The Physical Property Changes during Storage of 25-7-7 Analysis Grade of Suspension Fertilizer Processed by Luxen’s Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production of 25-7-7 analysis grade of suspension fertilizer processed by Luxen’s Method was investigated for some physical properties changes during various storage periods. The solid instead of liquid raw materials were used in the production. The experiment was designed in CRD consisting of six storage treatments; 0, 7, 15, 30, 90 and 180 days with 4 replicates. The total urea was provided for Urea 1 being fed in clear liquid mixed solution stage and Urea 2 being fed in suspended solution stage. The process was to add Urea 1, xanthan gum, KCl, MKP, and Urea 2, respectively, into the cylindrical glass bottle which was mounted to the adjustable speeds of mixer and presented water. The resulting 25-7-7 analysis grade of suspension fertilizers were stored undisturbed at normal room temperature for various storage periods and its physical properties were analyzed periodically. The analysis of variance was performed using R statistical program. The result showed that pH of the suspension fertilizer ranged between 5.5-5.6 and specific gravity ranged 1.249-1.274 during all storage periods and there was nosignificant difference. The fertilizer viscosity increased as the storage times increased. The stability and the pour-ability were significantly decreased as the storage times increased. However, after six months, both stability and pour-ability were found to be above acceptable level. The changes in salting-out were found to be no significant difference among various storage periods. The result showed that the suspension fertilizers which were produced by Luxen’s method could maintain their appropriate physical properties during six months of storage times.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".