On-line solids hold-up measurement in mineral slurries

by the standard addition method

A.M. Arizmendi-Morquecho, R. Peerez-Garibay
*
, A. Uribe-Salas, F. Nava-Alonso
CINVESTAV-IPN, Carretera Saltillo-Monterrey km. 13, Ramos Arizpe, Coahuila 25900, Mexico
Received 18 July 2001; accepted 11 October 2001
Abstract
This paper presents the application of the standard addition method to on-line measure the solids hold-up at the laboratory scale.
The method consists in measuring the electrical conductivity (mS/cm) of a two-phase dispersion using two conductivity cells: the rst
containing a known amount of dielectric material plus the solidliquid dispersion and the second containing the solidliquid dis-
persion only. A system of two equations are obtained by applying the Maxwells model to both cells, and the liquid conductivity and
the solids hold-up may be evaluated by solving them. It is demonstrated that the studied method is a reliable option to estimate the
solids hold-up on-line. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Process instrumentation; Mineral processing
1. Introduction
The measurement and control of solids hold-up is
essential in the mineral processing plants. In mineral
grinding, the slurry density, directly related to the solids
hold-up, is an important variable in the optimization
and control of the process. If this variable is not con-
trolled well, the energy consumption and the grinding
performance may be substantially aected.
Mineral otation is another process where the solids
hold-up control is important. It was demonstrated, for
example, that the performance of the column otation is
aected if the density of the pulp fed to the column is
relatively high. As well, the solids hold-up is an impor-
tant parameter to evaluate the eciency of a otation
circuit by material balance.
In spite of the above said and even though knowledge
of the solids hold-up is important to conduct the ma-
terial balance in any section or circuit of mineral pro-
cessing plants, only in few cases the control of this
variable is a common practice. Considering the advan-
tages of knowing this parameter, the aim of this paper is
to present an instrument to perform such a measure-
ment.
2. Background
The standard addition method (Peerez-Garibay and
Del Villar, 1999) uses a system of two equations to
evaluate the liquid conductivity and the dispersed phase
hold-up. Consider two identical conductivity cells, each
one having a given volume of dielectric material (solids)
and a given volume of continuous phase (water). If a
known volume of a dierent dielectric material (plastic
non conducting spheres) is added to one of the cells,
Maxwells model may be applied to each cell as shown in
Eqs. (1) and (2) (cf. Maxwell, 1892). Eq. (1) corresponds
to the cell containing only liquid and particles whereas
Eq. (2) corresponds to the cell containing the plastic
spheres as well. If the solid content in both cells is similar
and since the volume of standard added is known and the
cells conductivities (k
ls
and k
ls std
) are measured, Eqs. (1)
and (2) may be solved simultaneously, to calculate the
conductivity of the continuous phase (k
l
).
e
s

1 k
ls
=k
l
1 0:5k
ls
=k
l
; 1
e
std
1 e
std
e
s

1 k
ls std
=k
l
1 0:5k
ls std
=k
l
; 2
where k
ls std
is the conductivity of the liquidsolid-stan-
dard; e
s
is the volumetric fraction of the dispersed phase;
k
ls
is the conductivity of the dispersion and k
l
is the
conductivity of continuous phase.
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +52-8438-9600; fax: +52-8438-9610.
E-mail address: rperez@saltillo.cinvestav.mx (R. Peerez-Garibay).
Minerals Engineering 15 (2002) 6164
www.elsevier.com/locate/mine
0892-6875/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0892- 6875( 01) 00200- X
3. Apparatus and experimental technique
The main characteristics of the studied sensor are
presented and illustrated in Fig. 1. The sensor, of cy-
lindrical geometry was constructed from acrylic tube.
The electrodes comprising the conductivity cells were
made of nicromel wire and have a grid form. Non in-
trusive electrodes consisting of stainless steel rings where
also tested (see Fig 1(d)). The conductance measure-
ments (K
ls std
and K
ls
) were conducted with cells con-
sisting of two facing electrodes (cell I and cell II in
Fig. 1). Various shapes and volumes of standard were
tested [(a) concentric tubes e
std
30:8%; (b) static
mixers e
std
11:7%; (c) a group of small spheres
e
std
51:5% and (d) a single prism e
std
25:5%].
Concerning the volume of the standard used to solve the
system of Eqs. (1) and (2), it was experimentally ob-
served that despite the geometric standard volume being
constant, the volume of standard calculated by direct
application of Maxwells model is slightly dierent and
varies linearly with the electrical conductance of the
liquid e
std
f K
l
. In this work the linear equation
e
std
mK
l
b describing such a relationship was used
to interpret the experimental results in order to improve
the measurements.
The tests were conduced in the experimental appa-
ratus illustrated in Fig. 2. The apparatus consists of a
tank (4 l) in which the pulp is mixed and circulated
through the sensor using a peristaltic pump (Masterex
model 7585-30). The conductivity measurements were
performed with two conductivity meters (WTW, model
AK 340/B), whose analog output, proportional to the
measured conductivity, was recorded making use of data
acquisition system (DAS16 Omega). During the stea-
dy-state experiments, the system was operated in closed
circuit (i.e., the slurry ow trough the sensor and was
returned to the mixing tank).
3.1. Steady state tests
The tests were performed using silica sand of a nar-
row distribution of particles sizes. The amplitude of the
studied particles size distribution varied between 3 and
356 lm, while the solid hold-up was varied between 2%
Fig. 1. Dierent types and shapes of standard of the conductivity sensor studied in this work.
Fig. 2. Experimental apparatus showing the instruments and equipment used.
62 A.M. Arizmendi-Morquecho et al. / Minerals Engineering 15 (2002) 6164
and 30% (v/v). The experiments were conducted with
dierent liquid conductivities (in the range of 0.06 and
3.7 mS/cm), and with a volumetric slurry ow rate of
around 11 l/min. The conductivity of the slurry was
changed adding sodium chloride. The slurry was circu-
lated through the sensor making use of a peristaltic
pump. Once the slurry ow was stable the conductance
measured (K
ls
and K
ls std
) were recorded for a period of
at least 4 min. Concluding the test, the conductance data
was registered in the PC and the values were handled in
a spreadsheet to solve Eqs. (1) and (2).
In order to validate the values of solids hold-up es-
timated with the standard addition method by com-
paring them with the values calculated by direct
application of Maxwells model, the conductivity of the
liquid was directly measured by shutting down the mix-
ing, allowing the solids to settle and pumping the
supernatant through the sensor. This methodology was
applied to all the particles classes.
3.2. Transitory state tests
To verify the precision of the sensor in a dynamic
process, the sensor was tested in conditions where the
solids hold-up change in an arbitrary fashion. The size
distribution of the silica sand used varied between 74
and 427 lm. During the test, the hold-up of solids was
modied, in a random form, between 0% and 15.3% (v/
v). After each experiment the conductivity of the liquid
was increased by adding NaCl, to conduct the next test
with a dierent liquid conductivity.
4. Results
Fig. 3 presents the results obtained with the sensors.
These gures compare the results calculated by Max-
wells model applied directly (knowing the liquid con-
ductivity), versus those estimated by solving the
equations of the standard addition method. As observed
in the gures, except in the case of the sensor (a), the
results obtained with both methods are in good agree-
ment regardless of the experimental conditions used,
thus indicating that the method may be used with con-
dence. Two reasons to explain the dierences between
the results computed by both methods are: First, direct
measurement of experimental liquid conductivity may
be inaccurate due to solids settling on the electrodes and
Fig. 3. Solids hold-up calculated by the standard addition method against that obtained with the conductance measurement conducted with cell II
and Maxwells model. The standard addition consists of: (a) concentric tubes, (b) static mixers, (c) 5 mm spheres and (d) prism.
A.M. Arizmendi-Morquecho et al. / Minerals Engineering 15 (2002) 6164 63
covering a fraction of their surface; this aect the results
calculated by direct application of Maxwells model.
Second, standard addition method establishes that the
solid hold-up in cell containing the standard (cell II),
must be an exact fraction of the solids presented in cell I.
That is 1 e
std
e
s
. However, this is not always true
due to the segregation of the solids particles due to
mixing imperfections.
Considering only the correlation between the results
obtained with both methods, either Fig. 3(b) or Fig. 3(c)
sensor may be selected. Nevertheless, considering the
obstruction grade generated by the standard, the sensor
containing the coaxial cylinder may be the best selection
for on-line applications.
Fig. 4 presents the dynamic trend of the solids hold-
up obtained with sensor of (c) Fig. 1 (i.e., the one
whose standard consists of glass spheres). It is im-
portant to mention that the solids hold-up was varied
randomly by adding or removing the solids. As ob-
served in the gure, the standard addition method
reproduces fairly well the dynamics of the solids hold-
up variation, for wide particle size distribution (be-
tween 74 and 427 lm). It is important to remember
that in this case, the studied sensor has two-conduc-
tivity cells, each one with a pair of electrodes and a
conductivity meter. The use of two independent con-
ductivity meters permitted to improved sensor perfor-
mance as well as the continuous measurement of the
electrical conductance. As previously stated, the results
obtained with the standard addition method show
some scattering, which is attributed to mixing pertur-
bations.
The above discussion leads to the question of how to
install a sensor of this kind in process piping. The sensor
may be mounted on a bypass to allow the slurry to ow
without obstruction. Moreover, in the event of plugging,
the sensor may be easily dismantled for cleaning.
5. Conclusion
It was demonstrated, in steady and dynamic systems,
that the standard addition method provides a good es-
timation of the solids hold-up of mineral slurries owing
through pipes. The results showed that the proposed
sensor may be a device reliable enough for control
purposes.
References
Maxwell, J.C., 1892., third ed. A Treatise of Electricity and Magne-
tism, Part II, vol. 1. Oxford University Press, London, pp. 435449
(Chapter IX).
Peerez-Garibay, R., Del Villar, R., 1999. On-line gas hold-up measure-
ment in otation column. Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly 38 (2),
141148.
Fig. 4. Dynamic response of the standard addition method and sensor (c). The estimations of Maxwells model are also shown for comparison
purposes.
64 A.M. Arizmendi-Morquecho et al. / Minerals Engineering 15 (2002) 6164