Reactivos Cytec Cu Oxidado

M i n e r a l P ro c e s s i n g
TECHNOLOGY NOTE
Application of AERO XD900 and AERO XD902

Promoters for Flotation of Copper Oxide Ores
Summary
This Technology Note has been prepared to offer
suggestions for the effective application of AERO
XD900 and XD902 promoters for use in copper
oxide flotation. The work suggests that there may
be some synergy in using these two products following sulfidization. All of the work has been
done on African mixed sulfide/oxide ores, and the
results could potentially have application in all
copper oxide ores where the oxide minerals are
discrete, rather than low Cu content minerals
such as cupriferous goethite (Ref 1).
It has been demonstrated that use of AERO
XD900 promoter on its own can be effective but
tends to require very high dosage. In addition to
cost considerations, higher dosages of AERO
XD900 promoter have the disadvantage that they
can create excessive foaming and an over-stable
froth (excessive foaming can be minimized with
the use of AERO XD903 promoter). Concentrate
filtration also tends to be very difficult. Application of AERO XD900 promoter following CPS
(controlled potential sulfidization Ref 2) allows
a major reduction in dosage and tends to result
in improved recovery and superior concentrate
grade. Use of xanthate alongside NaSH and
AERO XD900 promoter and AERO XD902
promoter also appears beneficial.
Test Work Procedure
The bulk of this work involved taking the rougher
tails after flotation of sulfides from a mixed sulfide/oxide ore at two African customers. Slurry
samples were screened to remove trash and

+500m material, then split into charges using a
rotary splitter. Tests were done using both 2.5l
and 4.5l cells on a Denver D12 machine. Tests
were conducted at natural pH (typically pH 8.0
pH 8.5) after test work at pH 9.0 and pH 9.5
(with NaOH) showed no advantage. Flotation
times up to 24 minutes were investigated, but
the bulk of the work used a flotation time of 12
minutes.
Only the test work for Customer 1 was conducted
on ore milled in the laboratory. In this case, bulk
sulfide/oxide rougher concentrates were produced.
Concentrates and tails were filtered, dried,
weighed and prepared. Most assays were performed by an international met lab.
In the final sets of work, tails assays were done in
duplicate, sending the second sample under different nomenclature. Further repeats were conducted
when these did not match.
One of the two customers has two ores which
feed separate lines in the plant. These are underground ore, often referred to as LOB (lower ore
body) and the open pit ore.
Notes:
AS Cu = acid soluble copper. For most of this
work, acid was 5% H2SO4, agitated at room
temperature for 20 minutes.
AI Cu is acid (as above) insoluble copper which
generally refers to the sulfides, metallic Cu and
low solubility minerals such as chrysocolla. AI Cu
www.cytec.com
can be determined by aqua regia dissolution of the

residue from AS Cu dissolution, but is more often
determined by difference, TCu ASCu.
T Cu is total copper, usually analyzed following
dissolution with boiling aqua regia.
1) Performance of AERO XD900 promoter
on its own, versus with NaSH
One of the African operations treats a mixed sulfide/oxide ore, although sulfides tend to dominate.
AS Cu tends to vary between 0.2% and 0.5%. On
the day this test work was done, AS Cu levels were
at their minimum.
In this case, minimal AS Cu was achieved with

dosages of AERO XD902 promoter between 48
g/t and 170 g/t. Only by using 320 g/t of AERO
XD902 promoter, on its own, did we start to
achieve respectable AS Cu grade/recovery. The
addition of 30 g/t SiPX alongside low dosages of
AERO XD902 promoter did not improve performance. Much better performance was seen
when the reagent was used after sulfidization,
with and without xanthate.
In a second series of tests on the second customer
underground ore, higher dosages of AERO
XD902 promoter were used.
Second Customer Underground Sulfide Tails Flotation
AS Cu Grade vs Recovery
70
Flotation of First Customer Sulfide Rougher Tails

AS Cu Grade vs Recovery
70
129 g/t S-8881
40
245 g/t NaSH, 33 g/t A343, 33 g/t S-888
30
238 g/t NaSH, 32 g/t A343, 64 g/t S-888
20
10
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
244 g/t NaSH 32 g/t A343
Standard
244 g/t NaSH 32 g/t A343
Standard
3.0
AS Cu grade (%)
Results show superior AS Cu grade/recovery at

two dosage levels when Reagent S-8881 (an early
AERO XD900 promoter) was used alongside 245
g/t NaSH + 33 g/t SiPX.
Continuing the work at the other African
Concentrator (Ref 3), where AS Cu levels are
significantly higher, the series of tests shown below
was run on underground ore.
African Customer Underground, Flotation
of Sulfide Rougher Tails AS Cu Grade vs Recovery
AS Cu recovery (%)
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
AS Cu grade (%)
10
11 12 13 14
550 g/t AERO XD902

170 g/t NaSH, 230 g/t AERO XD902
40

30

20
320 g/t NaSH 40 g/t A343
48 g/t AERO XD902

100 g/t AERO XD902
170 g/t AERO XD902
320 g/t AERO XD902
30 g/t A343, 50 g/t
AERO XD902
30 g/t A343, 100 g/t
AERO XD902
360 g/t NaSH, 29 g/t A343,
48 g/t AERO XD902
400 g/t NaSH, 30 g/t A343,
100 g/t AERO XD902
420 g/t NaSH, 100 g/t
AERO XD902
380 g/t NaSH 30 g/t A343
Standard
380 g/t NaSH 30 g/t A343
420 g/t NaSH 60 g/t A343
Head 1.16% AS Cu
Standard
10
Head 1.24% AS Cu
0
0
Head 0.21% AS Cu
60
AS Cu recovery (%)
AS Cu recovery (%)
64 g/t S-8881
50
350 g/t AERO XD902
50
34 g/t S-8881
60
213 g/t AERO XD902
60
10
AS Cu grade (%)
This time, high AS Cu grade/recovery was only

achieved using 550 g/t AERO XD902 promoter,
with 350 g/t only achieving 22% AS Cu recovery.
The performance of 550 g/t AERO XD902 alone
was matched using 370 g/t NaSH + 250 g/t
AERO XD902 and by 550 g/t NaSH + 230 g/t
AERO XD902. There was an outlier, however, in
the repeat of the test using 350 g/t NaSH + 230
g/t AERO XD902.
A subsequent set of tests was run on a second
African open pit ore. The objective was to look at
NaSH, PAX and AERO XD900 promoter
requirements. Results for AS Cu recovery and AS
Cu grade have been plotted as AERO XD900
promoter dosage versus NaSH dosage.
This set of results appeared to be quite a setback
as it seemed that use of NaSH + PAX alone could
achieve high AS Cu recovery. Use of AERO
XD900 promoter managed to yield small increases
Second Customer AS Copper Recovery vs AERO XD900 Dosage

80
0 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX
AS Cu recovery (%)
60
16
14
12
10
50
40
30
20
20
40
60
80
100
120
Second Customer Flotation of Sulfide Tails AS Cu Grade vs Recovery

100
Collector to Rghr 1
90
PAX
80
Rghr
none
AERO XD900 condition

4 min
none
70
60
50
40
PAX
NaSH + XD900
PAX
XD900
AERO XD900 + PAX condition

4 min
none
30
20
All tests 700 g/t NaSH to head
10
Head - 0.90% AS Cu
0
4
10
12
20
40
60
80
100
120
PAX was added to the first rougher. High AS Cu

grade concentrate was produced at high grade in
the first rougher but little additional AS Cu recovery was achieved in the second rougher. Repeating
the test (PAX only to first rougher) but adding 70
g/t AERO XD900 promoter (black line) or an
additional 200 g/t NaSH + 70 g/t AERO XD900
promoter (pink line) both brought about an additional 15%-20% AS Cu recovery gain to final
conc. Use of 70 g/t AERO XD900 promoter (no
PAX) gave superior results to the PAX only test
but optimum results were seen when both PAX
and AERO XD900 promoter were added to the
first rougher. Unfortunately no test was run where
PAX was added to first and second roughers.
As the previous tests had demonstrated the value

in having NaSH and PAX present, the following
set of tests was run on the second customers open
pit ore to determine if AERO XD900 promoter
added any value when used in conjunction with
these products.
Head = 0.90% AS Cu
0
AERO XD900 Dosage (g/t)
in recovery but with a major drop in concentrate

grade. Looking more closely at the results, however, it was seen that NaSH + PAX appeared to hit a
maximum at 50% AS Cu recovery. Increasing
NaSH from 700 g/t to 1400 g/t and PAX from
105 g/t to 170 g/t did not improve AS Cu recovery. In the tests without PAX, at both 700 g/t and
1400 g/t NaSH, increasing the dosage of AERO
XD900 promoter from 75 g/t to 120 g/t did
achieve significantly higher AS Cu recovery at
equivalent concentrate grade. It was again clearly
demonstrated that little AS Cu recovery could be
achieved with low dosages of AERO XD900
promoter alone.
AS Cu Recovery (%)
Head = 0.90% AS Cu
AERO XD900 Dosage (g/t)
10
0
18

AS Cu Grade (%)
Note: four tests with same

recovery obscure each other
70
Second Customer AS Copper Grade vs AERO XD900 Dosage

20
14
16
AS Cu Grade
In all tests 700 g/t NaSH was added and conditioned for four minutes prior to addition of the
collector. Duplicate tests were run where 100 g/t
At the request of the first customer plant, a series

of tests were run to demonstrate the effectiveness
of AERO XD900 promoter at recovering oxide.
The first customer treats a high grade ore at typically 3.8% AI Cu and 0.8% AS Cu. They normally achieve >90% recovery of AI Cu but <30%
recovery of AS Cu. In this work, xanthate dosage
was held constant at 30 g/t SiPX + 30 g/t PAX.
This work differs from previously shown results,
in that a bulk sulfide/oxide conc is produced
rather than floating an oxide conc following sulfide flotation. Hence, the surface responses for T
Cu and AS Cu have been included. The test work
was done over a period of two days, with a significant change in ore quality between days, so it will
be seen that the effect of different day is highly
significant.
Combined Roughers T Cu Grade

100
1 4.2
1 4.4
1 4.61 4.8 1 5
1 5.2
Summary of Fit
1 5.4 1 5 .6
AERO XD900 dosage
80
RSquare
0.923682
RSquare Adj
0.8321
Root Mean Square Error
1.068849
Mean of Response
15.15915
Observations (or Sum Wgts)
12
60
Effect Tests
Source
40
20
1 5.8
0
0
1 5.8
16
1 00
2 00
3 00
4 00
1 5.6 1 5.4
5 00
6 00
Nparm
DF
Sum of Squares
F Ratio
Prob > F
Day
25.146189
22.0110
0.0054
NaSH dosage
0.403250
0.3530
0.5783
AERO XD900 dosage
0.110098
0.0964
0.7688
NaSH dosage* AERO XD900

dosage
1.515640
1.3267
0.3015

dosage
0.857460
0.7506
0.4259
Cytec OREPREP frother

dosage
1.001504
0.8766
0.3921
Sum of Squares
F Ratio
Prob > F
N aS H d os ag e
Combined Roughers T Cu Grade

100
1 4.2
1 4.4
1 4.61 4.8 1 5
1 5.2
Summary of Fit
1 5.4 1 5 .6
AERO XD900 dosage
80
60
RSquare
0.934278
RSquare Adj
0.856401
2.179624
Mean of Response
81.93862
12
Effect Tests
Source
40
20
1 5.8
1 5.8
16
1 5.6 1 5.4
Nparm
DF
Day
78.75451
16.5772
0.0096
NaSH dosage
100.60553
21.1767
0.0058
AERO XD900 dosage
2.53455
0.5335
0.4979

dosage
3.00296
0.6321
0.4626

dosage
29.30725
6.1690
0.0556
2.53544
0.5337
0.4978
1 00
2 00
3 00
4 00
5 00
6 00

dosage
N aS H d os ag e
* Not all effects, particularly grade, show statistical significance to >90%, so a degree of caution should be used rather than taking
all contours too literally. Even so, particularly for AS Cu recovery, the effects of NaSH dosage and AERO XD900 promoter
dosage do appear strong.
Combined Roughers AS Cu Grade
Summary of Fit
100
RSquare
0.949601
RSquare Adj
0.889123
0.347484
3 .1
Mean of Response
2.486433
12
3 .3
3 .2
AERO XD900 dosage
80
60
2 .9
Nparm
DF
Sum of Squares
F Ratio
Prob > F
Day
7.2047480
56.6689
0.0006
NaSH dosage
0.2259616
1.8714
0.2296
2 .6
AERO XD900 dosage
0.2325667
1.9261
0.2239
2 .5

dosage
0.2391924
1.9810
0.2183
2 .4

dosage
0.0004016
0.0033
0.9562

dosage
0.0606608
0.5024
0.5101
2 .8
40
2 .7
20
2 .3
0
1 00
2 00
3 00
4 00
5 00
Effect Tests
Source
6 00
N aS H d o s ag e
Combined Roughers AS Cu Recovery
Summary of Fit
100
80
80
AERO XD900 dosage
75
RSquare
0.939374
RSquare Adj
0.866622
4.85165
Mean of Response
56.68738
12
60
70
Effect Tests
Source
40
65
20
60
55
40
0
45
1 00
50
2 00
3 00
N a S H d o s ag e
4 00
5 00
6 00
Nparm
DF
Sum of Squares
F Ratio
Prob > F
Day
269.95274
11.4686
0.0195
NaSH dosage
877.75608
37.2902
0.0017
AERO XD900 dosage
240.72351
10.2268
0.0241

dosage
68.40509
2.9061
0.1490

dosage
96.65026
4.1060
0.0986
1.25839
0.0535
0.8263

dosage
Second Customer Open Pit Sulfide Tails

Flotation AS Cu Grade vs Recovery
2) Effect of AERO XD900 promoter and

AERO XD902 promoter Conditioning
Time
Second Customer Flotation of Sulfide Tails AS Cu Grade vs Recovery

100
Rghr 2
90
XD900 + PAX condition 1 min
none
XD900 + PAX condition 4 min
none
80
800 g/t NaSH, 100 g/t

AERO XD902
50
800 g/t NaSH, 100 g/t

AS Cu Recovery (%)
40
800 g/t NaSH, 100 g/t

AS Cu Recovery (%)
30
20
10
Head 1.14% AS Cu
0
0
10
12
14
AS CuGrade (%)
3.2 Use of CYQUEST 3223 dispersant
It was thought that use of CYQUEST 3223

dispersant might aid the use of AERO XD900
promoter by blocking adsorption on to surface of
slimes and dispersing slimes from the surface of
the oxide copper. Two sets of test work were run
using CYQUEST 3223 dispersant and in neither
set was any advantage seen.
0
XD900 + PAX condition 12 min none
60
50
40
XD900 condition 1 min
none
none
none
Flotation of First Customer Sulfide

Rougher Tails AS Cu Grade vs Recovery
70
30
34 g/t Reagent S8881
20
All tests 700 g/t NaSH to head
10
Head - 0.90%
0
0
10
12
14
AS Cu
16
AS Cu Grade
Use of PAX alongside this relatively low dosage of

AERO XD900 promoter proved beneficial.
Conditioning for 12 minutes was deleterious to
performance, with superior performance being
achieved at one minute and four minutes conditioning.
AS Cu Recovery (%)
60
50
40
129 g/t CYQUEST 3223, 64 g/t

Reagent S8881
30
330 g/t CYQUEST 3223, 64 g/t

Reagent S8881
20
10
Head 0.21% AS Cu
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
AS Cu grade (%)
Second Customer Underground Flotation of Sulfide

50
48 g/t AERO XD902
3) What Did Not Prove So Effective

3.1 Emulsification
It was thought that because the AERO XD900

promoter and AERO XD902 promoter molecules
were relatively water insoluble, use of an emulsifier
might aid its distribution through the pulp
(Cytecs Reagent S-9947).
As can be seen from the plot of duplicate tests,
there appears to be no metallurgical advantage to
adding an emulsifier. It would appear that the
AERO XD902 promoter disperses adequately on
its own.
100 g/t AERO XD902
AS Cu Recovery (%)
AS Cu Recovery (%)
70
AS Cu Recovery (%)
60
Since high energy conditioning is necessary for use

of AERO XD900 promoter and similar formulations in Kaolin processing, the question arose as to
whether additional conditioning time might
improve its effectiveness for oxide copper flotation. Tests were run on second customers open pit
ore using 70 g/t AERO XD900 promoter at three
conditioning times: one minute, four minutes and
12 minutes in 1) tests with only 700 g/t NaSH
added, 2) tests with 700 g/t NaSH then 100 g/t
PAX.
Collector to Rghr 1
800 g/t NaSH, 100 g/t

AERO XD902
70
40
170 g/t AERO XD902

320 g/t AERO XD902
30
50 g/t CYQUEST 3223,

100 g/t AERO XD902
100 g/t AERO XD902
100 g/t AERO XD902
.
20
10
Head 1.16% AS Cu
0
0
10
AS Cu grade (%)
This may have been because a dispersant was not

necessary on this ore, or it may have been due to
CYQUEST 3223 depressing the AS Cu to some
degree as a result of the high dosage.
3.3 Ammonium sulfate
In a paper by David Bastin of Liege University,

Belgium (Ref 4) it was suggested that use of ammonium sulfate significantly boosted AS Cu recovery in
CPS with xanthate. Looking again at the paper,
higher recoveries were achieved but at very poor
grades (relative to feed grade). The idea may have
come from the much older paper (Ref 5), which
describes use of ammonium sulfate as a means of
controlling the harmful effect of overdose of
sulfidizer.
Flotation of First Customer Sulfide
70
AS Cu Recovery (%)
60
References
Ref 1: Lee J.S, Nagaraj D.R. and Coe J.E., 1998,
Practical Aspects of Oxide Copper Recovery with
Alkyl Hydroxamates, Minerals Engineering Vol 11
No 10 p929939.
50
40
129 g/t CYQUEST 3223, 64 g/t

Reagent S8881
30
330 g/t CYQUEST 3223, 64 g/t

Reagent S8881
20
10
Head 0.21% AS Cu
0
0.0
To maintain Cu recovery through cleaning, it is

necessary to maintain the cleaning stages at similar
potentials to the roughing stage.
For a mixed copper sulfide/oxide ore, it may be
valuable (when feasible) to clean the sulfide and
oxide concentrates separately, as kinetics of oxide
flotation are likely to be slower.
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Ref 2: Nagaraj D.R. and Gorken A., 1991, Potential

controlled flotation and depression of copper sulfides
and oxides using hydrosulfide in nonxanthate systems, Canadian Metall. Quarterly Vol 30 No 2 pp
7986.
3.0
AS Cu grade (%)
In this work it can be seen that use of ammonium

sulfate had a negative impact on flotation performance. This may be because the levels of NaSH used
were below the threshold level where ammonium
salts start to show an advantage by control of excess
hydrosulfide.
Recommendations
As AERO XD900 and XD902 promoters tend to
solidify at lower temperatures (<17C), try to do
test work at the temperature of the plant pulp.
Adequate conditioning after NaSH addition is necessary to avoid excessive frothing.
Use of xanthate (PAX or NaBX), in addition to
sulfidization, and AERO XD900 promoter and
AERO XD902 promoter can aid recovery.
Very slimy ores can make use of AERO XD900
and XD902 promoters difficult, due to generation
of an over-stable froth. Look at either de-sliming or
use of polyphosphate type dispersants.
Experiment with conditioning time of AERO
XD900 and XD902 promoters, but 1-3 minutes is
a good starting point.
Ref 3: Kasanda J.K., Mpashi P. and Mumba C.,

1998, Laboratory Optimisation of the Underground
Copper Ore Flotation Recovery at Second customer
Concentrator, 100th AGM of the CIM, Montreal.
Ref 4: Bastin D., Frenay J. and Philippart P., 2003,
Ammonium Sulfate as Promoting Agent of the
Sulfidization Process of Cu-Co Oxide Ores From
The Luiswishi Deposit (DRC), Handout from Poster
session at XXII IMPC Cape Town 2003.
Ref 5: Zhang W. and Poling G.W., 1987,
Ammonium Sulfate as Activator in Sulpidized
Xanthate Flotation of malachite, unknown.
References not mentioned in the main text which

may be of value to enthusiastic oxide floaters:
Hallimond tube only
Salmon-Vega S., Herrera-Urbina R., SanchezCorrales V.M., Robles-Vega A., 2003, Floatability
of oxidised copper, oxidised chalcocite and copper
slag using octyl hydroxamate as a collector, 2003,
Cobre 2003 Volume III.
On use of ammonium sulfide
Kongolo K., Kipoka M., Minanga K. and Mpoyo
M., 2003, Improving the efficiency of oxide copper-cobalt ores flotation by combination of sulfidisers, Minerals Engineering 16, pp 10231026.
An early paper on use of sulfidization,

xanthate + AERO XD900 promoter and
AERO XD902 promoter
Evrard L. and De Cuyper J., 1975, Flotation of
copper-cobalt oxide ores with alkyl hydroxamates,
Proc 11th IMPC Cagliari.
Suggested use of imidazolines for malachite
flotation
Ackerman P.K., Harris G.H., Klimpel R.R. and
Aplan F.F., 1999, Use of Chelating Agents as
Collectors in the Flotation of Copper Sulfides and
Pyrite, Minerals and Metallurgical processing Vol
16, No 1.
Potential use of aldoximes for oxide copper

flotation
Das K.K., Pradip and Suresh B., 1995, Role of
Molecular Architecture and Chain Length in the
Flotation-Separation of Oxidised Copper-LeadZinc Minerals Using Salicylaldoxime derivatives,
XIX IMPC.
Email: custinfo@cytec.com
Worldwide Contact Info: www.cytec.com
US Toll Free 800-652-6013
Cytec Industries Inc. in its own name and on behalf of its affiliated companies (collectively, "Cytec") decline any liability with respect to the
use made by anyone of the information contained herein. The information contained herein represents Cytec's best knowledge thereon without constituting any express or implied guarantee or warranty of any kind (including, but not limited to, regarding the accuracy, the completeness or relevance of the data set out herein). Cytec is the sole owner or authorized user of the intellectual property rights relating to
the information communicated. The information relating to the use of the products is given for information purposes only. No guarantee or
warranty is provided that the product is adapted for any specific use. The user or purchaser should perform its own tests to determine the
suitability for a particular purpose. The final choice of use of a product remains the sole responsibility of the user.
2010 Cytec Industries Inc. All rights reserved.
Tel 973-357-3193
TRADEMARK NOTICE: The indicates a Registered

Trademark in the United States and the or *
indicates a Trademark in the United States. The mark
may also be registered, the subject of an application
for registration or a trademark in other countries.
MCT-1107-V2

Reactivos Cytec Cu Oxidado

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Reactivos Cytec Cu Oxidado

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

M i n e r a l P ro c e s s i n g

Application of AERO XD900 and AERO XD902

samples were screened to remove trash and

can be determined by aqua regia dissolution of the

In this case, minimal AS Cu was achieved with

Flotation of First Customer Sulfide Rougher Tails

129 g/t S-8881

238 g/t NaSH, 32 g/t A343, 64 g/t S-888

244 g/t NaSH 32 g/t A343

244 g/t NaSH 32 g/t A343

Results show superior AS Cu grade/recovery at

550 g/t AERO XD902

370 g/t NaSH, 240 g/t AERO XD902

560 g/t NaSH, 220 g/t AERO XD902

320 g/t NaSH 40 g/t A343

48 g/t AERO XD902

350 g/t AERO XD902

213 g/t AERO XD902

This time, high AS Cu grade/recovery was only

Second Customer AS Copper Recovery vs AERO XD900 Dosage

0 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX

700 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX

1400 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX

1400 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX

700 g/t NaSH, 105 g/t PAX

1400 g/t NaSH, 105 g/t PAX

700 g/t NaSH, 105 g/t PAX

1400 g/t NaSH, 105 g/t PAX

700 g/t NaSH, 170 g/t PAX

1400 g/t NaSH, 170 g/t PAX

1400 g/t NaSH, 170 g/t PAX

Second Customer Flotation of Sulfide Tails AS Cu Grade vs Recovery

AERO XD900 condition

AERO XD900 + PAX condition

All tests 700 g/t NaSH to head

PAX was added to the first rougher. High AS Cu

As the previous tests had demonstrated the value

AERO XD900 Dosage (g/t)

in recovery but with a major drop in concentrate

700 g/t NaSH, 170 g/t PAX

AERO XD900 Dosage (g/t)

0 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX

700 g/t NaSH, 0 g/t PAX

Note: four tests with same

Second Customer AS Copper Grade vs AERO XD900 Dosage

At the request of the first customer plant, a series

Combined Roughers T Cu Grade

AERO XD900 dosage

Root Mean Square Error

Observations (or Sum Wgts)

AERO XD900 dosage

NaSH dosage* AERO XD900

NaSH dosage* AERO XD900

Cytec OREPREP frother

Combined Roughers T Cu Grade

AERO XD900 dosage

Root Mean Square Error

Observations (or Sum Wgts)

AERO XD900 dosage

NaSH dosage* AERO XD900

NaSH dosage* AERO XD900

Cytec OREPREP frother

Combined Roughers AS Cu Grade

Root Mean Square Error