4.4 Article

Electrosynthesis of titanium dioxide from sulfate leach liquors using solvent extraction/electrochemical deposition process

期刊

SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 57, 期 2, 页码 238-255

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/01496395.2021.1891435

关键词

Sulfate leach liquors; solvent extraction; electrochemical deposition; nanoparticles; D2EHPA; titanium dioxide; uranium tailings

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed a recycling process to recover titanium from uranium processing mine tailings, using solvent extraction and electrochemical deposition techniques to prepare pure TiO2 powders. The research found that solvent extraction and electrodeposition processes can effectively recover titanium, with the formation of TiO2 nanoparticles confirmed through various analytical techniques.
The primary goal of this study was the development of a recycling process to recover titanium from real sulfate leach liquors prepared from the tailings of uranium processing mine. Preparation and characterization of pure TiO2 powders using; a clean, cheap, and low-temperature combined solvent extraction/electrochemical deposition technique were reported. Solvent extraction using di(2-ethylhexyl) phosphoric acid in kerosene allowed the selective recovery of Ti (IV) from the leach liquor containing Fe, Mn, and Zr impurities. All of the Ti was extracted selectively using 20% D2EHPA/kerosene under organic/aqueous phase ratio of unity in presence of L-ascorbic acid. The equilibrium in 8.5 M sulfuric acid is established within 60 min. Subsequently, Ti was recovered from the loaded organic phase using mixtures of HCl and H2O2 solutions. The preparation of TiO2 powders by cathodic electrodeposition was optimized. A combination of X-ray diffraction and dynamic light scattering analysis had been used to confirm the formation of TiO2 nanoparticles. Finally, the solvent extraction and electrodeposition mechanisms were discussed, and the resultant products were characterized by several techniques.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据