Gravity Recovery of gold An overview of recent developments

A.R. Laplante
McGill University
Department of Mining, Metals and Materials Engineering
3610, University Street, Wong Building
Montral, Qubec, Canada H3A 2B2

W.P Staunton
AJ Parker Cooperative Research Centre for Hydrometallurgy
Mineral Science, Division of Science & Engineering
Murdoch University
Murdoch WA 6150
Australia

ABSTRACT

Gold recovery early in the flowsheet, typically from the primary grinding circuit,
has seen significant advances in the past three years. Some of the advances achieved
under the auspices of the AMIRA P420B Gold Processing Technology project are
reviewed. The areas covered are gravity-recoverable gold (GRG) characterization, GRG
behaviour in classification, gravity recovery simulation and the link between gravity
recovery and cyanidation.
 INTRODUCTION

The AMIRA P420B Gold Processing Technology Project, an industry funded

collaborative research project, which spanned the May 2001 May 2004 period, had four
major research areas, process optimization, thiosulfate development, cyanide and the
environment, and complex and refractory ores. The first of these, plant optimization,
explored the use of modeling to optimize gravity and CIL/CIP circuits. Ultimately, it is
intended to link the gravity and CIL models, as the effectiveness of the gravity circuit
determines the size distribution of the gold reporting to the feed of the leach circuit. Of
particular interest is the gravity recoverable fraction that is not recovered by gravity,
either in the absence of gravity recovery or due to limitations of the classification and
gravity circuit, and subsequently report to the leaching. It will be demonstrated that for
one site surveyed this fraction constitutes the slowest leaching component of the ore.

1. Ore
characterization

Modeling
of recovery
2. Grinding and 3. Recovery
classification unit
behavior performance

Figure 1 Concept Map of the Gravity Research

Figure 1 presents the concept map of the gravity research program. The three
poles of research are the characterization of gravity recoverable gold (GRG) in ores,
determination of its behavior in comminution and classification units, and, finally, in
recovery units. The three components are used to populate a phenomenological model of
GRG behavior in grinding circuits, which can be used for design and optimization of
recovery circuits, and also yields the size distribution of gold produced by grinding
circuits and typically directed to cyanidation or flotation circuits. The gravity program in
the P420B project consisted of four research axes: gold ores characterization, gravity
circuit audits, the development of a web-based gravity recovery simulator, and studies
linking gravity recovery and leaching kinetics. The most salient results are reported
here.
 GOLD ORE CHARACTERIZATION

The McGill protocol to characterize gravity recoverable gold (GRG) has been
presented in Laplante et al. (1). It consists of a progressive (3 stage) liberation and
recovery of gold-bearing particles using a laboratory centrifuge unit, which preserves the
natural size distribution of gold. The first stage is performed at a P80 of 55050 m, the
second at a P80 of 16020 m, and the third at a targeted P80 of 75 m. Feed masses are
high to achieve good sampling representativity and to minimize weight recovery, thus
achieving high selectivity. The research program also probed the nature of GRG,
developed a simpler GRG test that could be used more routinely, and explored the nature
of marginal GRG.

MLA studies of GRG

The concentrates of four GRG samples were subjected to analysis using the Julius
Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre (JKMRC) mineral liberation analyzer (MLA). The
objective was to assess to what extent gold in GRG is liberated and can be recovered by
gravity. A more detailed summary of this work has been presented in Guerney et al. (2).
Cumulative Electrum (73% Au) Conten

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
212-300
30%
150-212
20% 53-75
10% 20-25

0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
% Electrum (73% Au)

Figure 2 Liberation of Stage-1 Concentrate as a Function of Particle Size for the

Bulyanhulu Sample
 Figure 2 shows the degree of liberation in three size fractions of the stage-1
concentrate of a sample from the Bulyanhulu mine, Tanzania. Liberation increases
significantly with decreasing particle size, but is high enough for gravity recovery even
in the coarsest particle size. The implication is that the coarser GRG particles may
require regrinding to produce a high-grade concentrate. This was confirmed with the
introduction of a small mill in the gold room, which had significant positive impact on
gravity recovery. It has also been found that the coarser, less liberated GRG was more
effectively captured using Knelson Concentrators (Model CD30) at a relatively low
rotating velocity corresponding to a theoretical 55 Gs.

For three of the samples tested, liberation based on surface examination tended to
underestimate recovery, since fragments of gangue material were typically at the surface
of gold matrices. This is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3 Examples of Gangue Particles Embedded in Gold Particles

(Left: Bulyanhulu sample; right: Sunrise Dam sample)

The MLA studies confirmed that the GRG test was selective enough to produce a reliable
estimate of gold content that could be recovered at full scale into concentrates of very
high gold grade. Its use extends far beyond, as it yields significant statistical data about
associations of gold and other minerals.

Developing a Simpler GRG Test

The cost, labour and weight requirements (60-100 kg) of the regular GRG test
preclude its use at mill site or for routine testing. A simpler alternative was deemed
desirable; two alternative approaches were tested. A first option consisted of performing
only stages 1 and 3, starting with 20 kg of material. A second option consisted of going
directly to stage 3 with the same feed mass. These were dubbed the two-stage and the
one-stage tests, respectively. In both cases, the final screen used was 25 m rather than
the 20 m of the standard test.
 100
90 Standard 2-stage 1-stage
Cumul. GRG content (%)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
EX
EV

A2

A3
E1

Y1

Y2

E2

E3

E4

E5
D
H

SD

W
M
U

U
N

G
Q

Q
Figure 4 Comparison of the Standard GRG Test Results and the 2-Stage and 1-Stage
Simplified Tests

Figure 4 compares the results of both tests to those of the standard test.
Generally, the one-stage test slightly underestimates GRG content, whereas the two-stage
test overestimates it. The data of Figure 4 actually slightly exaggerate differences
between the standard and simplified tests, as other factors contributed to variations in the
results. For example, the samples used for the QUE3, QUE4 and QUE5 simple tests
were extracted differently and returned very different grades from the standard test
samples. Despite these differences, tests results were very similar. Where the gangue is
particularly abrasive (e.g. sample GHA), the quantity of GRG can be significantly
underestimated, particularly with the one-stage test. Figure 5 shows that the size
distribution of the lower GRG content of the simplified tests is then also finer. This
phase of the work is nearing completion, and it is already clear that the one-stage test will
be the preferred route over the two-stage test.

Table I lists the advantages and disadvantages of the one-stage test when
compared to the standard test. Different roles for the standard test and simplified test
emerge. For greenfield application or when a single sample is available, the standard test
is clearly desirable, because of the extra accuracy and information provided. For routine
or scoping test work, or when flotation bench scale data on the separate GRG and non-
GRG fractions is required, the simplified test combines the advantage of lower mass
requirements, lower costs and fresher surfaces.
 40
2-stage

% GRG Retained
1-stage
30 Standard

20

10

0
10 100 1000
Particle Size (m)

Figure 5 Size Distribution of the Standard and two Simple Tests for the GHA Sample

Table I Advantages and Disadvantages of the One-Stage Simplified GRG Test

Advantages
Smaller mass easier to obtain for greenfield
projects
The test requires less resources to complete
The test is more likely to be completed at
the mine site
The fresher surfaces make it easier to
combine the test with flotation testing
Disadvantages
The nugget effect is increased for low grade
or coarse gold ores
The GRG liberation profile is lost
Some information on the GRG size
distribution is lost both at the fine and the
coarse end
Abrasive ores return a low and finer GRG
value

Marginal GRG

GRG is recovered at a rotation velocity that correspond to a theoretical

acceleration ranging from 55 Gs at the surface of the lowest groove of the Knelson
Concentrator Model MD3 to 70 Gs at the surface of the top groove. Figure 6 shows the
cumulative recovery retained (a measure of marginal GRG content) for the GHA ore
sample. Recovery was achieved with a Falcon SB50 semi-continuous Concentrator,
operating at a theoretical 180 Gs. Clearly the marginal GRG is largely below 20 m.
 20

Cumulative GRG recovery (%)

18 Feed: tailings of simple test
16 Feed: tailing of standard test
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
10 100 1000
Particle Size (m)

Figure 6 Cumulative Recovery Retained of Marginal GRG for a composite of the

Tailings of the WA1, WA2 and WA3 Samples

Rowland (3) used a vapour-pressure scanning electron microscope (VP-SEM) to

examine the marginal GRG recovered from the non-GRG component of the GUY1
sample. Marginal GRG had been recovered using three semi-continuous centrifuge units
operated at respectively 60, 155 and 180 theoretical Gs. The minus 20 m and 20-25 m
fractions of the concentrates were first upgraded by digestion with HF. Gold-bearing
particles were then identified in the back-scattered mode and photographed. The use of
the VPSEM made it possible to examine the sample without preparing a polished section
with minimum surface charging. Particle size was characterized in two dimensions using
the major and minor axes of each particle, the first being the largest dimension of the
particle and the latter being the largest dimension perpendicular to the first. Figure 7
shows the cumulated retained size distributions thus obtained. Results show that the size
distribution of the marginal GRG gets progressively finer at the centrifuge force used
increases from 60 to 180 Gs. The dimension of the minor axis is largely below 10 m at
180 Gs, whereas it is above 10 m at 60 Gs. The major axis shows a wider range (this
was expected) that reflects the presence of flakes and elongated particles along that of
stubby and almost spherical particles. These results open the door to the recovery of
finer gold particles than what is normally practised in primary grinding circuits, using
much higher rotating velocities. Anecdotal evidence from plants where this is practiced,
typically in regrind circuits, suggests both possibilities and difficulties. Further work is
planned in this area.
 100
90 180Gs - majoraxis
180Gs - minoraxis
80
60Gs - Majoraxis
% Cum. Passing

70 60Gs - minoraxis
60 115Gs - majoraxis
50 115Gs - minoraxis

40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100
Particle Size (m)

Figure 7 VPSEM Characterization of Marginal GRG

(Sample: GUY1 non-GRG; Size distribution of minor and major axes shown at
centrifuge accelerations of 60, 115 and 180 Gs)

PLANT AUDITS

The only outcome of this work presented here will be the additional insight
gained into GRG classification. Early plant sampling in Canada and elsewhere had
characterized the classification of GRG, but the range of cut-size was too narrow to
establish a definite link between classification of GRG and that of its gangue. Figures 8a
and 8b show part of the extended database; all coarse classification curves were extracted
from the plant audits performed during the project. The general ordering of the curves is
similar for both GRG and gangue. Some uncertainty at very fine size is observed. A
general relationship was developed between the partition curve of GRG and that of the
ore and validated with data collected from other sites. Figure 9 shows that the
relationship is satisfactory down to 37 m, with some deviations below 37 m. Such
deviations may be linked to the difficulty of measuring GRG content below 37 m,
particularly for coarser products i.e. products with a significant gangue content between
300 and 850 m. In practice, the bulk of gravity recovery comes from GRG coarser than
37 m, because GRG finer than 37 m is difficult to recover by gravity and reports to
cyclone overflows much more readily than its coarser counterpart. Thus the uncertainty
below 37 m has relatively little impact on the overall accuracy of the model.
 100

1
80
2
3
% to U/F

60
4
5
40
6
7
20
8

0
10 100 1000
Particle Size, m

A.

100

1
80
2
3
% to U/F

60
4
5
40
6
7
20
8

0
10 100 1000
Particle Size, m

B.

Figures 8a and 8b Comparing Partition Curves of Ore (A) and GRG (B)
 100 100

80 80
% to U/F

% to U/F
60 60
Solids Solids
Fitted Solids
40 40 Au
Gold
GRG
20 Fitted GRG
20 Sol. Fit.
GRG
GRGcalc.
0 0
10 100 1000 10 100 1000
Particle Size, m Particle Size, m

Figure 9 Fitted and Measured GRG Partition Curves

(Left: Jundee; right: Marvel Loch, second survey)
(GRG Partition curves based on the fitted gangue partition curves)

WEB-BASED SIMULATOR

A simulator accessible via the web was developed for sponsors. The simulator,
based on Laplante et al. (4), uses GRG data, grinding circuit data (e.g. partition curves),
Knelson-based gravity recovery and user-specified gold room recovery to predict gravity
recovery as a function of the proportion of the circulating load treated, for Knelson
Concentrator-based gravity circuits. As more of the circulating load is treated, the
number of recovery units needed also increases, and the best combinations of CD20,
CD30, or XT48 units are suggested for each circuit size. The rationale behind the
offering a range of circuit options for the user to quickly realize that the link between the
recovery effort and the total amount of GRG recovered is highly non-linear. By
matching design and operating costs to the predicted amount of gold recovered, the user
can approach the optimum economic size of the gravity circuit (Laplante and Xiao, 5).
Figure 10 shows a typical input screen, and Figure 11 a typical output screen.
The active cells of Figure 11 yield another result pane with the GRG size distribution of
the cyclone underflow and overflow. The latter will eventually be linked with the
SIMCIL web-based simulator of the A.J. Parker Cooperative Research Centre for
Hydrometallurgy.
 Figure 10 Example of Input Data Pane for the Gravity Circuit Simulator

Figure 11 Partial Display of the Simulator Output

Further expansion of the simulator is planned, including the addition of other recovery
units, such as Falcon Concentrators, InLine Pressure Jigs, and flash or contact cells. The
use of the simulator as a diagnostic tool for troubleshooting gravity circuits will also be
explored.
 THE LINK BETWEEN GRAVITY RECOVERY AND CYANIDATION
KINETICS

This link has been addressed before by the authors (Laplante and Staunton, 6). At
one sponsors site, the gravity circuit was shut down for 24 hours to assess the effect of
gravity recovery on leach circuit performance. Sampling of the cyclone overflow (COF)
and cyclone underflow (CUF) was undertaken shortly before shutting gravity down and
at regular time intervals whilst the circuit was shut down. Figure 12 summarises how the
total and gravity-recoverable gold content of the COF and CUF with and without the
gravity circuit running (Bax and Staunton, 7). The following observations were made:
The total amount of gold in the COF is equal to the head grade in the absence of
gravity. This amount drops by one third when the gravity circuit is operating,
which is consistent with the observed gravity recovery.
Most of the additional gold reporting to the COF in the absence of gravity is
gravity recoverable. A small increase in non-GRG is also observed, which is
consistent with the observation that grinding circuits transform some of the GRG
into non-GRG.
The difference in the CUF gold content is entirely due to the GRG content.

1.44 40.6 2.29 55.8

0.58 0.86 1.27 1.02

Key

Au, g/t % GRG

GRG, g/t Non-GRG, g/t

18.9 86.0 28.9 90.3

16.2 2.7 26.1 2.8

With gravity Without gravity

Figure 12 Gold Content in the Cyclone Overflow and Underflow with and without
Operation of the Gravity Circuit

Figure 13 illustrates the cyanidation kinetics of COF samples taken with and without the
gravity circuit. The difference is striking: cyanidation kinetics is much slower when the
gravity circuit is not operating. The response curves were fitted to slow and fast first-
order kinetics response curves (first-order kinetics is not the actual order of the reaction,
but a manifestation of the size distribution of the gold particles), and the following
observations were made:

The fast kinetics proportion is similar for both products, and corresponds roughly
to two thirds of the non-GRG in the COF.

The slow-kinetics proportion is slightly lower than the GRG content for both
products.

The grade of the cyanidation residue is equal to 0.18 g/t for both samples.

100 100

90 90

80 80
Metal Extraction (%)
Metal Ex traction (%

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30
20
20
10 10
0
0
0 12 24 36 48
0 12 24 36 48
Elapsed Time (hours) Elapsed Time (hours)

Figure 13 Recovery as a Function of Cyanidation Time for the COF With Gravity
(Left) and Without Gravity (Right)

Whilst it is not claimed that the cyanidation kinetics observed at laboratory scale
represents exactly what is observed at plant scale, recent increases in gravity recovery at
the site (up to 50% relative) have been matched by significant increases in overall
recovery (Price, 8).

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative research efforts such as the AMIRA P420B project are able to
provide significant research outcomes at modest cost to individual sponsoring
companies. Many facets of a complex problem can be simultaneously addressed. The
first pole of the triangle shown in Figure 1 benefited strongly from laboratory research
work; whereas the site surveys generated much of the information needed to link the
partition curve of GRG to that of the ore. This is already proving invaluable for at least
two important applications, namely the design of gravity circuits for greenfield
applications, for which a simulated mass balance of the grinding circuit is usually
available, and for optimization of existing gravity circuits with minimum data, typically a
GRG size distribution and a sized mass balance of the grinding circuit (without gold
assays).

A second important trend emerged from the gravity research: most circuit audits
identified simple corrective actions that could increase gravity recovery. Such actions,
when implemented, resulted in significant increases in gravity recovery and measurable
increases in overall recovery. In one plant, a combination of improved gravity recovery
and the introduction of unit flotation in the primary grinding and regrind circuit achieved
increases in overall recovery in excess of 2%.

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank the industry sponsors of AMIRA Project P420B
Module 1 (AngloGold Ashanti, Barrick Gold, Gekko Systems, Gold Fields, Knelson
Concentrators, Phelps Dodge, Newmont Mining, Placer Dome and Sons of Gwalia) for
their support and permission to publish this paper. The authors gratefully acknowledge
the financial support of the Australian Government through its Cooperative Research
Centres Program.

The authors would also like to acknowledge the contribution of Alan Bax on the
analysis of the cyanidation kinetics data.

REFERENCES

1. A.R. Laplante, F. Woodcock and L. Huang, Laboratory Procedure to Characterize

Gravity-Recoverable Gold, Trans. Soc. For Min., Met. And Explor., Vol. 308
(2000), pp. 53-59

2. P.J. Guerney, A.R. Laplante and S. OLeary, Gravity-recoverable gold and the
Mineral Liberation Analyser, Proceedings 2003, 35th Ann. Meet. Of Can. Min.
Proc., Ottawa, Jan. 2003, pp. 401-416

3. L. Rowland, Characterization of Marginal GRG Using a VPSEM, Summer Work

Report, McGill University, Department of Mining, Metals and Materials, 2004.

4. A.R. Laplante, F. Woodcock and M. Noaparast, Predicting gravity separation gold

recovery, Minerals and Metallurgical Processing J., May 1995, pp. 74-79

5. A.R. Laplante and Z. Xiao, Optimizing gravity recovery: the role of the recovery
effort, Proc. 33rd Ann. Meet. of Min. Proc., Ottawa, Jan. 2001, pp. 371-388
6. A.R. Laplante and W.P. Staunton, The link between gravity recovery and
hydrometallurgy: the case of gold, 2003 Hydrometallurgical Symposium in honour
of Ian Ritcey, at 2003 Conf. of Metal., Vancouver, Aug. 2003

7. A. Bax and W.P. Staunton, The Economic Benefit of Gravity Gold Recovery for
Free Milling Ores, Report AMIRA Project P420B, Module 1, May 2004, 32
pp.

8. J. Price, Optimization of the Marvel Loch Processing Plant, presented at

Symposium Optimization of Gold Processing Plants, Launceston, AJ Parker
Cooperative Research Centre for Hydrometallurgy, December 4 2003