MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945205068 · doi:10.5539/enrr.v9n2p102

Processing of Superfine and Ultrafine Phosphate of a Phosphomud (Part Two)

2019· article· en· W2945205068 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suzan S. Ibrahim, Khaled E. Yassin, Tawfik R. Boulos

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsConcentratorPhosphateGangueParticle sizeMineral processingUltrafine particleComposite numberPulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceFraction (chemistry)Particle (ecology)FalconProcess engineeringMaterials scienceChemistryMineralogyMetallurgyChemical engineeringComputer scienceNanotechnologyChromatographyGeologyComposite materialEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mineral industries in common generate a lot of rejects in the form of fines and slimes, which ultimately create environmental and social problems besides causing losses of mineral values. In view of the recent stringent policy imposed on the environment, there is an urgent need to attempt possible simple and cheap solutions to such problems. These slimes have long been considered in the industry to be unrecoverable. It has been standard practice over many years in the phosphate industry to separate and discard the fines and ultrafine particles. In this respect, the present study shed light on the recovery of super and ultrafine phosphate of a phosphomud produced after the processing of an East Mediterranean phosphate ore. Falcon Concentrator model SB40-VFD (semi-continuous with variable frequency drive) was used in this study to recover the -32 micron phosphate fines of D50=11 micron. The effect of the main variables of the semi-continuous Falcon concentrator model SB40-VFD, including the bowl rotation frequency Hz, the fluidizing water pressure psi, and feeding rate g/min on the separation efficiency were followed up. In addition, two feeding modes based on a particle size-by-size were tried in this study: The sample was fed as a global -32 micron sample or as two fractions, -32+11 micron, and -11 micron samples. Central Composite Rotatable Design (CCRD) was applied on the Falcon separation of the -11 micron fraction with D50 < 3 micron alone to model and optimize the separation process for the two responses: the recovered phosphate grade and recovery. Results showed that the phosphate fines containing 14.73% P2O5, 15.03% acid insoluble, and 19.07% loss in ignition was recovered with grade and P2O5 recovery reaching 28.29%, and 95.97% in case of separating the overall -32 micron sample as one feed. In case of the fractionated feeding samples, the total grade and recovery reached 29.21%, and 88.42%, respectively. The application of the CCRD results showed that the bowl rotation frequency showed to have the main irreversible effect on the product grade, where the fluidizing water pressure had the main reversible effect on the recovery. On the other hand, feeding rate showed some effect on the product grade with almost no effect on its P2O5 recovery%.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Natural Resources ResearchSame topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207