Studies of mineral liberation performance in sulphide comminution circuits

  • D. M. Weedon
  • T. J. Napier-Munn
  • C. L. Evans

Synopsis

This paper describes studies of two relatively coarse-grained sulphide ore grinding circuits (one copper and one lead/zinc), carried out to quantify the behaviour of the liberated minerals. The work formed part of a larger study whose objective is the modelling of mineral liberation for comminution circuit simulation.

The circuits were sampled and mass balances calculated. The mineralogy of the solids in each process stream was quantitatively determined using QEM*SEM, from which mass flows of liberated mineral were calculated. Samples of circuit feed were also broken in a laboratory pendulum apparatus, and the degree of liberation measured using QEM*SEM.

The plant results confirmed the strong effects of classification on liberation performance, and the differences in the behaviour of different classifier types. The effects are usually negative, as the denser liberated values tend to concentrate in the classifier underflow product, resulting in large circulating loads of liberated mineral which are reground unnecessarily, whereas the liberated gangue is preferentially selected for the downstream separation step (flotation in the case considered here). The data also demonstrated that the net liberation in secondary grinding can be quite small, and that the extent of liberation in products from the coarse (primary) grinding stage can be substantial.

The evidence in one case suggested that the proportion of liberation in a particular size interval is independent of comminution history, and that the propensity of a mineral to be liberated can be assessed using single particle breakage tests and QEM*SEM analysis.

These observations imply the need to consider aspects such as coarse flotation early in the grinding process, positive sizing devices to close the grinding circuit (eg screens rather than hydraulic classifiers), and whether conventional multiple grinding stages are always justified in practice.

Keywords

Ball Mill Size Interval Liberation Process Valuable Mineral Liberation Behaviour 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barbery G. and Leroux D., 1988. Prediction of particle composition after fragmentation of heterogeneous materials. Int. J. Mineral Proc., 22, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    King R.P., 1979. A model for quantitative estimation of mineral liberation by grinding. Int. J. Mineral Proc., 6, 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sutherland D.N. et al, 1988. The development and applications of QEM*SEM. Chemeca 87, Melbourne, 2, 106.1–106.6.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Miller P.R., Reid A.F. and Zuiderwyck M.A., 1982. QEM*SEM image analysis in the determination of model analysis, mineral associations and mineral liberation. Proc XIV Int. Mineral Proc. Cong., Toronto. CIM.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barbery G., 1989. Private communication.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Finch J.A. and Matwijenko O., 1977. Individual mineral behaviour in a closed grinding circuit. CIM Bull., Nov.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lynch A.J., 1977. Mineral crushing and grinding circuits. Elsevier.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manlapig E.V., Drinkwater D.J., Munro P.D., Johnson N.W., and Watsford R.M.S., 1985. Optimisation of grinding circuits at the lead/zinc concentrator, Mount Isa Mines Limited. Proc IFAC Symp. “Automation for Mineral Resource Development”, Brisbane. Aus. Inst. Min. Metall., 265–274.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marlow D., 1973. A mathematical analysis of hydrocyclone data. MSc thesis, University of Queensland (JKMRC).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Narayanan S.S. and Whiten W.J., 1988. Determination of comminution characteristics of ores from single particle breakage tests, and its application to ball mill scale-up. Trans. Inst. Min. Metall., Section C, 97, 115–124.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jackson B.R., Gottlieb P. and Sutherland D.N., 1988. A method for measuring and comparing the mineral sizes of ores from different origins. Third Mill Operators Conf., Cobar, May, 61–65 Aus. Inst. Min. Metall.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Espinosa-Gomez R., 1989. Private Communication. (Mount Isa Mines).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Watters T.J., 1990. Private Communication. (Pasminco Mining, Broken Hill).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Institution of Mining and Metallurgy 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. M. Weedon
    • 1
  • T. J. Napier-Munn
    • 1
  • C. L. Evans
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research CentreUniversity of QueenslandIndooroopillyAustralia
  2. 2.Mount Isa Mines Ltd.Mount IsaAustralia
  3. 3.Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research CentreAustralia

Personalised recommendations