Skip to main content
Log in

Influence of substrate roughness on particle adhesion and concentration

  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this research study, the interaction of particles with substrates of different roughness magnitude was investigated. Particle surface treatment, relative humidity (RH), and surface roughness levels were controlled in order to achieve separation of different particles by applying removal forces. Three different approaches to reproducibly roughen surfaces were used. Initially, glass disks were laser engraved to create a reproducible, controlled roughness substrate. However, the laser engraving method produced surface features that were much greater in scale than the particles. These scale differences were such that the substrates produced were not of value to this research. The second option investigated to induce reproducible substrate roughness was to scratch the glass disk using sandpapers of known grain size. A third approach to establish reproducible roughness was to use fine stainless-steel wire mesh substrates. In tests with sanded glass disks, the interfacial energy of plasma-cleaned (hydrophilic) glass beads had a high variation at 40% RH, showing non-uniformity of area of contact between particles and substrates. As the RH increased, it was expected that the interfacial energy of hydrophilic particles would increase, but this behavior was not observed. In addition, comparing the interfacial energy results of hydrophilic particles with hydrophobic particles, a region with significant interfacial energy difference was not identified. In the case of the stainless-steel mesh substrate, the mesh asperities and particle dimensions were comparable. Thus, the smaller particles had more area of contact with the substrate than the larger particles. For the plasma-cleaned (hydrophilic) beads, the recovery values had an average of 92.5% recovery when the RH was between 46 and 85%. For the hydrophobic beads, the average recovery was 19.0% when the RH was between 46 and 75%. Thus, the hydrophobic characteristic of the particle influenced its lower interaction with the mesh substrate. The difference in recovery can be exploited to achieve separation of particles based upon adhesive forces.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Figure 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moreno BaqueiroSansao B, Kellar JJ, Cross WM, Schottler K, Romkes A (2021) Comparison of surface energy and adhesion energy of surface-treated particles. Powder Technol 384:267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Moreno Baqueiro B, Kellar JJ, Cross WM, Romkes A (2021) Separation of particles of different surface energies through control of humidity. Miner Eng 160:106680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Johnson KL, Kendall K, Roberts AD (1971) Surface energy and the contact of elastic solids. Proc Royal Soc A 324:301–313

    Google Scholar 

  4. Packham DE (2005) Roughness and adhesion, Handbook of adhesion 2nd edition, 407-408

  5. Packham DE (2003) Surface energy, surface topography & adhesion. International Journal of Adhesion Adhesives 23:437–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Verrelli DI, Bruckard WJ, Koh PTL, Schwarz MP, Follink B (2012) Influence of particle shape and roughness on the induction peried for particle-bubble attachment,” in XXVI International Mineral Processing Engineering Congress - IMPC, New Delhi

  7. Persson BNJ (2006) Contact mechanics for randomly rough surfaces. Surf Sci Rep 61(4):201–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pohrt LQR, Popov V (2019) Adhesive strength of contacts of rough surfaces. Front Mech Eng 5

  9. Zimon AD (1982) “Chapter V”, in Adhesion of dust and powder. Consultants Bureau, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Fritzsche J, Urs AP (2016) Modeling adhesive force distributions on highly rough surfaces. Powder Technol 289:88–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. “Keyence,” [Online]. Available: https://www.keyence.com/ss/products/microscope/roughness/line/. [Accessed 11 05 2021].

  12. B. M. Moudgil, S. C. Brown and I. U. Vakarelski, “Influence of nanoscale roughness on flotation,” in XXII International Mineral Processing Congress, Cape Town, 2003.

  13. “The home of surface measurement,” Rubert, [Online]. Available: http://www.rubert.co.uk/faqs/roughness-parameters/. [Accessed 11 05 2021].

  14. Zisman WA (1961) Relation of equilibrium contact angle to liquid and solid constitution. Adv Chem Ser 43:1–51

    Google Scholar 

  15. Owens DK, Wendt RC (1969) Estimation of the surface free energy of polymers. J Appl Polym Sci 13:1741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Good RJ, Girifalco LA (1960) A theory for estimation of surface and interfacial energies. III. Estimation of surface energies of solids from contact angle data. J Phys Chem 64:561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fowkes FM (1964) Attractive forces at interfaces. Ind Eng Chem 56:40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. van Oss CJ, Good RJ, Chaudhury MK (1986) The role of van der Waals forces and hydrogen bonds in “hydrophobic interactions” between biopolymers and low energy surfaces. J Colloid Interface Sci 111:378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wenzel RN (1936) Resistance of solid surfaces to wetting by water. Ind Eng Chem 28:988–994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zimon AD (1982) “Chapter IV”, in Adhesion of dust and powder. Consultants Bureau, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Kellar JJ, Cross WM, Romkes A (2018) Proposal to the National Science Foundation

  22. Zafar U, Hare C, Hassanpour A, Ghadiri M (2014) Drop test: a new method to measure the particle adhesion force. Powder Technol 264:236–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation Grant #1805550 Sustainable System for Mineral Beneficiation.

The authors declare no competing interests. All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon J. Kellar.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sansao, B.M.B., Cross, W.M., Romkes, A. et al. Influence of substrate roughness on particle adhesion and concentration. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 39, 3–12 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00521-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00521-9

Navigation