Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluating additives and impurities in zinc electrowinning

  • Lead and Zinc
  • Research Summary
  • Published:
JOM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The zinc electrowinning (EW) process is very sensitive to the presence of impurities. There is only one EW plant in the world that we know of that operates at moderate current efficiency and deposition times without using any additives. All the others must use them continuously. Additives allow zinc EW to occur at high current efficiencies while suppressing excessive acid mist formation. The study of the electrochemical effects of additives in zinc EW is not straightforward. This article presents a review of the experimental techniques currently used at Cominco Research: Cyclic voltammetry, Hull cells, laboratory and mini-cell electrowinning techniques are all described and their relationship to the industrial operation is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. C.K. Gupta and T.K. Mukherjee, Hydrometallurgy in Extraction Processes, Volume 1, (Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  2. M.J. Collins et al., “Starting Up the Sherritt Zinc Pressure Leach Process at Hudson Bay,” JOM, 46(4) (1994), pp. 51–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. F. Tamargo and Y. Lefevre, “Concepts and Operation of the New Conventional Cell House of Asturiana de Zinc at San Juan de Nieva, Spain,” Zinc’ 93, ed. I.A. Matthew (Hobart, Australia: CIM, 1993), pp. 295–300.

    Google Scholar 

  4. C.J. Krauss, “Effects of Minor Elements on the Production of Electrolytic Zinc from Zinc Sulphide Concentrates,” Zinc’ 85, ed: K. Tazawa (Tokyo, Japan: MMIJ, 1985), pp. 467–481.

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Ohyama and S. Morioka, “Effect of Some Impurities on the Electrowinning of Zinc,” Zinc’ 85, ed. K. Tazawa (Tokyo, Japan: MMIJ, 1985), pp. 219–234.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R.M. Morrison et al, “The Effect of Some Trace Metals Impurities on the Electrowinning of Zinc from Kidd Creek Electrolyte,” Hydrometallurgy, 29 (1992), pp. 413–430.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. R.C. Kerby and T.R. Ingraham, “Effect of Impurities on the Current Efficiency of Zinc Electrodeposition,” Research Report R243 (Ottawa, Canada: Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  8. J.D. Miller, “Solution Concentration and Purification,” Rate Process Extr. Metall., ed. H.Y. Sohn and M.E. Wadsworth (New York: Plenum, 1979), pp. 197–244.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R.C. Kerby, “Application of Polarization Measurements to the Control of Zinc Electrolyte Quality for Electrowinning,” Application of Polarization Measurements in the Control of Metal Deposition, ed. I.H. Warren (New York: Elsevier, 1984), pp. 84–132.

    Google Scholar 

  10. G. Houlachi et al., “An On-line Sensor for Monitoring the Quality of Zinc Sulfate Electrolyte,” Modelling, Simulation and Control of Hydrometallurgical Processes, ed. V.G. Papagelakis and G.P. Demopoulos, (Quebec City, Canada: CIM, 1993), pp. 249–259.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A.R. Ault and G.C. Bratt, “Control of Manganese Level in an Electrolytic Zinc Plant Circuit by Anodic Deposition of Oxide,” Proc. Australas. Inst. Min. Metall., 254 (1975), pp. 37–45.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. E.J. Frazer and I.C. Hamilton, “The Estimation of the Coulombic Efficiency of Zinc Electrodeposition by Measurement of Current Efficiencies at a Rotating Ring Disc Electrode,” J. Appl. Electrochem., 16 (1986), pp. 387–392.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. R. Wiart et al., J. Appl. Electrochem., 20 (1990), pp. 381–389.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Instrumental Methods in Electrochemistry, Southhampton Electrochemistry Group (Chichester, Great Britain: Ellis Horwood Ltd., 1985).

  15. D.J. Mackinnon J.M. Brannen,a nd P.L. Fenn, “Characterization of Impurity Effects in Zinc Electrowinning from Industrial Acid Sulfate Electrolyte,” J. Appl. Electrochem., 17 (1987), pp. 1129–1143.

    Google Scholar 

  16. “Directions for Hull Cell Plating Tests,” McGean-Rohco Inc., Data Sheet.

  17. A.F.S. Afshar, D.R. Gabe, and B. Sewell, “Rotating Electrode Current Density Cells to Simulate High Speed Electrodeposition,” Tr. Inst. Met. Finish, 69(1) (1991), pp. 37–44.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. J.B. Moller, “Plating Cells for Control of Plating Baths,” Metal Finishing, 86 (1982), pp. 65–68.

    Google Scholar 

  19. I. Kadija et al., “Hydrodynamically Controlled Hull Cell,” Plating and Surface Finishing, 78 (1991), pp. 60–67.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. A.N. Koshev and N.P. Poddubnyi, “Effect of Electrochemical Parameters on Uniformity of Reverse-Current Electrodeposits,” Sov. Electroch., 14(10) (1978), pp. 1288–1292.

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. Neufeld and P.V. Patel, “Dynamic Measurement of Current Distribution in the Hull Cell,” Tr. Inst. Met. Finish, 52 (2) (1974), pp. 71–72.

    Google Scholar 

  22. N. Ibl, “Current Distribution,” Comprehensive Treatise of Electrochemistry, vol. 4, ed. J.O. Yeager, B.E. Conway,and S. Sarangapani, (New York: Plenum Press, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  23. I. Rajagopal and K.S. Rajam, “A New Addition Agent for Lead Plating,” Metal Finishing, 76 (1978), pp. 51–55.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. H.V.K. Udupa, K.C. Marasimhan, and P.C. Gomathi, “Codeposition of Lead-Copper from a Nitrate Bath,” Plating and Surface Finishing (December 1975), pp. 1150–1154.

    Google Scholar 

  25. T.V. Venkatesha, J. Balaahandra, and S.M. Mayanna, “Acidic Zinc Sulfate,” Metal Finishing, 83 (1979), pp. 17–20.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J.B. Mohler, “Finishing Pointer—the Current Density Meter,” Metal Finishing, 87 (1983), pp. 53–54.

    Google Scholar 

  27. A.Y. Hosny et al., “Correlation Between Mass Transport and Operating Parameters in Zinc EW,” J. App. Electrochem., 21 (1991), pp. 785–792.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. R. Terakado and H. Nagasaka, “A New Alternative to the Hull Cell,” Metal Finishing, 83 (1979), pp. 17–20.

    Google Scholar 

  29. A.Y. Hosny, T.J. O'Keefe, and W.J. James, “Hull Cell Technique for Evaluating Zinc Sulfate Electrolytes,” Min. Eng., 2 (2) (1989), pp. 415–123.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. A.Y. Hosny et al., “Effect of Gas Sparging on Mass Transfer in Zinc Electrolytes,” J. Appl. Electrochem., 22 (1992), pp. 396–405.

    Google Scholar 

  31. P.Y. Lu, “The Lu Cell, A Hull Cell with a Rotating Cathode,” Plating and Surface Finishing, 78 (1991), pp. 62–65.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. M.G. Newman et al, “Controlling Processes for the Electrolytic Recovery of Metals,” Canadian Patent Application Number 2,003,913 (May 27, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  33. C.J. Krauss and D.J. DeBiasio, “Mist Control with Metaparacresol,” Canadian Patent 978,137 (November 18, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  34. D.J. Mackinnon, R.M. Morrison, and J.M. Brannen, “The Effects of Nickel and Cobalt and their Interaction with Antimony on Zinc Electrowinning from Industrial Acid Sulfate Electrolyte,” J. Appl. Electrochem., 16 (1986), pp. 53–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. J.A. Gonzalez-Dominguez, “A Review of Lead and Zinc Electrodeposition Control by Polarization Techniques,” Minerals Engineering, 7(1) (1994), pp. 87–97.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. M. Fleischmann et al., Ultramicroelectrodes (Morganton, NC: Datatech Systems Inc., 1987).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gonzalez-Dominguez, J.A., Lew, R.W. Evaluating additives and impurities in zinc electrowinning. JOM 47, 34–37 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03221128

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03221128

Keywords

Navigation