Table 1 List of representative experiments conducted under specified conditions, including the type of reaction (described by Eq. (3) or Eq. (4), magnetic field (0, 8 kOe, or 8 kOe+\(\nabla {\text{H}}\)), cell casing (I: plastic insulating cylinder as shown in Fig. 2e, or M: metallic conducting cylinder as shown in Fig. 2f)), and content of contaminants (experiments with less contamination are indicated by Bold values; see Section “On the dependence of non-uniform field and contaminant content”).

From: Investigating the Antiscale Magnetic Treatment Controversy: Insights from the Model Calcium Carbonate Scalant

  1. For each experiment, we referenced the figure (Fig.#) containing curves of one of the associated two in-situ measurements or the corresponding four ex-situ measurements on each of \({\text {Res}}_{8\mu \text {m}}^{\text {Eq.3/Eq.4}}\), \({\text {Res}}_{0.22\mu \text {m}}^{\text {Eq.3/Eq.4}}\), or \({\text {Res}}_{\text {evap}}^{\text {Eq.3/Eq.4}}\). The in-situ measurements include conductivity (\(\sigma ^{\mathrm{Eq.3/Eq.4}}_{\text{i}}\)) and pH (\(\text{pH}^{\mathrm{Eq.3/Eq.4}}_{\text{i}}\)). The ex-situ measurements include microstructure (SEM), magnetization (\({\text{M}}_{\text{i}}\)), DC susceptibility (\(\chi _{\text{i}}\)), refined X-ray diffractogram (XRD), and the percentages of the polymorphic phases of calcite (Cal), vaterite (Vat), aragonite (Arg), and halite (Hal). The integers (i = 1, 2, \(\ldots\)) and letters (a,b,..) denote the curve or panel in the corresponding figure. We note the presence of unidentified contaminating peaks (much weaker than the minority phases) emerging in only a few cases, shown in the footnotes. The random manifestation of these peaks, with no correlation to the controlled parameters, does not influence the conclusions drawn in this work.
  2. 1 Unidentified weak peaks at d = 3.07, 2.63, 2.25 Å.
  3. 2 Unidentified weak peaks at d = 3.12, 2.96, 2.91, 2.62, 2.55, 2.26 Å
Back to article page