Cited by 16Extraction and Separation ProcessesChemical and Physical Properties in Aqueous SolutionsAnalytical chemistry methods development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Purification of nickel sulphate solutions containing iron, copper, cobalt, zinc and manganese

Senapati, Debasis, Chaudhury, G. Roy, Sarma, P. V. R. Bhaskara·1994·Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology

Abstract

Acidic nickel‐bearing solution containing iron, cobalt, manganese, zinc and copper was processed through a solvent extraction and precipitation technique to obtain a pure nickel sulphate solution. Iron was extracted using 0.2 M Cyanex‐272 (partially neutralised) as the extractant. Stripping of iron from the loaded organic has also been studied. After iron recovery through solvent extraction the raffinate still contained 0·25 g dm−3 of iron which was quantitatively separated by a lime precipitation technique. During this iron precipitation there was no loss of cobalt and nickel but copper, manganese and zinc were coprecipitated to some extent. From the iron‐free nickel sulphate solution the other impurities were extracted using the same extractant (Cyanex‐272) in a single stage. The metal ions from the loaded organic were stripped using a 0·5% (v/v) H 2 SO 4 solution in a single stage. The entire operation needs only seven stages: two stages for iron extraction, three stages for iron stripping from the loaded organic, and one stage each for extraction and stripping of other impurities. In the entire operation the loss of nickel was less than 0·5%.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jctb.280590404

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Townson B., Mining Magazine
  2. 1990, The Chemistry of Metals Recovery using LIX Reagents
  3. Ozberk E., 1986, Int. Symp. Iron Control Hydromet. Met. Soc, 1
  4. Arregui V., 1979, Lead‐Zinc–Tin '80, 97
  5. Dutrizac J. E., 1979, Lead‐Zinc–Tin '80, 532
  6. Blumberg R., 1967, Int. Min. Proc. Congr
  7. Ritcey G. M., 1972, Coextraction of U and Th, J. Metals, 24, 39
  8. Cyanex‐272 Extractant

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 16

Metadata

Authors
Senapati, D., Chaudhury, G. R., & Sarma, P. V. R. B.
Affiliations
Institute of Minerals and Materials Technology (IN)
Corresponding author
Chaudhury, G. Roy
Venue
Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1994-04
Volume
59
Issue
4
Pages
335-339
ISSN
  • 0142-0356 (ISSN-L)
  • 0268-2575
  • 1097-4660
OpenAlex
W2049811076
Cited by
16
References
17
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Metals and Alloys › Extraction and Separation Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Filtration and Separation › Chemical and Physical Properties in Aqueous Solutions
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
Keywords
solvent extraction, Cyanex 272, iron removal, lime precipitation, impurity separation, copper, cobalt, zinc, manganese, nickel recovery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review