Talk:Separation process

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Separation process article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Chemistry C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemical and Bio Engineering (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Chemical and Bio EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringChemical and Bio Engineering articles

comments

is scooping a method for separatingm chocoooooooo CALAMAAAR whats Centrifigation?? I might have misunderstood it, the examples of chemical properties used in the article are size, shape and mass. Aren't these properties physical rather than chemical? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.73.244.177 (talk) 19:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE BE POLITE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.14.91.122 (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to edit, but notice that this article is rather disorganised with rather random headings: Only the first examples under the heading chromatography are actually chromatographic processes, stripping is a distillation process (a stripping column being a distillation column with the feed coming in at the top), etc. Organizing the article is, however, a bit difficult. Are we here talking about analytical separation processes or preparative separation processes or both? Separation methods used industrially to produce stuff may look and be named slightly different than separation methods used in lab for analytical purposes. Another difficulty is that the line between different separation processes are a bit blurry. Take distillation (separating components of different volatility), evaporation (removing volatile components from non-volatile components), drying (removing volatile components from solids) and evaporative crystallisation (crystallisation by removing volatile component and thus creating an over-saturated solution) as an example. Crystallisation may happen, by design, in an evaporator, if there is a large difference in volatility, should the process be called distillation or evaporation, etc. Adsorption and chromatography is another case where the line is blurry and it is made worse by the method Size Exclusion Chromatography (or Gel Filtration Chromatography) where (unlike essentially all other chromatographic methods) there should ideally be NO interaction at all between the components in the fluid and the matrix in the packed bed. And, by the way: The initial sentence reads: "A separation process is a method that converts a mixture or solution of chemical substances" Do non-chemical substances exist and what are they? Would you call skimmed milk and cream chemical substances?Saittam (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am reviewing the article. I am familiar with some separation process literature that I can use for citations. I agree the headings may be better organized. The lede identifies that differences in physical properties may be exploited to effect separations. (e.g. gravity separation from differences in specific density, membrane separation from differences in permability, distillation from differences in boiling point). I believe I can reorganize the List of Separation Techniques into separate classes based on the physical property used by each process. For now, I am taking out a section that is highly specific to liquid centrifuges; I may add something like it back after better sources are found. Balta katei 22:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

This article presents a fine collection of separating processes. However, I was not very happy with its definition, hence the change: A separation process does not necessarily separate substances of different chemical composition. Sieving, sedimentation, centrifugation and elutriation are examples, when the aim is size separation.

Agreed. This ambiguity should be addressed. LeProf

Though I leave this to discussion I am not even certain, that one should include chemistry. Filtration or distillation in chemistry are not really processes, but rather laboratory techniques. I hasten to add, that being a laboratory technique does not decrease any of their importance. LouisBB (talk) 20:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please supply sources for your contentions; as a practicing chemist, I can tell you that chemists routinely refer to filtration and distillation processes. If you are beginning a natural product isolation from a complex mixture produced by an industrial fermentation where a first step to is to filter off biological solids from a batch from a 4M (yes, 4M) liter fermentor, the filtration step is a sub-process in the overall process of natural product isolation, but it is a filtration process none-the-less. Cite your sources that assign these terms as you describe. LeProf

Proposed New Title

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Separation process → Separation Science – Current title is a sub-topic of a larger field. Since there is not much content,it is better to have the more general title.Kzl.zawlin (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – if the contents expand to include topics other than the present topic, then we can consider changing the title. But don't capitalize "science" if you propose that later. Dicklyon (talk) 05:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Copyrighted material

Some parts of this article seems to have been copied and pasted; do a Google search. I'm not sure which edit added the copy-pasted content, so I added the tag. David1217 ^{What I've done} 04:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See new section below. LeProf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.92.36 (talk) 19:23, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Demister article

I would like to clarify that Demister is a brand name of Mist Eliminator. Today, Demister owned by Koch-Glitsch company. The following link will take you to Kock-Glitsch site: http://www.koch-glitsch.com/mistelimination/pages/Products.aspx

Long time in the past, Demister is a very famous mist eliminator upto the point that many people call Mist Eliminator as Demister. This is just like French people call their dictionary as Larousse. It's true that Demister set the industry standard but the name Demister should not be used in place of Mist Eliminator as it would miss leading people to the wrong direction as searching for Demister will send to only Kock-Glitsch products.

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.35.225.231 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's call a spade a spade. The article is plagiarized.

See plagiarism and WP:Plagiarism. The terms refer to appropriation of ideas/facts that have been reworded, as well as direct appropriation of text. Even if text cannot be traced verbatim to a non-free article, the fact that so much information appears without citation violates the WPs relating to verifiable sources, as well as for plagiarism. One citation for 900 words is a clear signal of either nonscientific prose (fiction), or original research, or plagiarism. The fact that there is direct correspondence between some phrasing in the article and some in the External Links is icing on the cake, but isn't necessary to make the clear case. (This from a university faculty member; see Ch. Lipson's "Doing Honest Work in College," University of Chicago Press, for more.) The whole article should be redacted, if the original contributor of the blocks of text cannot be identified through the History, and contacted through Talk and agrees to make rapid changes. And let's have no talk of forensic referencing; post hoc repairs to large blocks of sloppy unreferenced work are a waste of time and cannot result in attribution of all ideas to their original sources. The person originating this needs to fix it, or it should go. LeProf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.92.36 (talk) 19:11, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does someone wish to start from scratch and write an original article on the subject? If no one else will, I will.RSido (talk) 04:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems

@50.179.92.36 and Conifer: It appears all the plagiarized material has since been removed, so I'm removing the tag. Thanks to everyone who helped delete the copied material. If anyone sees anything that was missed, feel free to just remove it. -- Beland (talk) 01:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Separation science

... redirects here, but (as noted above) appears to be a broader topic/ field. Stub article anyone? Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:48, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Selection

I was very displeased when I read the liquid separator section. I think the creator of this article was very specific in a couple of liquid separators and also extremely vague on the details. Separating liquids from what? Liquid-Liquid? gas-liquid? solid-liquid?. If this is the case there is tons of techniques for every one of this cases such as centrifuges, extraction , distillations columns etc.. I also found that most of the things that I commented can be found right next to this section , so why to create a Liquid section at all if you going to cover most of them after it? The section should have a different title , or not exist at all.

Carvacha (talk) 05:34, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]