Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Minerals Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mineng
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Flotation performance depends on bubble–particle attachment which is controlled by the particle surface
Available online 20 July 2011 properties which include the particle composition and the surface liberation of valuable minerals. This
paper discusses the contribution of liberation of valuable minerals to bubble–particle attachment time
Keywords: measurements, under constant chemical conditions. The bubble–particle attachment time measurements
Bubble–particle attachment time were performed using a sized fraction from concentrates obtained at different times and tails by flotation
Mineral liberation analysis of a copper–gold sulphide ore (Northparkes Mine, Australia) in a mechanically agitated batch flotation
Froth flotation
cell. All products and tails were analyzed using quantitative mineral liberation analysis. The results
showed that there was a relationship between the time of the concentrate collected, the Cu grade of
the sample and the bubble–particle attachment time, and that the measurements were most sensitive
to the amount of unliberated material. The fast floating material was higher grade, with a lower attach-
ment time indicating that the measured bubble–particle attachment time could be used to characterize
flotation performance of an ore.
Ó 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1. Introduction alimond tube (Ye and Miller, 1988; Ye et al., 1989; Yoon and Yor-
dan, 1991; Su et al., 2006). An alternative measure for predicting
Flotation is a physicochemical process that utilises the surface the susceptibility of a mineral to float is bubble–particle attach-
properties between valuable and non-valuable materials to achieve ment time which represents the time required for attachment of
the beneficiation. In this process, particles collide with bubbles, particles to an air bubble when they are in close proximity (Ye
and if the particle is sufficiently hydrophobic, there is the thinning and Miller, 1988; Ye et al., 1989; Yoon and Yordan, 1991; Albijanic
and the rupture of wetting films between a bubble and a particle, et al., 2010).
and the expansion and relaxation of the gas–liquid solid contact Glembockij (1953) developed a device to determine
lines, resulting in bubble–particle attachment. The bubble–particle bubble–particle attachment time. This device has been widely em-
aggregates, transported to the froth zone, are collected in the con- ployed by researchers (Ye and Miller, 1988; Ye et al., 1989; Yoon
centrate launder. Therefore, bubble–particle attachment is a criti- and Yordan, 1991; Gu et al., 2003) who have obtained a strong cor-
cal step for successful flotation. relation between bubble–particle attachment time and flotation
Bubble–particle attachment is influenced by numerous factors performance, e.g., the highest flotation occurs at the shortest
including surface chemistry and the physical properties of particles attachment time. The Glembotsky attachment timer device uses
and bubbles (Leja, 1982; Nguyen and Schulze, 2004). To provide in- a captive bubble placed in contact with a bed of mineral particles
sights into the factors affecting bubble–particle attachment, con- for a series of controlled times, from which the attachment time
tact angle measurement has been traditionally used. However, it is determined at a pre-selected percentage (e.g., 50%) of particle
has been proven that these measurements cannot always be used attachment. The researchers proved that bubble–particle attach-
to predict the flotation response of pure minerals obtained using ment time of pure minerals, obtained with the Glembotsky
H- technique, depends on the particle density, size and shape, solution
chemistry (pH, ionic strength, concentration of surfactants), bubble
size and pulp temperature. A comprehensive review of these inves-
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 7 3365 5832; fax: +61 7 3365 5999.
tigations is given elsewhere in detail (Albijanic et al., 2010). The
E-mail address: d.bradshaw@uq.edu.au (D.J. Bradshaw).
1
Present address: Department of Mining Engineering, Istanbul University, Istanbul most important findings of the available studies can be summa-
34320, Turkey. rised as follows:
different composition may have different states of hydro- Mineral Feed Con-1 Con-2 Con-3 Tails
phobicity (Ye et al., 1989; Peng, 1996). mineral mineral mineral mineral mineral
(ii) There is an optimum collector dosage, pH and ionic strength weight weight weight weight weight
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
at which the attachment time is the shortest and flotation
recovery is the highest (Yoon and Yordan, 1991; Gu et al., Chalcopyrite 1.1 15.81 12.19 7.98 0.04
Bornite 1.61 23.02 18.04 12.36 0.09
2003). Quartz 14.68 8.04 9.74 11.64 12.72
(iii) The attachment time increases with increasing particle or Plagioclase 31.76 15.20 19.30 22.41 35.50
bubble size since it needs longer time for the displacement Orthoclase 12.04 15.01 18.50 19.93 21.36
of the wetting film on the surface of larger particles or bub- Amphibole 2.22 0.37 0.43 0.65 0.89
Chlorite 3.08 0.96 0.86 0.87 1.14
bles (Ye et al., 1989; Yoon and Yordan, 1991).
Muscovite 11.37 1.78 1.12 2.26 2.03
(iv) The attachment time decreases considerably with increasing Biotite 5.55 3.00 3.27 3.38 4.49
temperature (Lazarov et al., 1994). Garnet 1.58 1.71 1.72 2.24 2.39
(v) The attachment time for spherical particles is higher than Hornblende 1.93 3.10 3.88 5.23 11.51
that for sharp-edged particles because the sharp edges facil- Calcite 1.46 0.20 0.12 0.28 0.18
Siderite 1.92 1.25 1.40 1.44 1.41
itate the thinning of wetting film (Dippenaar, 1982).
Ankerite 4.7 2.21 2.20 2.44 2.33
(vi) All these studies have been conducted using pure minerals. Other 5 8.34 7.23 6.89 3.92
was lower than 0.04 in the case of concentrates. However, in the Table 2
case of tails, the maximal standard deviation was 0.28. Attachment time of flotation products measured at 100%
attachment.
80
The MLA results for the flotation products (Con-1, Con-2 and
Slow floating minerals (>4 min) Con-3) and the tails are presented in Fig. 3. As seen in Fig. 3, the
60 majority of the valuable minerals in the flotation concentrates
are bornite and chalcopyrite which indicates that the copper min-
erals were recovered successfully. The weight percentage of the
40
valuable minerals in flotation products also decreased from 22%
bornite and 18% chalcopyrite (Con-1) to 11% bornite and 9% chalco-
Fast floating minerals (0-1 min) pyrite (Con-3). The tails is mainly composed of non-sulphide min-
20
erals such as silicates and oxides.
Table 2 shows that the bubble–particle attachment time for the
0 concentrates increases during the flotation. The reason for this is
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 the decrease of the weight percentage of valuable liberated miner-
Flotation time (min) als during flotation as demonstrated in Figs. 3–5. For example, the
attachment time for Con-1 (15% bornite and 8% chalcopyrite were
Fig. 1. Cumulative Cu recovery as a function of flotation time.
liberated) was two times lower than that for Con-2 (11% bornite
and 6% chalcopyrite were liberated). Interestingly, while the
weight percentage of valuable liberated minerals in Con-2 was
100 two times higher than that in Con-3, the attachment time of
Con-1
Con-2 was almost 150 times lower than that of Con-3. The attach-
Con-2
ment time for the tails is considerable higher, which is around 17 s.
80
Attachment efficiency (%)
Fig. 3. 2D-images of concentrates and tails indicating representative particles ( bornite, chalcopyrite, other sulphides, silicates, oxides, other minerals).
100
Bornite (a) Bornite Liberation
100
Chalcopyrite
80
Mineral weight (%)
Pyrite 80
Mineral grade (%)
60
60
40
40
20
0
20 Con-1 Con-2 Con-3 Tails
Poorly Liberated Highly Liberated
0
Middlings 100% Liberated
Con-1 Con-2 Con-3 Tails
Fig. 4. MLA results for sulphide mineral grade of 106 53 lm fraction in (b) Chalcopyrite Liberation
concentrates and tails. 100
Mineral weight (%)
80
to note that there is fully liberated bornite in the tailings, but not
chalcopyrite.
60
40
3.4. Correlation between bubble–particle attachment time
measurements and MLA results
20
15
Acknowledgements
5
References
0 Albijanic, B., Ozdemir, O., Nguyen, A.V., Bradshaw, D., 2010. A review of induction
0 0.1 1 10 100 and attachment times of wetting thin films between air bubbles and particles
Attachment time (s) and its relevance in the separation of particles by flotation. Advances in Colloid
and Interface Science 159 (1), 1–21.
Dippenaar, A., 1982. The destabilization of froth by solids. I. The mechanism of film
Fig. 6. The correlation between the bubble–particle attachment and Cu grade.
rupture. International Journal of Mineral Processing 9 (1), 1–14.
Fandrich, R., Gu, Y., Burrows, D., Moeller, K., 2007. Modern SEM-based mineral
liberation analysis. International Journal of Mineral Processing 84 (1–4), 310–
Cu minerals in concentrates the higher the bubble–particle attach- 320.
Glembockij, V.A., 1953. The time of attachment of air bubbles to mineral particles in
ment time. Indeed, the relationship between the bubble–particle
flotation and its measurement. Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR (OTN) 11, 1524–
attachment time and the grade of valuable metal may exist for 1531.
other flotation systems, because the majority of valuable minerals Gu, Y., 2003. Automated scanning electron microscope based mineral liberation
are recovered by bubble–particle attachment mechanism. analysis. Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering 2,
33–41.
Gu, G., Xu, Z., Nandakumar, K., Masliyah, J., 2003. Effects of physical environment on
4. Conclusions induction time of air–bitumen attachment. International Journal of Mineral
Processing 69 (1–4), 235–250.
Lazarov, D., Alexandrova, L., Nishkov, I., 1994. Effect of temperature on the kinetics
The bubble–particle attachment time and the MLA method were of froth flotation. Minerals Engineering 7 (4), 503–509.
used to study the contribution of liberation of valuable minerals to Leigh, G.M., Sutherland, D.N., Gottlieb, P., 1993. Confidence-limits for liberation
measurements. Minerals Engineering 6 (2), 155–161.
bubble–particle attachment time. In this study, a copper–gold sul-
Leja, J., 1982. Surface Chemistry of Froth Flotation. Plenum Press, New York, p. 758.
phide ore (Northparkes Mine, Australia) was employed. The bub- Nguyen, A.V., Schulze, H.J., 2004. Colloidal Science of Flotation. Marcel Dekker, New
ble–particle attachment time measurements performed for the York, p. 840.
concentrates and tails indicated that the bubble–particle attach- Peng, F.F., 1996. Surface energy and induction time of fine coals treated with various
levels of dispersed collector and their correlation to flotation responses. Energy
ment time measurement is dependent on particle composition and & Fuels 10 (6), 1202–1207.
is a reliable method to discriminate between the concentrates col- Su, L., Xu, Z., Masliyah, J., 2006. Role of oily bubbles in enhancing bitumen flotation.
lected during the flotation. The bubble–particle attachment time Minerals Engineering 19 (6–8), 641–650.
Ye, Y., Miller, J.D., 1988. Bubble/particle contact time in the analysis of coal flotation.
was reduced when there was a higher weight percentage and liber- Coal Preparation (Gordon & Breach) 5 (3–4), 147–166.
ation of valuable minerals in the flotation products. The decrease in Ye, Y., Khandrika, S.M., Miller, J.D., 1989. Induction-time measurements at a particle
Cu grade of concentrate resulted in increasing the value of bubble– bed. International Journal of Mineral Processing 25 (3–4), 221–240.
Yoon, R.-H., Yordan, J.L., 1991. Induction time measurements for the quartz–amine
particle attachment time. The analysis of the bubble attachment flotation system. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 141 (2), 374–383.
time and the MLA results showed that there is a relationship