2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.mineng.2014.04.022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The implications of the froth recovery at the laboratory scale

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the case of there being no such accumulation, Rf amounts to a mere 1.5/15, or 10%. For Rf to approach 100%, the scraping interval under these conditions should be less than 1.5 seconds, as also suggested by the data of Amelunxen et al, (2014).…”
Section: Froth Recoverymentioning
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the case of there being no such accumulation, Rf amounts to a mere 1.5/15, or 10%. For Rf to approach 100%, the scraping interval under these conditions should be less than 1.5 seconds, as also suggested by the data of Amelunxen et al, (2014).…”
Section: Froth Recoverymentioning
confidence: 68%
“…A common assumption in bench tests is that the froth recovery is 100%, the main reasoning behind this being the notion that because the froth is comparatively shallow and being scraped, all floating material is being recovered. Amelunxen et al, (2014), however, in a series of bench tests on a sulphide ore, showed conclusively that in a typical test, the figure is closer to 30 to 40% only. This finding can be substantiated by considering, for example, a laboratory flotation cell at a typical superficial gas velocity (Jg) of 1 cm/s and froth being scraped every 15 seconds to a depth of 1.5 cm.…”
Section: Froth Recoverymentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Hydrophobic particles can attach to bubbles and then report to the froth. It has been discovered that the froth is also selective (Seaman et al, 2004(Seaman et al, , 2006Amelunxen et al, 2014) and the final recovery of valuable minerals is determined to a large extent by froth recovery. Welsby et al (2010) further proposed that froth recovery can also affect the valuable mineral recovery in the pulp zone owing to the particles that drop back to the pulp from the froth.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During laboratory batch flotation tests, if the froth is removed very rapidly (Arbiter & Harris, 1962;Harris, et al, 2002;Runge, 2007;Amelunxen & Amelunxen, 2009b), froth phase effects may potentially be ignored although Amelunxen et al (2013) demonstrated that the rate of froth removal needs to be in the order of less than a second per scrape, which is not the case in many laboratory procedures. For continuous operations (pilot and plant scale) the contribution of the froth must not be ignored and has been reported and studied extensively (Cutting & Devenish, 1975;Moys, 1978;Yianatos, et al, 1988;Falutsu & Dobby, 1989;Falutsu & Dobby, 1992;Vera, et al, 1999;Ross, 1991;Contini, et al, 1988).…”
Section: Froth Phase Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By applying equation (16) froth recovery was then estimated as a function of froth depth. This technique is robust for providing an accurate account of the froth phase performance within laboratory cells although the assumption of a 100% froth recovery has been questioned (Amelunxen, et al, 2013) as this is also impacted by the froth scraping rate. The need to change froth depth multiple times however makes industrial application very difficult by being time consuming as well as disrupting the steady state of the circuit (Alexander, 2006;Seaman, 2006).…”
Section: Direct Measurements Of Froth Recoverymentioning
confidence: 99%