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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zhang, H. Articles by Selim, H. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Zhang, H. Articles by Selim, H. M. Agricola Articles by Zhang, H. Articles by Selim, H. M. Related Collections Toxic Trace Metals Multicomponent Transport Models Solute Transport Models Nonequilibrium Transport

Modeling the Transport and Retention of Arsenic (V) in Soils

Sturgis Hall, Dep. of Agronomy and Environmental Management, Louisiana State Univ. Agric. Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803-2110

View larger version (9K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. A schematic diagram of the multireaction transport model (MRM). Here C is concentration in solution, Se, Sk, Si, and Sirr are the amounts sorbed on equilibrium, kinetic, and irreversible sites, respectively, where Ke, k1, k2, k3, and kirr are the respective rates of reactions.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Tritium breakthrough curves for soils. Solid curves depict results of curve-fitting with convection dispersion equation (CDE) for non-reactive solutes.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Arsenate adsorption isotherms for Olivier, Sharkey, and Windsor soils after 24 h of reaction time. Solid curves depict results of curve-fitting with Freundlich Eq. [8].

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Freundlich Parameters KF and b versus retention time.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Arsenate concentration in soil solution versus time during adsorption for Olivier, Sharkey, and Windsor soils. Symbols are for different initial As(V) concentrations (Co) of 20, 40, 80, 100 mg L–1. Solid curves are multireaction transport model (MRM) simulations.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Comparison of multireaction transport model (MRM) formulations M1-M8 for predicting As(V) breakthrough curves for Olivier soil (top) and Windsor soil (bottom). Model parameters were those from the batch kinetic experiment (Table 4).

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Comparison of multireaction transport model (MRM) formulations M1-M8 model for predicting As(V) breakthrough curves for Olivier soil column 101. Model parameters were obtained using nonlinear inverse modeling.

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Comparison of multireaction transport model (MRM) formulations M1-M8 for predicting As(V) breakthrough curves for Olivier soil column 102. Model parameters were obtained using nonlinear inverse modeling.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Comparison of multireaction transport model (MRM) formulations M1-M8 for predicting As(V) breakthrough curves for Windsor soil column 103. Model parameters were obtained using nonlinear inverse modeling.

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Comparison of multireaction transport model (MRM) formulations M1-M8 for predicting As(V) breakthrough curves for Windsor soil column 104. Model parameters were obtained using nonlinear inverse modeling.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Comparison of predictions and simulations using multireaction transport model (MRM) formulation M8 for predicting As(V) breakthrough curves for Sharkey soil column 105.