Mechanism and kinetics study of Mg <sup>2+</sup> removal from wet‐process phosphoric acid by Sinco‐430 resin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The reaction mechanism and kinetics of Sinco‐430 cation exchange resin removing Mg 2+ from wet‐process phosphoric acid (WPA) were studied. Fourier transform infrared and X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy analyses revealed that the main functional group of the resin that combined with Mg 2+ ions was –SO 3 H. To investigate the most suitable conditions for Mg 2+ removal, the operating parameters that could affect Mg 2+ removal were studied. The results demonstrated that under optimal conditions (T = 50°C, solid to liquid mass ratio = 0.3, and P 2 O 5 content = 20 wt.%) the reaction reached equilibrium in 8 min and Mg 2+ removal rate reached 59.09%. The kinetic model and activation energy of the reaction were second‐order and 19.11 kJ/mol according to kinetic analysis, respectively. The diffusion model of Mg 2+ removal was determined as pore diffusion according to the comparison of three different diffusion models. H 3 PO 4 was recovered using deionized water and Mg 2+ was removed from the loading resin with 20 wt.% H 2 SO 4 . In addition, after eight loading/regeneration cycles, the Mg 2+ removal ability of the Sinco‐430 resin remained the same. The Mg 2+ removal rate in a fixed‐bed reactor was 98.83%, higher than that obtained in a continuous stirred‐tank reactor.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".