Phosphate removal from aqueous solution using ytterbium oxide supported mesoporous silicas (SBA-15, KIT-6 & MCM-41)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a series of ytterbium supported mesoporous silicas, SBA-15, KIT-6 and MCM-41 (containing different amounts of Yb) were studied for phosphate removal from aqueous solution. The prepared materials were characterized by X-ray diffraction, N2 adsorption/desorption (BET), HRTEM and XPS. All of the materials prepared were found to possess an ordered hexagonal mesoporous structure. The best performing materials under the conditions used (in terms of maximum adsorption capacity) for each of the silica supports were 0.3Yb SBA-15, 0.1Yb KIT-6, and 0.1Yb MCM-41 which had maximum adsorption capacities of 20.1 mg P/g, 20.9 mg P/g and 20.5 mg P/g respectively. The aforementioned best performing materials were found to have slightly higher maximum adsorption capacities at lower pH (pH 3 and 5, compared to pH 6) whilst the coexistence of chloride, sulphate and nitrate, were found to have no significant effect on phosphate adsorption. Bicarbonate ion was found to have a significant negative effect on adsorption capacity – this however was most likely due to this ion increasing the solution pH which in turn causes reduced adsorption. It was found that adsorbed phosphate could be readily desorbed from the materials studied using HNO 3 (5%) at room temperature. Reuse tests showed a slightly reduced adsorption capacity for the materials for which regeneration studies were conducted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".