1996
DOI: 10.2172/624636
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of Copper in the In-Tank Precipitation Process Caustic Samples

Abstract: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, pro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1997
1997
1997
1997

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The set of repeated experiments (flasks [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] used different mechanisms to adjust the pH (as indicated in Table 1): nitric acid (HNO,) and carbon dioxide (C02). This provides an opportunity to test for an effect in the response due to this difference.…”
Section: A Comparison Of Ph Adjustments Using Hno Versus Comentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The set of repeated experiments (flasks [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] used different mechanisms to adjust the pH (as indicated in Table 1): nitric acid (HNO,) and carbon dioxide (C02). This provides an opportunity to test for an effect in the response due to this difference.…”
Section: A Comparison Of Ph Adjustments Using Hno Versus Comentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The set of repeated experiments (flasks [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] used different mechanisms to adjust the pH (as indicated in Table 1): nitric acid (HNO,) and carbon dioxide (C02). This provides an opportunity to test for an effect in the response due to this difference.…”
Section: Statistical Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%