2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2015.12.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of roughness and shape factor on flotation characteristics of glass beads

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 137 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These attractive forces may be due to the presence of nano bubbles present at such hydrophobic surfaces. As suggested in the literature, when two hydrophobic surfaces are brought close to each other, capillary bridging between these nano bubbles takes place leading to attraction which can be considered to be an explanation for hydrophobic interactions [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41]. One more observation that can be made from Fig.…”
Section: Afm Surface Force Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…These attractive forces may be due to the presence of nano bubbles present at such hydrophobic surfaces. As suggested in the literature, when two hydrophobic surfaces are brought close to each other, capillary bridging between these nano bubbles takes place leading to attraction which can be considered to be an explanation for hydrophobic interactions [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41]. One more observation that can be made from Fig.…”
Section: Afm Surface Force Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…The surface microstructure and roughness are important parts of mineral surface physical properties [9]. It has been shown that the surface roughness has an effect on the surface wettability or flotation performance of quartz [7,19,20], barite [21], malachite [22], glass beads [8], complex sulfide ores [23,24], coal [25] and so on. Calcite, barite, and quartz particles with different surface roughness were obtained by using a pulverizer, ball mill, and autogenous mill, and the contact angle measurements showed that the particles with the rougher surface had higher wettability [26].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The flotation performances of the pyrite particles ground by different mills using a Hallimond tube suggested that the lower roughness and acuteness values caused higher flotation recoveries for the pyrite particles [28]. In turn, the flotation characteristics of glass beads with different roughness were studied using cetyltrimethylammonium bromide as a collector, and the results showed that the surface roughness improved the flotation recovery and bubble adhesion of glass beads [8]. Malachite ground with quartz of greater hardness had a rougher surface than that with montmorillonite, and therefore, showed a greater recovery after adsorption of the collector with a larger contact angle [22].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The RMS surface roughness of the sample was 71.0 nm. Comprehensive SEM and AFM results, it indicates that the pretreatment with Pb 2+ increased the surface roughness of the hemimorphite, owing to the formation of lead sulfide on the mineral surface [30][31][32].…”
Section: Afmmentioning
confidence: 96%