Effect of Pb and Cd on Cu adsorption by sand–bentonite liners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mobility of Cu alone and in the presence of Cd (compatible) and Pb (incompatible) was studied using laboratory columns packed with a 95 wt.% sand and 5 wt.% bentonite mixture. The liner material was subjected to one of four heavy metal solutions using a pressure head of 7 kPa: 2.0 cmol(+) Cu/L solution; 1.0 cmol(+) Cu and 1.0 cmol(+) Cd/L solution for a total of 2.0 cmol(+)/L solution; and 1.0 cmol(+) Cu and 1.0 cmol(+) Pb/L solution for a total of 2.0 cmol(+)/L solution. The effluents and the liner samples were analyzed for Cu, Pb, and Cd. The breakthrough curves indicated that Cd was the most mobile of the metal cations, whereas Pb was the least. Total metal adsorption was greatest for Cu with Pb, followed by that of Cu with Cd, and then that of Cu alone, showing that Cu is compatible with Cd but not Pb. The selective sequential extraction analysis indicated that most of the Cu was precipitated by the carbonate and hydroxide fractions.Key words: Cd, Pb, Cu, sand–bentonite liners, adsorption, leaching.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".