Le traitement dans l'eau usées est différent de traitement ds3la solution car dans l'eau usées il y a interraction de plusieurs composés

What do you mean by "Mistakes and inconsistencies regarding the adsorption ...". Whether you mean errors and inconsistencies in selection of analytical methods, in the experimental study, in the interpretation of the results and in particular the mechanism, or maybe in the quantitative description and interpretation of model parameters.

Une solution usée contient generalement plus q'un poluant. De ce faite qu'elle est le poluant cible en premier lieu (qui va saturer les pore du charbon actif), puis le deuxième et 3eme...

Donc on va parler de pourcentage d'occupation des differentes poluants.

Rania Remmani, Most errors, inconsistencies and misunderstandings concern the quantitative description of kinetic and equilibrium data. Do you mean it.

There are alot of discrepancies in theory regarding the use of Adsorption techniques to remove hazardous materials using activated carbon. The dynamics of the adsorption in terms of funding the right isotherm model that best describe the process.

Also, it's generally accepted that activated carbon makes the best adsorbents. There probably be other method that might effective remove these hazardous waste. As such data are not enough to analyse the adsorption process this gives rise to inconsistency as the best conditions of reaction(Optimals).

Variations in experiemental methodology and erroneous results that follows. Are the experiemental methodology reproducible?

Rania Remmani, Bearing in mind "the top mistakes and inconsistencies regarding the adsorption", it is also worth remembering about various accompanying phenomena that may disturb the course of batch adsorption. Here, inter alia, aggregation of adsorbent particles or blocking of pores can be mentioned. As a consequence, the results of the experiment, mathematical description and conclusions may be distorted.

Common mistakes:

1) Inappropriate activated carbon,

2) Contamination of activated carbon,

3) Excessive loading of waste water containing organic pollutants,

4) Blocking of active surface area of the activated carbon by the organic pollutants,

5) Use of wrong dymention of activated carbon bed.

Common inconsistancies:

1) Use of wrong activated carbon,

2) Use of wrong depth of activated carbon bed,

3) Lack of optimization of process parameters (i. e., loading, retention time, back flushing etc.),

4) Formation of biofilm on active surface area of the activated carbon and improper cleaning by back flushing,

5) Slip of loosely bound activated carbon in supernatent phase of the waste water. If it happened, it will re-contaminate the waste water.

The common mistakes are:

-when choosing kinetic model

-equilibrium modeling

and the interference of uv Ray of solar

The mistakes and inconsistencies about adsorption depend directly on the operation mode, I mean either it is batch or continuous. Regarding batch experiments, this paper summarizes all inconsistenciesArticle Mistakes and inconsistencies regarding adsorption of contami...

Regarding continuous mode, I consider that the way in which the samples are taken is crucial, and causes a series of errors when interpreting the data. Besides, the choice of the appropriate kinetic model and its interpretation is a common mistake on this operation mode.

A common mistake may be the lack of preliminary tests and, consequently, too low or too high rpm, or incorrect sampling times. The selected method of chemical analysis must also be appropriately sensitive, as well as reliable. There are endless reasons for possible errors and inconsistencies. What will the author of the question say to all this?

Thank you Mirosław Grzesik and Diego M. Juela for your respend.

Rania,

Your question is too general.

Be more precise by giving more details of your adsorption tests: nature of activated carbon, organic pollutant, is it really, waste water ? Or a model of organic pollutant in distilled water?