The Limits of Fine and Coarse Particle Flotation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The flotation behaviour of quartz particles was studied over the particle size range from 0.5 µm to 1000 µm and for advancing water contact angles between 0° and 83°. Flotation was performed in a column and in a Rushton turbine cell. Particle contact angle threshold values, below which the particles could not be floated, were identified for the particle size range 0.5–1000 µm, under different hydrodynamic conditions. The flotation response of the particles, either in a column or in a mechanically agitated cell with a similar bubble size, was comparable. Turbulence plays a role, as does bubble‐particle aggregate velocity and bubble size. The stability of the bubble‐particle aggregate controls the maximum floatable particle size of coarse particles. For fine particles, the flotation limit is dictated by the energy required to rupture the intervening liquid film between the particle and bubble. Flotation of very fine and large particles is facilitated with small bubbles and high contact angles. These results greatly extend our earlier observations and theoretical predictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".