The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of heavy metal removals from aqueous solutions by chemical precipitation and characteristics of precipitates
Abstract
Abstract Typical chemical precipitation methods using lime (Ca(OH)2), soda ash (Na2CO3) and sodium sulfide (Na2S) for removals of heavy metals (i.e. Zn (II), Cu (II) and Pb (II)) from aqueous solutions were compared by jar tests. A focus was especially given to particle size differences and chemical phase conversion of precipitates. A removal of 99.99% from aqueous solutions with three precipitants was achieved for copper and zinc at an initial concentration of 100 mg/L. And lead was efficiently removed (99.75%) by sodium sulfide. In contrast, the maximal lead removals with lime or soda ash precipitation were only 76.14% and 97.78%. The mean particle size of precipitates was in the range of 55 nm–45 μm, depending on properties of precipitants and heavy metal to precipitant ratios. The settling performance of the sludge derived from precipitation was dominated by particle size and Zeta-potential of precipitates. It was observed that ultra-fine copper sulfide particles resulted from the precipitation were around 55 nm and did not settle in 12 h due to electrostatic repulsion force between particles. The main compounds in the sludge obtained from precipitation were metal hydroxides and metal sulfides. However, spontaneous dehydration of metal hydroxide, oxidation of sulfide and atmospheric carbonation were identified by means of XRD and thermal analyses, which is invaluable to the disposal and utilization of the sludge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: A review
Fu, F., & Wang, Q. (2011) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.11.011 · Cited by 8,703
Physico–chemical treatment techniques for wastewater laden with heavy metals
Kurniawan, T. A., Chan, G. Y. S., Lo, W.-H., & Babel, S. (2006) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2006.01.015 · Cited by 2,072
Cited by
Heavy Metal Water Pollution: A Fresh Look about Hazards, Novel and Conventional Remediation Methods
Zamora-Ledezma, C., Negrete-Bolagay, D., Figueroa, F., Zamora-Ledezma, E., Ni, M., Alexis, F., & Guerrero, V. H. (2021) · Environmental Technology & Innovation · doi:10.1016/j.eti.2021.101504 · Cited by 1,246
Removal of heavy metals from aqueous solution using carbon-based adsorbents: A review
Duan, C., Ma, T., Wang, J., & Zhou, Y. (2020) · Journal of Water Process Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101339 · Cited by 533
Insight on water remediation application using magnetic nanomaterials and biosorbents
Abdel Maksoud, M. I. A., Elgarahy, A. M., Farrell, C., Al-Muhtaseb, A. H., Rooney, D. W., & Osman, A. I. (2020) · Coordination Chemistry Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2019.213096 · Cited by 374
Zhang, Y., Zhao, M., Cheng, Q., Wang, C., Li, H., Han, X., Fan, Z., Su, G., Pan, D., & Li, Z. (2021) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130927 · Cited by 325
Abidli, A., Huang, Y., Ben Rejeb, Z., Zaoui, A., & Park, C. B. (2022) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.133102 · Cited by 194
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, Q., Yao, Y., Li, X., Lu, J., Zhou, J., & Huang, Z.
- Venue
- Journal of Water Process Engineering
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 26
- Pages
- 289-300
- ISSN
- 2214-7144 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2899849003
- Cited by
- 755
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 17.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of heavy metal removals from aqueous solutions by chemical precipitation and characteristics of precipitates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jwpe.2018.11.003
- The paper
- Chen, Q., Yao, Y., Li, X., Lu, J., Zhou, J., & Huang, Z. (2018). Comparison of heavy metal removals from aqueous solutions by chemical precipitation and characteristics of precipitates. Journal of Water Process Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2018.11.003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
