ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2024
Study on low-rank coal flotation collector screening and performance based on molecular polarity index.
Article in Journal of molecular modeling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Experimental and Quantum Chemical Calculation Study on the Performance of Different Types of Ester Collectors.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextExtensive studies using a trial-and-error approach have been conducted on low-rank coal flotation collectors. However, screening efficient collectors remains a considerable challenge due to the lack of suitable screening principles. It has proven that polar compounds such as carboxylic acids and esters are effective collectors for low-rank coal flotation. In this work, the effects of carboxylic acid, alcohol, and methyl ester on the floatability of low-rank coal were compared, the flotation performance of the polar collector was evaluated with theoretical calculations, a suitable evaluation parameter was determined and a screening principle based on this parameter was determined. The results show that the enhancement effects of polar collectors on low-rank coal floatability follow the order of methyl decanoate > methyl laurate > methyl octanoate > sec-octanol > methyl oleate (or methyl oleate > sec-octanol) > n-octanoic acid. Compared with the molecular polarity index, the hydrophobicity indices log P and dipole moment cannot be used to accurately evaluate different types of collectors and the same type of collectors, respectively. At room temperature, liquid polar compounds with molecular polarity indices in the range of 6.0 ~ 8.0 kcal/mol effectively enhance the floatability of low-rank coal. The molecular polarity index of the collector is used for the first time to screen effective collectors of low-rank coal in this work. This parameter is anticipated to be highly important for the development and research of low-rank coal and other mineral collectors.
methodsTo obtain reasonable and accurate molecular structure, geometry optimization and frequency calculations of the studied collectors were conducted via the Gaussian 09 software package based on density functional theory at the B3LYP/6-311 + G (d, p) level. The integral equation formalism for the polarizable continuum model (IEF-PCM) was utilized with water as the solvent (dielectric constant = 78.36, T = 298 K) for all the calculations. Then, the atomic charge distributions (MPA and NPA) and electrostatic potential maps, the dipole moment and molecular polarity index, and the log P and water solubilities of studied collectors were shown or calculated by Gauss View 5.0, Mutiwfn program and website ( https://www.molsoft.com/mprop/mprop.cgi ), respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39256229What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.