium thioantimonates. J Am Chem Soc 1:2. Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pope CG (1997) X-ray diffraction and the bragg equation. J Chem Educ 74(1):129–131Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Awual MR, Imm R, Yaita T, Khaleque MA, Ferdows M (2014) pH dependent Cu(ii) and Pd(ii) ions detection and removal from aqueous media by an efficient mesoporous adsorbent. Chem Eng J 236(2):100–109Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ali RM, Hamad HA, Hussein MM, Malash GF (2016) Potential of using green adsorbent of heavy metal removal from aqueous solutions: adsorption kinetics, isotherm, thermodynamic, mechanism and economic analysis. Ecol Eng 91:317–332Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wen L, Nan X, Wang T, Lin X, Ni J (2013) Influence of pH, ionic strength and humic acid on competitive adsorption of Pb(ii), Cd(ii) and Cr(iii) onto titanate nanotubes. Chem Eng J 215(3):366–374Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nightingale ERJ (1958) Phenomenological theory of ion solvation. effective radii of hydrated ions. J Phys Chem 63(9):566–567Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Philippou K, Savva I, Pashalidis I (2018) Uranium(VI) binding by pine needles prior and after chemical modifcation. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 318:2205–2211Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Du ZH, Jia MC, Wang XW (2013) Cesium removal from solution using PAN-based potassium nickel hexacyanoferrate. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 298(1):167–177Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liatsou I, Christodoulou E, Pashalidis I (2018) Thorium adsorption by oxidized biochar fibres derived from Lufa cylindrica sponges. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 318:1065–1070Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Altinisik A, Gür E, Seki Y (2010) A natural sorbent, luffa cylindrica for the removal of a model basic dye. J Hazard Mater 179(1–3):658–664PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    El-Naggar IM, Zakaria ES, Ali IM, Khalil M, El-Shahat MF (2012) Kinetic modeling analysis for the removal of cesium ions from aqueous solutions using polyaniline titanotungstate. Arab J Chem 5(1):109–119Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hassanzadeh M, Ghaemy M (2018) Preparation of bio-based keratin-derived magnetic molecularly imprinted polymer nanoparticles for the facile and selective separation of bisphenol a from water. J Sep Sci 41(10):2296–2304PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rui MCV, Campinas M, Costa H, Rosa MJ (2014) How do the hsdm and boyd’s model compare for estimating intraparticle diffusion coefficients in adsorption processes. Adsorption 20(5–6):737–746Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Naveen N, Saravanan P, Baskar G, Renganathan S (2011) Equilibrium and kinetic modeling on the removal of Reactive Red 120 using positively charged Hydrilla verticillata. J Taiwan Inst Chem E 42:463–469Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yin CY, Aroua MK, Daud WMAW (2007) Impregnation of palm shell activated carbon with polyethyleneimine and its effects on Cd2+ adsorption. Colloid Surface A 307(1–3):128–136Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ajenifuja E, Ajao JA, Ajayi EOB (2017) Equilibrium adsorption isotherm studies of Cu(ii) and Co(ii) in high concentration aqueous solutions on Ag-TiO2-modified kaolinite ceramic adsorbents. Appl Water Sci 7(5):2279–2286Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sarada B, Prasad MK, Kumar KK, Murthy CVR (2014) Cadmium removal by macro algae caulerpa fastigiata:characterization, kinetic, isotherm and thermodynamic studies. J Environ Chem Eng 2(3):1533–1542Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Puspitasari T, Kadja GTM, Radiman CL, Darwis D, Mukti RR (2018) Two-step preparation of amidoxime-functionalized natural zeolites hybrids for the removal of Pb2+, ions in aqueous environment. Mater Chem Phys. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Nuclear Science and TechnologyNaval University of EngineeringWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations