Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
A mathematical model is derived in dimensionless form for heap leaching of one or more solid
reactants from nonreactive, porous, spherical ore particles. The model is for the interpretation
of column and heap leaching data and for use in the design and scaleup of heap leaching pro-
cesses. Data from experimental column leaching tests are presented which validate the model.
The scope of the present study is limited to the case where the rate-controlling reagent is a
component of the lixiviant solution only and not of the gas phase. The effects of particle-scale
kinetic factors, heap scale and operating variables, competition between multiple solid reactants,
and particle size distribution are examined using the concept of the heap effectiveness factor.
It is shown that heaps operate either "homogeneously," with distribution of reagent throughout
the heap at all times, or in a "zone-wise" manner, depending mostly on a single parameter.
The observed value of this parameter deviates from the predicted value in inverse proportion
to the degree of contact effectiveness between the lixiviant solution and the ore particles. A
rough correlation between the contact effectiveness and Reynolds number is generated from the
simulation of column test results.
ORE PARTICLES
V = (1 - ~).Vb
ENTRAINED AIR
V = (~h - E0.V~
BULK LIXIVIANT
V = ~-V k
C,.(Z,t)
C,,(Z,t)
METAL DEPOSITS:
PORE S T R U C T U R E
V = (1 - ~b)-~~ b
D 0 0
- +
Cyanide
,)
i -
_ _
- ore
glass
wool
solution
E--L___
I - - funnel
waste waste
pct assay sand, 2 / 3 of which was left coarse and 1/3 calculated from the ore porosity and the column void
which was pulverized fine (to decrease the porosity and fraction, and this was subtracted from the weight of
increase the adhesion of the agglomerates); 5 wt pct water in the column. The volume of the remaining bulk
Type I1 Portland cement, plus pure silver metal powder, water was divided by the volume of the column to obtain
ranging from 4 to 7 /xm in diameter. This mixture was the bulk solution volume fraction. From these tests,
agglomerated with tap water on a disk pelletizer, pro- eh = 0.39 and G = 0.03.
ducing spherical pellets ranging from about 0.5 to 2 cm
in diameter. These were then cured under cover at room V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
temperature for several weeks and became quite hard.
Porosity and density of the ore pellets were deter- A. Computer Simulation: One Solid Reactant
mined as follows. Several pellets were dried, smoothed In order to examine the general behavior of the model,
by rubbing, measured with calipers, and weighed. They the following restrictions were temporarily applied:
were then set in beads of water which was readily ab- (1) only one solid reactant (n = 1), (2) first-order rate
sorbed by capillary action. After a few minutes, they dependence in the solid reactant concentration (~bp = 1),
were dabbed to remove any excess water and weighed and (3) no surface deposits (3. = 0). The diffusion equa-
again. The porosity of each pellet was then determined tion for reagent A now becomes
by calculating the volume of water which was absorbed
and dividing by the calculated volume of the pellet. Ore OPa 2 Oa 3 Oa
-- + ---- Kppa =----
density was determined by dividing the dry weight of O~2 ~ a~ I'~W aO
the pellets by their calculated volume and by one minus
the calculated porosity. From these tests, G = 0.20 + and the rate expression for the disappearance of solid
0.02 and Po = 2.1 --- 0.1 g / c m 3. reactant
Column void fraction and bulk solution volume frac- d%_ Kd3,,o~
tion were determined as follows. An empty column sec- - - o',,c~
dO 3
tion was tared, filled with dried ore pellets, and
weighed. The bulk density was calculated, and the col- The convection equation for reagent A through the heap
umn void fraction was determined by subtracting the is simplified to
ratio of bulk to pellet density from one. The column was
then wetted, left under a steady drip for 1 hour, and Oab w(Oa~ _= Oa___2
weighed again. The amount of water in the pores was o~ \asU~=~ o0
Xp = 1 Kp = 10 ~:p = 100
0. . . . . . . . . .
XpW = 1 o,
~ . 0.4
-__ o,
0.4 ......... . . . . - i!
o, .... o, o,
o . o o . o ~ ~ oo o.oo.o.7..r,.r,,,7.,=.r..,7,,=,r,,,_,7..r.,.7...-.
o.2 o.* o.~ o.'8 1.o
lo &8 = 0.1 '~o &O = 0.5
o., ~ o.s
I 0.6 0.6
0.2 0.2
' 0.~1 ' 11' 161~1 ' ' ' ' I ~ . ~ r ' ' ' 'a}~'' ' ' I la' g ' 'I I I ' i ' g 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 " 0.0 0.a 0.~ 016 " 110
ll~lt II I
i!i
I.
'i!i
0.6
Kp6.) = lOOg
0.4
I 0.2
- i ......... i ......... i ......... ~ ......... f ......... i 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0,6 0.8 1.0
o.o o.z o., o.e o.8 1.o 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Dimensionless depth, ~" Dimensionless depth, r Dimensionless depth, r
Fig. 3 - - S o l u t i o n s to the simplified continuity equations for reagent A in the bulk solution (~b) and the fractional conversion (X) as functions of
heap depth.
L 1.0 t , - . - 5 : - r----"
/cp = 1 ~ / / ,'"
fl = 1 ,,"
%! ] \/ , 0.8 1 w = 10 / .-/X.'"
~: 4 /'~ xp= 1
%. o.6zl ,/ \ p = O.Ol ~ ! 0.6
,, ~
/ .
o.o ~ 1 ~ ; . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . ~( 0.0 flHrrHi I ,
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3,0 3.5
Dimensionless flow time, 8 Dimensionless flow time, 0
1.0
tJJ / s'
, 0.8 /,//// t-"
, o.a
i
P -- 11 /"/i I
///// top = 1
;~110.4 1 0.01 [ / / /t
/
I 0.2 I 0.2
// /2 =
=
// / / /
0.0 0.0 / / /'
1 41 81 121 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Dimensionless flow t i m e , 0 Dimensionless flow time, 0
Fig. 4 - - E f f l u e n t concentration (Xb(1, 0)), fractional conversion (X), and extraction (E) vs dimensionless flow time (0) given various values of
fl and w.
through the heap over the course of the leach cycle, the characteristic delay in attaining peak concentration in all
total holdup of dissolved products is negligible. Hence, heap leaching operations is only significant when the ore
the conversion and extraction curves largely coincide at grade is very low, as in precious metal leaching opera-
all values of Kp and oJ. At KpCO = 1, the effluent con- tions. At KpW = 100 and Kp = 1, both the conversion
centration curve consists of a short peak followed by a and extraction curves are linear, yet nearly half of the
long tail, and the conversion curves are roughly the solid reactant has been converted before any dissolved
shape of exponential response curves, signifying the complex is seen in the heap effluent.
dominant role of particle kinetics. As KpW is increased, The relative magnitudes of convection, diffusion, and
the Xb peak grows taller until, at Kpto = 100, it reaches reaction resistance are most conveniently illustrated in
its maximum value of one and flattens out. Above a cer- semilog plots of heap effectiveness factor v s fractional
tain value of to, the dimensionless flow time for com- conversion, as shown in Figure 5. At low values of to,
plete reaction decreases to its limit, 0 = 1//3v, which is the heap effectiveness factor approaches a limiting value
simply the time required in order to feed a stoichiometric dependent on the particle kinetics, u2] As to is increased,
amount of reagent to the heap. The conversion curve is the effectiveness drops until, at approximately Kpto =
a straight line, since the rate of propagation of the re- 100, the ineffective character of the bulk flow process
action zone through the heap is constant at d ~ x / d O ~- ~3to dominates, obscuring any effects at the particle level.
( e . g . , the bottom left comer of Figure 3). This happens irrespective of the reagent concentration of
At /3 = 1, the overall flow times are much shorter, the incoming fluid.
and a "chromatographic effect" due to the high diffusion Relaxing the restriction of no surface deposits and also
driving force at the beginning of the leach cycle results assuming first-order rate dependence at the surface, the
in significant holdup. This effect which causes the surface rate expression becomes
2-
~ 0.8
0"~. 4
~--0.1
0.2 0
0.1 :? 0.1 0.1 ,=-='s'7-"~Z >~0.6
S-
4-
0 0.4
2-
=
a-
h--p = 1 O0
//// u-1
0.01
0.0 0.5 1.0
0.01
0.0
Fractional
0.5 1.0
conversion, X
0.01
0.0
.... i , , , ,
0.5 1.0
--~0.2
o.1
L_ 0.0 i i i i 1 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i J i i i i
Fig. 5 - Heap effectiveness factor (-q) v s fractional conversion (X) for b_ 2 3 4 5
the continuity equation solutions shown in Figure 3.
Dimensionless flow time, O
1.0
do"s K~Bvto X
- - O'sa b
dO 3h ~0.8
~
0
and the intraparticular rate expression becomes CO
L.-
X = I
00.6
do'p __ KpflVW
>
c- X= 0
- - O'pO~
dO 3(1 - A) o
o 0.4
These equations have the following initial conditions: 1D
t---
'-11oo
~({:, 0 ) = l ,--
0 0.2
-11
o~,(~r,o) = 1 0
0.0 i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I 0 i i i
Since it has already been determined that surface de- I, 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 39
posits have little or no effect on the kinetics of particles Dimensionless flow time, 0
with low Kp,t]2j this study only examines the case when
Fig. 6--Fractional conversion (X) vs dimensionless flow time (0)
this parameter is high and particle kinetics are diffusion given various surface fractions (h).
controlled. Figure 6 shows the effect o f various surface
fractions h on the rate o f reactant conversion from the
same particles in two different heap simulations. Higher of a valuable mineral component, l~2] Computer simula-
surface fractions result in much faster conversion rates tion of the particle model showed how the presence o f
at to = 0.1 but have little impact at to = 1. At low to, a reactive gangue material may push the otherwise
kinetics at the particle level control the entire process, highly effective reaction o f a valuable component into a
so the leaching rate is strongly enhanced by higher sur- much less effective regime and how the overall process
face fractions. At the higher to, however, the character- may approach a near-steady state. Figure 8 shows the
istic contours o f the particle kinetics all but disappear as concentration gradients o f reagent A and one solid reac-
the rate of bulk flow through the heap becomes rate tant with Kp~ = 1,/31 = 1, and ~bp~ = 2 / 3 with no surface
controlling. deposits in a heap at w = 1 and v = 1. A value of
Similar results are obtained by varying the reaction ~bpt = 2 / 3 implies that solid reactant 1 is present as dis-
order ~bp, as shown in Figure 7. For these plots, a low creet spherical blebs. In one simulation, reactant 1 is
value o f Kp for the particles is assumed since reaction alone, and in the other, it is accompanied by a reactive
order is only a factor in systems under chemical reaction gangue material with Kp2 = 10, f12 = 0.01, and thp2 =
control, t~21 Again, the effect is greater at low values of 0, also with no surface deposits. At these parameter val-
to, especially at the beginning o f the leach cycle. How- ues, identical to those chosen in the previous article, it
ever, the suppression of particle kinetics at the higher is assumed that there is 100 times more solid reactant 2
value o f to is less pronounced, since a higher reaction than 1 but that its intrinsic dissolution rate is 10 times
order tends to widen the active reaction zone in the heap, slower. Also, a value o f thp2 = 0 implies that the gangue
A~"x, resulting in a net increase o f heap effectiveness with material forms an even coating over the internal surfaces
reaction order. of the particle, or perhaps it is the ore matrix material 9
Alone, reactant 1 dissolves effectively throughout the
B. Computer Simulation: Competing Solid Reactants heap, and the reagent gradients are insignificant. In the
presence of solid reactant 2, however, the reaction shifts
In a previous article, it was shown that the presence more toward the top o f the heap, and the reagent gra-
of one or more competing reactants within porous ore dients are steep, with ab < 0.12 at the bottom 9 In ad-
particles can significantly alter the kinetics o f conversion dition, the reagent gradients within the heap approach a
e ~=0
tO 0.4 sinh ('V~p2)
where
-~00.2 X~p2 - tanh (V~.2)
y=
tanh (X~p2)
L 0.0
14_ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The concentration of solid reactant 1 is expressed
Dimensionless flow time, e
1.0
X c,ff, (, 0) = 3
~ 0 . 8
exp ( - KP~C33'v~~(~, ~0 ) ~, =
.~0.6
g / ~p = 2.0
For our test situation, these equations become
--O~(ff, ~ 5~ 0) =
sinh ( X / ~ )
e -217~
//
0 0.4
11.8~:
a(~', ~ = O) = 0.268e -217~
0 0.2
Orb(( = 1) = 0.114
(]
L 0.0
tJ_ 2 3 4 o-p,(~, ~, 0) = 1 -
Dimensionless flow time, (3
Fig. 7 - - F r a c t i o n a l conversion (X) v s dimensionless flow time (0)
given various orders of reaction (~bp). The conversion curves for reactant 1 both within and
without the presence of reactant 2 are shown in Figure 9.
As expected, the conversion when n = 2 is significantly
delayed relative to when n = 1. The effect of the second
steady state, just as they do within the pores of the in- reactant on the heap effectiveness factor of the first reac-
dividual particles. Hence, the conversion kinetics of tant rh is illustrated in Figure 10. When n = 2, the
reactant 1 could be approximately described in this case r h - X1 curve does not approach unity near complete
by a steady-state solution for reagent A, using only the conversion, identical to the particle model alone, uzl
parameters for reactant 2. As outlined in the previous However, in a very ineffective (high to) heap, this would
article, the diffusion equation for reagent A becomes the not necessarily be the case, since the second reactant
spherical Bessel equation would have to be depleted at every depth before the re-
action zone could move downward into fresh ore. Under
O2ct 2 d a these extreme circumstances, the time for total dissolu-
d~ 2 + ~ dE Kp20g 0 tion of reactant 1 (or any other minor constituent) would
be 0 ~ 1//32v.
coupled with the mass-action rate expression for
reactant 1 C. Computer Simulation: an Approach for Particle
Size Distributions
dOrpl Kpl/~ 1b'to
- - r
~pl
~ In a previous article, uzj the particular leaching model
dO 3 was solved for a distribution of particle sizes based on
the Gates-Gaudin-Schuhmann distribution function. In
Additionally, the heap convection equation for reagent this study, these results are applied to the global heap
A becomes model, albeit limiting our discussion to ore with no sig-
nificant surface deposits.
OOfb /O( 00~ If a dimensionless particle radius is defined as
--+ =0
R
_,~=--
An analytical expression for the concentration of reagent
X go.8 n = 1
I 0.8 "~ n = 2
I ~0.6
I
i 0.6 o
0.4
~// ~; = 1 ~2 = o . o l
o, o = =o
0.2 ~ ~ C
o
4-
0
0
0.0 --I ' | I | | i I i' , I i , i i I i i i i I i , i ,
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tO
01
Dimensionless depth, (D
C
2-It \n =2
13
where/~ is some reference radius, then for any normal- (D
= 101
where E.,~, and ~=m~• are the minimum and maximum
dimensionless particle radii, respectively. Assuming the 99p2 = 0
simplest case of no mineral liberation upon comminu-
0.1
tion, as in the previous article, and also ignoring surface I'}w = 1 ~= 1
deposits, the rate constant Kei, the diffusion time r, and
the global heap parameter ~o will vary as functions of " ,,,,,,,,,i,,,,,,,,,
particle size; thus,
0.0 0.5 1.0
Fractional conversion, Xl
Kp~-- ~2gpi r =2_ oJ =2 Fig. 1 0 - - H e a p effectiveness factor (Th) v s fractional conversion of
solid reactant 1 (Xt) for the systems s h o w n in Figure 11.
X I ~__1 ~ ~ ~ = lo v = 0.1
1
that a distribution of particle sizes will have on the heap {jO.6
leaching process as a whole, the convection equations
must be altered. Employing the GGS distribution, uS/ o
these take the form 0 0.4
O~
r
_ o3 ax, w(E)
J-=m,, \0~:/~=, - -E- T d E
02 ;1 o, ",
6
i i i i i i i i i i
11
i i :,%, I l i
16
i i i i ""7"~
i i i
21
-~'-- 26
i I I I I I I l I TI
X,---- 3
L Lfo m~, m l(1 - ~e,)~2dMEd~ ~0.2
~.
"oo
~ = 0.01
;_ii 55-;;
"~._ -~_
M o d e l fit: 06 \ / = 93o
#p = 9 5 0 , /3 = 0 . 0 1 0 6 ~" ~/ ~o=2
rpp = 2, v = 0 . 2 4 6 V F= o.olo6
~= 1.1, m = 6 o.4 _/k, ~ = o.1oo
1.o 9 ~ . . . . . Izi" ""ig~--A"
9 0.2
0.8 i [] 9 f
9 0.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .;.0. .1. . . . . . I'061 1501i. . . . . . . =~;'~
0.6 i Dimensionless flow time, e
Fig. 1 3 - - E f f l u e n t and extraction data from column leaching test 2.
d~
o.4 , X~ _\'-
IJl 1.0
o
O
o
0,0 I I I I I I
1O0
I I i I I I I I I
200
I I 1 1 1
,300
I
400
o 0.8 \
0
j . . . . . . . . .
0.6 ~, p z, = 53o 4
(E) I -\./ #p = 2
, 8 = 00_o98 3-
,,~. 0.4 / \ ~ = o.15o
2-
~0,2
I,,,-
o
9 0.0 0 0.1
501 1001 1501 2061 0 B- (Test 4)
Dimensionless flow time, 0 7-
CO 6-
Fig. 15--Effluent and extraction data from column leaching test 4. 0
C
5- (Test 2)
0 4-
>
0.20 1.0
O 0 3-
O 4-- (Test 3)
.0.8 0
2-
(1) 0.15 'o 0
0-
0
0
"~ \ o/ - ~0 = 9.3 .0.0 o r"
;~<0.10 \ / ~p = 2 ___ 0
9 ~k/_ /9"= 0 0 9 5 5 o 0.01
9 .~X" ~ = 0.100 0.4
9 rT]
7-
9 0.05
-0.2 6-
sJ
0,00 ........ t . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . ~. . . . . . . . . ~. . . . . . . . . 0.0
, 1)
201 401 601 801 1001
Dimensionless flow time, 0 3-