Applying the Splitting Technique to determine floatability components of an ore sample

Javier Sierra-Villalobos, Gonzalo Montes-Atenas

Departamento de Ingeniera de Minas Facultad de Ciencias Fsicas y Matemticas Universidad de Chile

Introduction
Flotation kinetics
models based on computed from
(Garca-Zuiga, 1935; Sutherland, 1948, Loveday, 1966; Harris & Chakravarti, 1970; Finch & Dobby, 1990; Trahar, 1981; Fichera & Chudacek, 1992; King, 2001)

Floatability components
(De Bruyn & Modi, 1956; Harris & Cuadros-Paz, 1978; Chander & Polat, 1995) (Cutting et al, 1981; Sutherland, 1977)

Overall assay data

(Franzidis et al. , 1999)

based on

Splitting technique
(Nicol et al., 1983; Deighton, 2001; Varadi, 2007)

Release analysis
(Dell, 1953)

Slipitting up a sample using determining

determining the state of release

Re-floating tests
mass balance applying

Mineral liberation
(King & Schneider, 2000)

keeping constant

data reconciliation

Variables affecting flotation kinetics

(Dell, 1953; Runge, 1997 & 2007; Franzidis et al. , 1999)

compared to

Kinetics models
(Imaizumi & Inoue, 1963; Kelsall, 1961; kelly & Carlson, 1991)

MLA
(Gu, 2003)

to determine

How much, What and Where is recovered?

Laboratory Methodology
Con 1
P80=189 m

Con 2 Con 3 FFCon

P80=151 m

Con 1

Con 4 Con 5

Feed
P80=213 m

Con 2

Con 3
R

Con 4

FFTail

P80=207 m P80=209 m

P80=255 m

Con 1 Con 2

SFCon1

Con 3
R Con 4 Con 5 SFCon2
P80=272 m

Tail

SFTail
P80=271 m

BATCH FLOTATION KINETICS RESULTS

Kinetics and mineralogy analyses

80

Py Recovery (%)

60
40

0 g/t
40 g/t

80 g/t 20
0 0 20 40 60 80

160 g/t

+ MLA results

Cpy Recovery (%)

Chalcopyrite and pyrite the major

sulphide minerals in the ore

High collector dosage promoting the

flotation of all mineral particles having the appropriate liberation of chalcopyrite and pyrite (Dell , 1953).

Results 1. FSM Model

Fast-slow model (FSM) considering mass recovery as sulphides recovery

= 1 1 + 1
F-S Model ks (min-1) kf (min-1) ms (wt.%) mf (wt.%) Pearson coefficient, R2
Cumulative recovery (%)
8 6

First flotation 0.3516 2.1221 0.0248 0.0376 0.9999

Cumulative recovery (%)

Con1 0.0657 0.5000 0.9920

Con3 0.2660 3.0998 0.4843 0.2499 0.9999

Cumulative recovery (%)
80

80

60 40
20

60 40 20
0

4 2 0 0 3 Time (min) 6 9

0 0 3
Time (min)

3
Time (min)

First flotatiom

Con 1

Con 3

Results 2. Imaizumi & Inoues gr. Model

Imaizumi and Inoue k1 (min-1) k2 (min-1) k3 (min-1) M1 M2 M3
For Con 3,
0 2

First flotation 0.0014 0.0236 0.9495 0.0347

Con 1 0.0478 (*)

0.9710(*)

Con 3 0.0274 0.1452 0.4359 0.5427 0.2771 0.1802

Time (min)
4 6 8 10

(*) data obtained using linear regression. Mass of slow floating components ms=(1-M1)*(1-(1-M2))=0.1267

1.00
0.37

1-Rm,s (%)

y = -0.0274x + 0.5427

0.14 0.05 0.02 y = -0.1452x + 0.2771 y = -0.4359x + 0.1802

Mass of intermediate floating component mi=(1-M1)*(1-M2)*(1-(1-M3))=0.0596 Mass of fast floating component mf=(1-M1)*(1-M2)*(1-M3)=0.2710

Results 3.Characterisation of flotation products/concentrates

Cpy-Py recovery (%)
Cpy-Py recovery (%)

100 80 60 40 20 0
1 Con1 10

100 80 60 40
20 0

Size (m)

100 FFCon

1000

10

Size (m)
SFCon1

100

1000

Con3

SFCon2

Conclusions
The ST was successfully applied to the Ernest Henry ore. However, the number of repetitions and the difficulties to keep the surface properties make the technique sensitive to the operational procedure. The floatability components were best described using Imaizumi and Inoue s graphical method as it differentiates clearly the components. FSM represents the overall results accurately, however the floatability components depend on the number of constant previously established.

Conclusions
Size and liberation studies of the floatability components showed dissimilar trends when comparing the concentrates of the first flotation test and reflotation tests. These results are not in agreement with the study published by Dell in 1953.

The fast floating materials consisted of fully liberated intermediate and coarse particles. The slow floating materials consisted of coarse particles exhibiting low liberation and low densities as well as of highly liberated fine particles.

Acknowledgements
JKMRC for the financial support of this study JKMRC Students: Ana Mara Rojo and Erico Tabosa PhD. Marco Vera Universidad de Concepcin Universidad de Chile