Microwave Leaching

OPTIMISATION OF FLOTATION REAGENTS IN THE
OTJIHASE CONCENTRATION PLANT
A PROJECT REPORT
Submitted By:
Victoria Ligola Amuthenu (200830538)
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of BSc. (Hon) Degree in Metallurgical

Engineering
DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF NAMIBIA
January 2013
DECLARATION
This report is a presentation of my original research work. Wherever contributions of

others are involved, every effort is made to indicate this clearly, with due reference to
the literature.
The work was done under the guidance of Mr G. Dombo, at the Faculty of
Engineering and Information Technology, Ongwediva.
Victoria L. Amuthenu ________________ Date: ______________
In my capacity as supervisor of the candidate’s project, I certify that the above

statements are true to the best of my knowledge.
Mr G. Dombo ________________ Date: ______________
(Supervisor)
ii
DEDICATION
This thesis is lovingly dedicated to my beloved parents, Mr. Leonard Amon and Mrs.
Selma Amon. Their support, encouragement, constant love and unwavering faith
have sustained me throughout my life.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am most grateful to the Namibia Oil Corporation (NAMCOR)’s Petroleum Training

and Education Fund (PETROFUND) for sponsoring my studies from the onset until my
final year. I would not be able to pursue this project, had they not offered me
financial assistance.
Furthermore, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the following parties, for
their contribution towards the completion of this project, at the Otjihase
concentration plant:
Weatherly mining Namibia for granting me an opportunity to pursue my final year

research project with them; my academic supervisor Mr G. Dombo, for having always
been there to render a helping hand, whenever the need arose from the beginning,
until completion of the project; The Weatherly Mining Namibia Processing Manager,
Mr O.K. Ilunga, for supervising the project from the onset until its completion; the
Processing foreman, Mr Vincent, for making all necessary arrangements, when special
expertise was required for particular tasks; Mrs M. Muyongo, Bureau Veritas
laboratory chemist and supervisor, for always making sure that the samples are
correctly analysed, and that the results are accurate, Otjihase mine site laboratory
analysts for spending so much of their valuable time carrying out analyses to obtain
results needed for the completion of the project, the Human Resources department
for dealing with all the logistics professionally.
Special thanks to Mr I. Funtua, for providing a home away from home

accommodation, for the whole duration of my project. Mom, dad and all my siblings,
thank you for believing in me, it kept me motivated to work hard, throughout.
Lastly, to everyone who contributed to the completion of this project, in one way or
another, thank you very much. MAY GOD BLESS YOU ALL
iv
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to optimize flotation reagents, the copper collector
“Senkol 294” and the pyrite depressant “Sodium Cyanide”, in the flotation circuit of
the Otjihase concentration plant, for the recovery of copper (Cu), gold (Au) and silver
(Ag). The work also aims to determine the feasibility of using sodium cyanide as a
depressant instead of hydrated lime, as well as to study the response of various ore
blends to the flotation process. The flotation reagents were prepared, and laboratory
flotation experiments were carried out using varying reagent dosages for the collector
and depressant optimization experiments, and a constant dosage for the various ore
blending experiments. Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy was used for samples
analyses (concentrate and tailings of each flotation experiment). For the collector,
optimum results were obtained at 20g/t dosage, with a concentrate grade of 17.04%
Cu, and 93.79% Cu recovery. Whereas for sodium cyanide, optimum results were
obtained at 26g/t dosage, with a concentrate grade of 23.83% Cu, 1.59ppm gold,
43.5ppm silver, and corresponding recoveries of 96.35%, 60.78% and 63.47%,
respectively. Sodium cyanide depressed pyrite more than did hydrated lime. The
blending ratio of 60% Matchless ore, 25% Otjihase underground ore and 15%
Otjihase 9-level ore produced the concentrate with an optimum grade-recovery
combination of 30.71% Cu, at a recovery of 97.60%.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION .................................................................................................................................. ii
DEDICATION .....................................................................................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................... iv
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................................................x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Objectives ............................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Justification of the Study .................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Limitations and Challenges of the Study ......................................................................... 3
1.4.1 Gold and Silver Analyses ............................................................................................... 3
1.4.2 Scale of Project .............................................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................. 4
2.1 The Flotation Process............................................................................................................. 4
2.1.1 Description of the flotation process.............................................................................. 4
2.1.2 Various Sub-Processes Controlling the Flotation Process ........................................... 7
2.2 Common Trends in Similar Operations ................................................................................. 7
2.3 Minerals that Hinder Depression of Pyrite ............................................................................ 9
2.4 Hydrated Lime as a pH Regulator and Depressant ........................................................... 11
2.4.1 Overview of Hydrated Lime .......................................................................................... 11
2.4.2 Hydrated Lime as a pH Regulator .............................................................................. 11
2.4.3 Hydrated Lime as a Pyrite Depressant ....................................................................... 12
2.5 Sodium Cyanide (NaCN) as a Depressant ......................................................................... 14
2.6 Flotation Control Systems................................................................................................... 14
2.7 Solubility Of Gold In Sodium Cyanide ............................................................................... 15
CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE .................................................................................. 17
vi
3.1 Sample Collection ................................................................................................................ 17
3.2 Sample Preparation ......................................................................................................... 17
3.2.1 Senkol 294 And Sodium Cyanide Optimisation.......................................................... 17
3.2.2 Blending Ratio Optimization ........................................................................................ 23
3.3 Reagent Collection and Preparation .............................................................................. 23
3.4 Reagent dosages calculations ........................................................................................ 25
3.5 Grinding and Particle Size Analysis ................................................................................ 27
3.6 Flotation Experiments ..................................................................................................... 29
3.6.1 Collector Senkol 294 Optimisation ......................................................................... 32
3.6.2 Sodium Cyanide Optimization ................................................................................. 34
3.7 Blending Ratio Optimization ........................................................................................... 36
3.8 Reagent consumption assessment................................................................................. 37
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 38
4.1 Ore Grades .......................................................................................................................... 38
4.2 X-ray diffraction results ...................................................................................................... 39
4.3 Grinding And Particle Size Analysis.................................................................................... 39
4.4 Individual Ore Flotation ..................................................................................................... 42
4.5 Collector (Senkol 294) Optimization .................................................................................. 42
4.6 Depressant (NaCN) Optimization ........................................................................................ 44
4.7 Blending Ratio Optimization ............................................................................................... 46
4.8 Reagent Consumption Assessment ................................................................................... 47
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. 48
5.1 Ore grades ....................................................................................................................... 48
5.2 Mineralogical Examination Using The X-Ray Diffraction Technique ............................ 48
5.3 Grinding and Particle Size Analysis ................................................................................ 49
5.4 Individual Ore Flotation .................................................................................................. 51
5.5 Collector Optimization ..................................................................................................... 51
5.6 Sodium Cyanide Optimization ........................................................................................ 53
5.7 Reagent Consumption Assessment ................................................................................ 55
5.8 Reagent Consumption Assessment ................................................................................ 56
vii
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 58
6.1 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 58
6.2 Recommendations............................................................................................................... 60
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 61
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................... 64
Appendix A: Ore Blend Mineralogy............................................................................................ 64
Appendix B: Calculations for chalcopyrite and pyrite composition of blended ore sample .. 65
Appendix C: Flotation results ..................................................................................................... 66
Appendix D: Flotation parameters ........................................................................................... 67
Appendix E: Sodium Cyanide Safety ......................................................................................... 68
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Preparation of flotation reagents ............................................................. 24

Table 2. Preparation of initially solid flotation reagents .......................................... 25
Table 3. Tons of ore milled and concentrate produced for months February to
September, 2012 ................................................................................................. 26
Table 4. Ore blending ratios ................................................................................. 36
Table 5. Ore grades for the samples collected and for the blend produced .............. 38
Table 6. Mineralogical analysis of blended ore ....................................................... 39
Table 7. Cumulative percent passing for particle size analysis for months July to
September 2012 .................................................................................................. 40
Table 8. Cumulative percent passing for particle size analysis for plant float feed, as
well as for 17 and 25 minutes grinding ................................................................. 41
Table 9. Concentrate grade for individual ore flotation ........................................... 42
Table 10. Calculated float feed grades for the various blending ratios ..................... 46
Table 11. Data for Reagent Consumption Assessment, Hydrated Lime versus Sodium
Cyanide .............................................................................................................. 47
Table 12. Obtained p80 values for random samples taken from months July to
November 2012 ................................................................................................... 49
Table 13. Obtained p80 values for plant float feed, and for 17 and 25 minutes
grinding .............................................................................................................. 50
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Various sub-processes controlling the flotation process [7] ........................ 7

Figure 2. Floatability of pyrite in the solutions of different types and concentrations of
depressants in the presence of 10mg/l KBX [8] ....................................................... 8
Figure 3. Recovery of Pyrite at varying pulp pH. Reprinted from Pyrite Flotation With
Xanthate Under Alkaline Conditions — Application to Environmental Desulfurisation
[11] .................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 4. Flotation control objective [3] ................................................................ 15
Figure 5. Circuit sketch of laboratory sorting and crushing ..................................... 18
Figure 6. Jaw crusher .......................................................................................... 19
Figure 7. Raw ore sample .................................................................................... 20
Figure 8. Product from laboratory jaw crusher ..................................................... 20
Figure 9. Sieving and sample mixing for preparation of gross sample ..................... 21
Figure 10. Drum used for sample holding .............................................................. 22
Figure 11. Prepared reagents (set 1) .................................................................... 24
Figure 12. Prepared reagents (set 2) ................................................................... 25
Figure 13. Laboratory grinding mill (ball mill) ........................................................ 27
Figure 14. Series of laboratory sieves ................................................................... 29
Figure 15. Setup of the flotation process ............................................................... 30
Figure 16. The flotation process ........................................................................... 31
Figure 17. Plot of cumulative % passing for months July to November, 2012 .......... 40
Figure 18. Plot of cumulative % passing versus screen aperture size, for plant float
feed, as well as for 17 and 25 minutes grinding .................................................... 41
Figure 19. Plot of Cu recovery versus concentrate grade for collector optimization,
with addition of sulphidiser to flotation circuit........................................................ 42
x
without addition of sulphidiser to flotation circuit ................................................... 43
with addition of sulphidiser to flotation circuit........................................................ 43
Figure 22. Plot of Cu recovery versus concentrate grade for NaCN optimization, (run
1) ....................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 23. Plot of Cu recovery versus concentrate grade for NaCN optimization (run
2) ....................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 24. Plot of Au and Ag grades in concentrate ............................................... 45
Figure 25. Plot of Au and Ag grades for various Senkol 294 and NaCN dosages ....... 45
Figure 26. Plot of Cu recovery versus concentrate grade for various ore blending
ratios .................................................................................................................. 47
Figure A1. XRD plot for the ore blend used for Senkol 294 and NaCN optimization
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………64
Figure C1. Flotation results for Senkol 294 and NaCN optimization experiments……. 66
Figure D1. pH, temperature and potential measurements for Senkol 294 and NaCN
optimization experiments………………………………………………………………………………….67
xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Cu Copper
Au Gold
Ag Silver
mm Millimeter
PAX Potassium Amyl Xanthate
ppm Parts per million
ppb Parts per billion
NaCN Sodium cyanide
FeSO4 Iron (II) Sulphate
K3[Fe(CN)6] Potassium ferricyanide
K4[Fe(CN)6] Potassium ferrocyanide
FeS2 Pyrite
Ca(OH)2 Calcium hydroxide (Hydrated lime)
CaO Calcium oxide
CaCO3 Calcium carbonate
FeO(OH) Ferric OxyHydroxide
Fe(OH)3 Iron (III) Hydroxide
Ca(CN)2 Calcium cyanamide
xii
CaCl2 Calcium chloride
NaOH Sodium Hydroxide
Na[Au(CN)2 Sodium aurocyanide
g gram
ml millilitre
HCN Hydrogen cyanide
S Sulphur
µm micrometer
t tons
rpm Revolutions per minute
GSN Geological Survey of Namibia
xiii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem Statement
Ore containing on average 1.80% Cu, 229ppb Au and 6.0ppm Ag is processed to give
a concentrate averaging 24 % Cu, 65ppm Ag and 0.25ppm Au. During the process a
concentrate from the roughing stage is cleaned to give final concentrate. The main
gangue mineral is pyrite. Previous research results indicated that the use of NaCN
(instead of the currently used lime) as a pyrite depressant in the roughing stage
significantly increases the grade of copper [1].
While this appears to be a positive development, there is potential loss of Au and Ag

due to leaching by NaCN from the concentrate into processing water. This would be
undesirable because precious metals are bonus elements that considerably improve
the profitability of the business. Losing these metals could adversely affect the
economics of the operation. Thus, while the benefits of using NaCN as a depressant
have been quantified in the rougher cell by a previous researcher [2], the same has
not been done for the cleaner cells. In addition, the concomitant losses, if any, of Au
and Ag are not known.
There was therefore a need to establish the optimum dosages of the collector (Senkol
294), and the pyrite depressant (NaCN), as well as to study the behavior of different
ore blending ratios to the flotation process.
There was also a need to study the economic feasibility of using NaCN as a pyrite
depressant, instead of the currently used hydrated lime.
1
1.2 Project Objectives
 To establish the optimum dosage of sodium cyanide and the collector, Senkol
294 in the cleaning stage of the flotation process
 To determine the feasibility of using sodium cyanide as a depressant, instead
of hydrated lime
 To study the behavior of various ore blending proportions to the flotation
process
1.3 Justification of the Study
 There is a need to establish the dosage of NaCN and Senkol 294 that achieves
high Cu grade of concentrate and at the same time minimizing the loss of Au
and Ag from the same concentrate
 Minerals that consume large quantities of collector in the matchless ore need
to be identified
 High valuable metal recoveries and grades are what all concentration plants
aim to achieve. This study therefore determined the grades and recoveries of
copper, gold and silver under the stated operational conditions, which may
result in increased economic advantages and also less metal disposal to the
tailings dam.
2
1.4 Limitations and Challenges of the Study
1.4.1 Gold and Silver Analyses
The analyses of gold, silver as well as mineralogical composition are not carried out
in the Otjihase laboratory, which means the results on the mineralogy of the ores,
gold and silver grades in the flotation feed and concentrate could not be obtained
right after the samples were sent for analyses. These samples were sent to external
laboratories, and treated as urgent samples, and results were made available within
the provided project duration.
1.4.2 Scale of Project
The experiments were limited to laboratory scale and could not be tested at large
scale plant operations, to avoid disrupting production.
3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This section summarises information obtained from previous researches pursued on

fields that are related to the subject(s) studied in this research project.
2.1 The Flotation Process
2.1.1 Description of the flotation process
Flotation is a very important and versatile mineral processing technique, and both
its use and application are continually being expanded to treat greater tonnages
and to cover new areas [2].
Flotation is a physico-chemical separation process that utilises the difference in

surface properties of the valuable minerals and the unwanted gangue minerals.
After treatment with reagents, such differences in surface properties between the
minerals within the flotation pulp become apparent. For flotation to take place,
an air bubble must be able to attach itself to a particle, rendering it
hydrophobic (water repellent) and lift it to the pulp surface, from which it is
removed as froth [3].
In addition, Wills [3] states that the process of material being recovered by flotation
from the pulp comprises three mechanisms:
1. Selective attachment to air bubbles (or "true flotation")

2. Entrainment in the water which passes through the froth
4
3. Physical entrapment between particles in the froth attached to air bubbles
(often referred to as "aggregation")
The attachment of valuable minerals to air bubbles is the most important

mechanism and represents the majority of particles that are recovered to the
concentrate [3].
There must be an optimum particle size for successful flotation (5-300microns); too
big a particle means the force of adhesion between the particle and the bubble may
be less than the particle weight and hence the bubble will drop [4].
The flotation process may either be direct or indirect [5]:
Direct flotation: the desired mineral component is transferred to the froth or float
fraction leaving the gangue in the pulp or tailing.
Indirect (reverse) flotation: the gangue is floated leaving the valuable component
in the pulp.
Various chemicals called flotation reagents are required, for the flotation process to
be successful. These are:
 The collector
They are inorganic compounds that adsorb onto the mineral surface rendering them
hydrophobic (water repellent) or aerophilic (air-loving)
Xanthates are the most widely used collectors for flotation of sulphide ores; fatty
acids are used for metal oxides, hydroxides and carbonates while amines are used to
float silicates [5].
 The frother
Frothers are heteropolar surface-active compounds that lower the surface tension of
water and have the ability to adsorb on the air bubble–water interface. Their
5
presence in the liquid phase increases the film strength of the air bubbles, thus
providing better attachment of hydrophobic particles to the bubbles. The frother
concentrates at the interface of water and air bubbles, forming an envelope around
the bubbles, which prevents them from colliding or touching. Frothers also lower the
surface tension of the water. The forces created around the air bubble in the
presence of a frother prevent the bubbles from collapsing [6].
 Regulators
Activators, depressants and pH regulators are often referred to in the literature as

modifiers or regulators of the flotation process. The main purpose of these reagents
is to modify the action of the collector on mineral surfaces and as a consequence
govern the selectivity of the flotation process. In the presence of regulators, the
collector only adsorbs on particles that are targeted for recovery [6].
In some cases, a regulator reacts directly with the mineral surface (for example
copper sulphate with sphalerite) and provides conditions for interaction of this
mineral with the collector. These reagents are known as activators. Some regulators
may reduce conditions for hydrophobization of a particular mineral with the collector,
or they can make the surface hydrophilic. These reagents are called depressants.
Both activators and depressants can be either inorganic or organic compounds [6].
6
2.1.2 Various Sub-Processes Controlling the Flotation Process
Figure 1 shows the schematics of the various sub-processes that control the flotation
process [7]
Figure 1. Various sub-processes controlling the flotation process [7]
2.2 Common Trends in Similar Operations
The mineral that mostly interferes with copper flotation in the Otjihase plant is pyrite
[1], and hence the need for a strong pyrite depressant in the flotation circuit.
Elsewhere, research done by Milena [8] on depression of pyrite by cyanide found that
the introduction of the depressants in the flotation system leads to the reducing of
pyrite floatability, while various depressing effects were achieved with various
depressants (Figure 2).
7
Figure 2. Floatability of pyrite in the solutions of different types and concentrations of
depressants in the presence of 10mg/l KBX [8]
KBX is Potassium Butyl Xanthate, a copper collector
1-FeSO4
2-NaCN
3-K3[Fe(CN)6]
4-K4[Fe(CN)6]
From Figure 2 it can be seen that single depressants significantly reduced the pyrite
collection ability in the presence of 10mg/l KBX. This effect is not so pronounced in
the presence of FeSO4, while pyrite still relatively well floats in the solution of this
8
reagent (R=82%). Used reagents could be classified in the following series by the
efficiency of depressing effects [8]:
NaCN > K 3[Fe(CN)6 ] > K 4[Fe(CN)6 ] > FeSO4 ………………………………………..(1)
Effective separation of valuable minerals becomes problematic when other minerals

within the pulp are inadvertently activated. Pyrite (FeS 2) is one such mineral that
responds to copper activation. Pyrite is the most abundant sulphide mineral and is
undesirably associated, and in most cases fine grained and intimately intergrown with
minerals of economic value [9].
At the Madneuli copper concentrator in Georgia, three different types, named as

sulphide ore, complex ore and oxidized ore are blended (ratio not provided) to form
up an ore blend with an average copper grade of 0.89%, which produces a
concentrate with an average copper grade of 18%[10].
The pH value in the flotation circuit is kept around 11.5 for pyrite depression.
Potassium isobutyl xanthate is used as the collector with the dosage of 25-32 g/t
[10].
2.3 Minerals that Hinder Depression of Pyrite
Sulphide copper ores are considered easy to treat provided that the main copper
mineral is chalcopyrite. In case the ore contains secondary copper minerals, such as
chalcocite, bornite and covellite, depression of pyrite may be a problem because the
pyrite can be activated by copper ions generated during the grinding operation [6].
The pyrite in copper sulphide ores is more active than in the porphyry copper ores, so
the depression of pyrite is more difficult. Some ores contain pyrrhotite and marcasite,
9
which in many cases contaminates the concentrate. In the ores where pyrrhotite is
present, copper concentrate can be as low as 16–20% Cu [6].
Pyrite flotation was carried out by Mermillod-Blondin et. al, [11], at varying pH, using
hydrated lime as the pH regulator. The results obtained are as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Recovery of Pyrite at varying pulp pH. Reprinted from Pyrite Flotation With
Xanthate Under Alkaline Conditions — Application to Environmental Desulfurisation
[11]
Flotation was high at pH 6 and dropped rapidly at a pH above 6 to approach the

entrainment recovery value (around ten weight percent). These results confirm the
well-known flotation behavior with pyrite flotation being more effective for a pH
below 6 [11].
10
2.4 Hydrated Lime as a pH Regulator and Depressant
2.4.1 Overview of Hydrated Lime
Hydrated lime, chemically known as calcium hydroxide, calcium hydrate or caustic

lime is produced by reacting water with high calcium quicklime in an atmospheric
hydrator. It is a white powder and decomposes on heating producing calcium oxide.
It is soluble in water and the solution is a medium strong base reacting violently with
acids and attacking many metals in presence of water [12].
Hydrated lime is suitable for a wide range of applications including: the treatment of
potable water, waste water and municipal sludge, as a chemical process additive and
the stabilization of toxic waste for site remediation [12].
It is the most widely used reagent in the mineral industry for flotation of sulphides
and in some cases, non-sulphide minerals [6].
The slaked or hydrated lime Ca(OH)2 is the form of lime primarily used in mineral
flotation. Production of high-calcium lime is based on calcination of limestone at a
temperature of 1100–1300 °C in kilns according to the reaction 2 [6].
CaCO3 + heat CaO + CO2 …………………………………………………(2)
2.4.2 Hydrated Lime as a pH Regulator
Lime is normally used as a pH regulator exclusively in sulphide mineral flotation [5].
Research done at the Mineral Industry Research Laboratory at the University of

Alaska, found that in a flotation process, slurry pH decreases gradually during pulping
11
of the sulphur-containing sample. Lime, sodium hydroxide and sodium carbonate
were tested as the pH regulators in the sulphur flotation. Lime was shown to be
slightly more effective than the other two pH regulators [12].
Flotation where possible, is carried out in an alkaline medium, as most collectors

including xanthates are stable under these conditions [14]. The alkalinity of the pulp
is maintained by addition of lime and to a lesser extent sodium hydroxide or
ammonia.
The lowering of the pH can be attained by the addition of sulphuric acid or

sulphurous acid. These chemicals are often used in very significant amounts in almost
all flotation operations [14].
The pH regulators are cheaper than the frothers and collectors, however the overall
costs are generally higher with the pH regulators per ton of ore treated. For example:
the cost of lime in sulphide minerals flotation is roughly double the amount of the
collector used, so the significant operation cost saving can be attained by proper
selection of the pH regulators [14].
2.4.3 Hydrated Lime as a Pyrite Depressant
Hydrated lime is the most common depressant used in the mining industry [15]. It is
effective for depression of pyrite, arsenopyrite and pyrrhotite. Some valuable minerals
such as galena and liberated free milling gold may be depressed by excessive
amounts of lime. Pyrite is the most common gangue and this mineral is sensitive to
both the hydroxide and calcium ion [15].
In the process of copper flotation, hydrated lime is used as a depressant and for
achieving the desired level of alkalinity in flotation tanks [16].
12
Hydrated lime is also the principal depressant for iron sulphides (pyrite, pyrrhotite,
marcasite, etc.). The depression mechanism of lime was extensively studied mainly
because of its wide application. There is conflicting data on the mechanism
responsible for depression using lime. Some investigators have postulated that the
depression of sulphides by lime is a result of increased hydroxyl ion concentration in
the same way as the action of sodium hydroxide. In this case, pyrite in an alkaline
solution forms colloidal hydrated iron oxide FeO(OH) or Fe(OH)3 on the pyrite
surface, thus preventing collector adsorption. However, the depressing effect of lime
is vastly different from that of other alkalines (i.e. NaOH) [5].
In addition, Bulatovic [6] states that pyrite, FeS2 (Fe-46.6%; S-53.4%; hardness-6;
specific gravity-5) is the most abundant sulphide in virtually all types of ores. This is
one of the most studied minerals and yet the most problematic, interfering mineral –
not only in flotation of copper ores but also in the flotation of virtually all sulphide
ores.
Also according to Bulatovic [6], pyrite belongs to a group of highly floatable minerals
and can be effectively floated in the presence of a frother only. However, the
floatability of pyrite, as well as hydrophobicity (depression) largely depends on the
temperature under which pyrite is formed. For example, pyrite formed under low
temperature (i.e. well crystalline pyrite) is less floatable than pyrite formed at a
higher temperature.
In addition, Bulatovic [6] states that in an alkaline pH, pyrite is well depressed and in
an acidic pH, the floatability of pyrite improves significantly. In an alkaline pH,
secondary depressants such as organic compounds, sulfates and cyanide are quite
effective.
13
2.5 Sodium Cyanide (NaCN) as a Depressant
Commercially, sodium cyanide is produced from calcium cyanamide, carbon and

sodium chloride as per the following reactions [15].
Ca(CN)2 + C + 2NaCl = 2NaCN +CaCl2………………………………………………..….(3)
Ca(CN)2 + C + Na2CO3 = 2NaCN + CaO + CO2………………………………………...(4)
Sodium cyanide is an extremely powerful depressant for pyrite. When used in excess,
this reagent will also depress the valuable minerals such as copper, lead, and zinc
sulphides. It will also depress the flotation of liberated gold [15].
Information on sodium cyanide safety appears in Appendix E.
2.6 Flotation Control Systems
A flotation control system consists of various sub-systems, some of which may

be manually controlled, while others may have computer-controlled loops, but
all contributing to the overall control objective. The aim should be to improve the
metallurgical efficiency, i.e. to produce the best possible grade-recovery curve
(Figure 4), and to stabilise the process at the concentrate grade which will
produce the most economic return from the throughput despite disturbances
entering the circuit. This has not, as yet, been achieved by automatic control alone
[3].
14
Figure 4. Flotation control objective [3]
2.7 Solubility Of Gold In Sodium Cyanide
Gold dissolves into sodium cyanide according to the reaction, at a pH of around 10:
4Au + 8NaCN + O2 + 2H2O 4Na[Au(CN)2] + 4NaOH …………………..(5)
Research done by Eisele et. al. [16] compared the extraction of gold and silver
from a variety of precious metal ores under comparable conditions of reagent
concentrations, time of leaching, and at oxidant levels that enhance extraction
for both cyanide and thiourea. A NaCN concentration of 2 g/L (under test
conditions) was used because this is a commonly used level in cyanidation of
precious metal ores. For some ores that contain no constituents such as base
metal sulphides or carbonaceous compounds which interfere with cyanidation
(clean oxide ores), a NaCN level as low as 0.17 g/L may be sufficient.
15
However, for ores containing cyanicides, much higher levels, more than 2 g/L may
be necessary to obtain good precious metal extraction [16].
A good gold recovery by leaching requires adequate cyanide and oxygen levels as
well as a pH value between 10 and 12. The normal cyanide consumption per ton of
ore is in the range of 100-500g (for leaching) [16].
16
CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
The research was conducted by carrying out experiments, and hence, the nature of
the research was experimental. This chapter discusses the detailed methodology of
the research project conducted.
3.1 Sample Collection
Each of the 3 ore stockpiles (Matchless ore, Otjihase underground ore as well as
Otjihase 9-level ore) was visually divided into sixteen vertical sections, and then into
three horizontal sections, giving a total of 48 sampling points. From each sampling
point (division) a scoop which takes approximately 500g of sample was used to take
a sample of the ore. When the required sample mass was not obtained when a scoop
of ore was taken from every sampling point, the exercise was repeated, taking the
ore sample from a different position of the sampling point.
3.2 Sample Preparation
3.2.1 Senkol 294 And Sodium Cyanide Optimisation
3.2.1.1 Sorting and crushing
For each ore stockpile sample collected, the ore was hand sorted, to remove large
ore particles of approximately 30mm diameter or more. These large ore particles
17
were fed into the jaw crusher, giving a product with a particle size range of 5-15mm.
The product from the jaw crusher, as well as the finer ore particles that remained
after hand sorting were fed into the roll crusher, which screens the feed with a grizzly
screen of 20mm aperture size. The oversize is taken from the grizzly and fed back
into the jaw crusher, whereas the undersize goes into the roll crusher and is crushed
by means of two rolling cylinders, to give a product with a particle size of at most
5mm.
Figure 5 shows a sketch of the laboratory sorting and crushing circuit as described in
section 3.2.1.1
Sample
+30mm
Hand Sorting Jaw Crushing
-30mm
Roll Crushing
Sieving and Sample

Mixing
Figure 5. Circuit sketch of laboratory sorting and crushing
18
The jaw crusher that was used is shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Jaw crusher
1- Jaw crusher feeding point

2- Chamber for collecting crushed ore
Figures 7 and 8 show the collected raw ore samples, as well as the product of the
jaw crusher, respectively
19
Figure 7. Raw ore sample
Figure 8. Product from laboratory jaw crusher
3.2.1.2 Sieving
The product from the roll crusher was fed onto a 3350µm sieve which was hand
shaken. The undersize of the 3350µm sieve were collected, and put in a labeled
drum, for each ore sample. Sieveing is shown in Figure 9.
20
Figure 9. Sieving and sample mixing for preparation of gross sample
Before the three ore samples were mixed together, a sample of each ore was
obtained, and taken to the Geological Survey of Namibia (GSN) for mineralogical
analysis using the X-ray diffraction technique.
A total sample mass of 105kg was to be prepared, to ensure that there was enough
sample to carry out the trial experiments as well as the main flotation experiments. A
similar project done at the Otjihase concentration plant showed that the ores should
be mixed in the ratio of 25.5:44.8:29.7; in the order of Otjihase underground
ore:Matchless ore:9-level ore, respectively [2]. A sample of each of the three ores
was taken for copper (Cu), zinc (Zn) and sulphur (S) analyses in the Otjihase mine
site laboratory.
A mass of 26.775kg of underground ore, 47.04kg of the Matchless ore, as well as

29.7kg of nine-level ore were weighed on the laboratory scale and put into labeled
drums. These were the masses of the samples that were mixed to produce the gross
sample of the flotation experiments.
21
A drum was obtained in which the gross sample was to be put, and a sample was
taken from each of the three ores each time, mixed in a plate, and, using the
3350µm sieve, the mixed sample was sieved into the gross sample drum. This
exercise was repeated until all the 3 separate ore samples were finished. The gross
sample was then further mixed in the drum, and was sieved into another drum using
the hand shaken 3350µm sieve, to ensure thorough mixing of the three ores. After
sample preparation was done, three samples were taken, one was sent to the
Otjihase mine site laboratory for Cu, Zn and S analyses, one was sent to the Bureau
Veritas laboratory in Swakopmund for gold (Au) and silver (Ag) analyses, while one
was sent to the Geological Survey of Namibia for mineralogical examination using the
X-ray diffraction technique.
Figure 10 shows the drum that was used for sample collection (for each ore a
different drum was used)
Figure 10. Drum used for sample holding
22
3.2.2 Blending Ratio Optimization
3.2.2.1 Sorting and crushing
Sorting and crushing for the blending ratio experiments was done as for Senkol 294
and Sodium cyanide optimization, as described in section 3.2.1.1.
3.2.2.2 Sieving
The same procedure was followed as in 3.2.1.2 above.
For the blending ratio optimization experiments, the ore samples were kept in
separate drums, and were not mixed as was the case with the collector and
depressant optimization experiments, which is described in section 3.2.1.3. From
each of the three ore samples, a sample was taken and sent to the Otjihase mine site
laboratory for Cu, Zn and S analyses.
3.3 Reagent Collection and Preparation
The reagents used in the flotation experiments were collected from the Otjihase
flotation plant. Only sodium cyanide was obtained as a solid from the Bureau Veritas
laboratory supervisor. The copper collector senkol 294, the sulphidiser NaHS, the gold
collector LSB as well as the frother were collected as 100% liquid reagents from
drums in the plant. pH regulator as well as depressant Hydrated lime and the copper
collector Potassium Amyl-Xanthate (PAX) were collected as 100% solid reagents from
the plant.
23
It is not safe practice to use highly concentrated reagents in the laboratory; hence
Senkol 294, PAX, sulphurdiser, LSB and sodium cyanide were each diluted to make a
1% solution. Lime was diluted to make up a 10% solution, whereas the frother was
undiluted since it is insoluble in water. The densities of all reagents were equal to one
(1), except for the sulphidiser, whose density was 1.2.
Table 1 shows how the reagents were prepared:
a) Initially liquid reagents
Table 1. Preparation of flotation reagents
REAGENT Volume of reagent Final volume (after Concentration of

added (ml) addition of distilled reagent (%)
water) (ml)
Senkol 294 10 1000 1
LSB 5 500 1
Sulphurdiser 8.33 1000 1
Frother 30 30 100
Figure 11. Prepared reagents (set 1)
24
Figure 12. Prepared reagents (set 2)
b) Initially solid reagents
Table 2. Preparation of initially solid flotation reagents
Reagent Mass of reagent added Mass of Final volume (after Reagent

(g) water added addition of distilled water) concentration
(g) (ml) (%)
Hydrated lime 100 900 1000 10
PAX 5 495 500 1
NaCN 10 900 1000 1
3.4 Reagent dosages calculations
The file with records on the amount of each reagent used for each month was
consulted to determine the total amount of reagent used for the period of 8 months,
February to September 2012. Information on the amount of ore treated each month
over this period of time was provided by the Processing Manager, Mr I.K. Ilunga.
25
Table 3. Tons of ore milled and concentrate produced for months February to
September, 2012
Tons of ore milled

Matchless Otjihase Total ore Cu conc (t)
ore milled ores milled milled (t)
(t) (t)
February 11410.882 10264.91 21675.79 1429.29
March 17355.914 10688.43 28044.34 1770.04
April 13322.189 10501.83 23824.02 1650.66
May 11882.277 16410.46 28292.73 2002.17
June 14601.862 18434.29 33036.15 1952.04
July 13597.456 11124.25 24721.71 2021.85
August 12825.014 15649.99 28475.00 1932.41
September 17044.55 17403.31 34447.86 2545.10
TOTAL 112,040.14 110,477.46 222,517.60 15,303.56
The amount of each reagent used over that 8 month period was calculated, and the
dosage of each reagent was calculated as 95% of “the total reagent obtained divided
by the total amount of ore treated”. This is because of the total reagent used in the
plant, 95% is fed to the rougher cells, and the remaining 5% is fed to the cleaner
circuit.
For sodium cyanide optimization, the dosage to the flotation circuit was calculated
based on the optimum value that was obtained by from a similar project carried out
at the Otjihase concentration plant by Leonard [2].
26
3.5 Grinding and Particle Size Analysis
The grinding and particle size analysis experiments were done to determine the
particle size range of the flotation feed, as well as the residence time of the flotation
feed in the mill, that would yield the required float feed particle size ranges.
Firstly, the shift assays file was consulted for the float feed particle size analysis for
the five months period of July to November 2012. For each month, particle size
analysis was chosen randomly for one shift, and this was used to determine the P80
for each particle size analysis chosen. P80 is the screen aperture size, through which
80% of the sample being screened passes. From the P80’s of the 5 months, an
average P80 value was calculated. Also, a sample of the float feed was taken from
the plant, and taken through particle size analysis. The results of the two analyses
were compared.
Projects done at the Otjihase concentration plant, and involving flotation

experiments, had used a grinding time of 17 minutes. Two grinding and particle size
analysis experiments were therefore carried out, with the grinding residence times of
17 and 25 minutes.
Figure 13. Laboratory grinding mill (ball mill)
27
The procedure for the grinding experiments was as follows:
1. A 1.3kg sample was weighed

2. The sample was added to the mill
3. 800ml of water were added
4. 0.334ml LSB solution and 0.466ml sulphurdiser solution were added to the mill
5. The mill was run for 17 minutes
6. The pulp was discharged into a flotation cell
7. The mill was washed with 1450ml of water and the contents were added to
the flotation cell with the initial mill discharge
8. The mill was cleaned to prepare it for grinding of the next sample
Procedure for particle size analysis, after grinding
1. Samples were filtered and dried

2. A mass of 50g was weighed and then put on a series of vibrating screens for
about 10 minutes
3. The product of each screen (the mass of particles retained on each screen)
was weighed
4. The percentage mass retained on each screen was calculated (and hence
percentage passing)
5. Graphs of cumulative percentage passing versus screen aperture sizes were
plotted, from which the P80 of each grinding period was determined.
The series of sieves used for particle size analysis are shown in Figure 14.
28
Figure 14. Series of laboratory sieves
3.6 Flotation Experiments
Before the collector as well as depressant optimization experiments were started, trial
experiments were carried out, first to familiarize the researcher with the flotation
machine operation as well as to study the response of the three individual ores to the
flotation process, when they are not blended together. The reagents dosages used
for the trial experiments were the ones calculated using the method described in
section 3.4.
For every experiment done, pH, temperature and potential were recorded, before pH
adjustment, before introducing air into the cell, as well as after the flotation process,
in both the rougher and cleaner cells, as is indicated in Appendix D.
Flotation experiments were carried out using the equipment setup as shown in Figure
15.
29
Figure 15. Setup of the flotation process
1-Temperaratue, potential and temperature meter
2- Flotation cell with pulp
3- pH, temperarute and potential probes dipped into pulp
4- Agitator
5- Air valve
6- Handle, when rotated moves the agitator up or down in the pulp
30
7- Power source
8- Flotation machine switch
The three separate ores, Otjihase underground, Otjihase 9-level as well as the
Matchless ore underwent the flotation process separately, to study how each of the
ores would respond to the flotation process when it is concentrated without being
blended with other ores.
All flotation experiments were carried out under the following constant conditions:
 Agitator speed of 1200rpm

 Pulp density of 1.7
 Atmospheric air was used by opening the air valve
A flotation cell during the flotation process, with the rotating agitator dipped into the
pulp is shown in Figure 16.
Figure 16. The flotation process
31
3.6.1 Collector Senkol 294 Optimisation
The procedure for the flotation process was as follows:
a) ROUGHER CELL
1. The cell with the pulp was placed below the flotation machine and the agitator
was lowered into the pulp
2. The flotation machine was switched on and the agitator was allowed to run for
some time to create homogeneity in the pulp
3. The pH, temperature and potential of the pulp were recorded
4. The pH of pulp was adjusted to the range 9.3-9.5, by adding lime
5. PAX, frother and Senkol 294 were added
6. The reagents were allowed to condition for 3 minutes
7. The pH, temperature and potential of the pulp were recorded as the
conditioning time neared 3 minutes
8. Air was introduced into the cell by opening the air valve
9. The froth was allowed to rise and a scraper was used to collect the froth into
the second cell for 9 minutes
10. After 9 minutes the flotation process was stopped
12. The agitator was cleaned, and the flotation cell was removed
b) CLEANER CELL
1. The cell with the rougher concentrate was placed on the flotation machine
some time (about 30 seconds) to create homogeneity in the pulp
4. The pH was adjusted to 10.5 by adding lime
32
6. The reagents were to condition for 3 minutes
9. The froth was allowed to rise, and thereafter a scraper was used to collect
froth into the receiving cell for 3 minutes
10. The flotation process was stopped after 3 minutes
12. The flotation machine was switched off
13. The rougher tails, cleaner concentrate, and cleaner tails were filtered, dried
and were analysed for Cu, Zn and S
The collector Senkol 294 dosage was varied from 20 to 45g/t, using dosages of 20,
25, 30, 35, 40 and 45g/t. the flotation experiments were done first using all reagents
as outlined in the procedure in a) and b) above, and secondly, the flotation
experiments for all senkol 294 dosages were done without using the sulphurdiser, to
study the response of the ore to the flotation process, and the results obtained were
compared to when the sulphurdiser was used.
The two samples that gave a good Cu concentrate grade and recovery combination
were sent to the Bureau Veritas laboratory in Swakopmund for Au and Ag analyses.
Since the Au and Ag results take time to be obtained (10 days), the Senkol 294
dosage that yielded a concentrate with a good Cu grade and recovery combination
was used for the sodium cyanide optimization experiments. Graphs were plotted for
concentrate grade and recovery combinations for the various collector dosages.
33
3.6.2 Sodium Cyanide Optimization
The dosage which yielded a good Cu concentrate grade and recovery combination
was used for the sodium cyanide optimization experiments, and was kept constant
throughout the experiments.
A similar project done by Willem Leonard, a third year student at the University of
Namibia at the time, yielded an optimum dosage of 13g/t NaCN, to the rougher
circuit, without continuation to the cleaning of the rougher concentrate. It was
therefore decided that a factor of half of the NaCN dosage previously recommended
be used in determining the NaCN dosing rates to be used in the optimization
experiments. The starting dosage was 6.5 g/t, half the dosage of 13g/t. Other
dosages were increased, by adding 6.5g/t to the preceding dosage, in each case, to
give dosages of 19.5, 26 and 32.5g/t.
Sodium cyanide dosages used were therefore: 6.5, 13, 19.5, 26 and 32.5g/t.
The flotation experiments were carried out as follows:
1. ROUGHER CELL
1. The cell with the pulp was positioned below the agitator on the flotation
machine and the agitator was lowered into the pulp
about a minute to create homogeneity in the pulp
4. PAX, frother and NaCN were added to the pulp
6. The pH, temperature and potential of the pulp were recorded as the
conditioning time neared 3 minutes
34
8. The froth was allowed to rise and a scraper was used to collect the froth into
the second cell for 9 minutes
9. After 9 minutes the flotation process was stopped by switching the flotation
machine off
11. The agitator was cleaned and the flotation cell was removed from the flotation
machine
CLEANER CELL
1. The cell with the rougher concentrate was placed on the flotation machine
some time (about 30 seconds) to create homogeneity in the pulp
8. The froth was allowed to rise, and thereafter a scraper was used to collect
froth into the receiving cell for 3 minutes
9. The flotation process was stopped after 3 minutes
11. The flotation machine was switched off
12. The rougher tails, cleaner concentrate, and cleaner tails were filtered, dried
and were analysed for Cu, Zn and S
For each NaCN dosage, the flotation experiment was carried out twice, to enhance
reliability of the results of the flotation process. The two samples with dosages
yielding a good combination of the Cu concentrate grade and recovery were sent to
35
the Bureau Veritas laboratory in Swakopmund for Au and Ag analyses. The results
obtained on the Cu, Au and Ag grade of concentrate were used to calculate the
recovery of each of the three elements, and then graphs of grade versus recovery for
various NaCN dosages were plotted.
3.7 Blending Ratio Optimization
Sample collection and preparation for this set of experiments was done as described
in section 3.2.2. After the optimum collector and depressant dosages were
determined (based on the Cu concentrate grade and recovery only), these dosages
were used for the optimization of the blending ratios. The blending ratios used are as
appears in Table 4:
Table 4. Ore blending ratios

Matchless ore % Otjihase Underground Otjihase 9-level ore
(low level ore) % %
1 30 20 50
2 30 50 20
3 30 35 35
4 40 20 40
5 40 40 20
6 40 35 25
7 50 25 25
8 50 15 35
9 60 20 20
10 60 25 15
11 70 15 15
21.06 kg needed 9.02 kg needed 12.48kg needed
36
Each ore was separately analysed for Cu, Zn and S. For every ore blend in the table
above, one flotation experiment was carried out (both the rougher and cleaner
stages); to determine the concentrate as well tails grades and recoveries of Cu.
For every blend, the required amount of each ore was weighed on the laboratory
scale. The three weighed ores were mixed, and were fed into the mill for grinding
(the grinding was done as described in section 3.6.1, and the flotation experiments
were carried out the same way as described in section 3.6.2 (b), except that the
sodium cyanide dosage was kept constant.
Based on the results obtained for each ore blend, graphs of grade and recovery
combinations were plotted, and the blend yielding the optimum grade and recovery
combination was determined.
3.8 Reagent consumption assessment
Information on the costs of sodium cyanide and lime were obtained from a report on
a similar project done. However, the costs obtained from the report were per ton of
each of the reagents, but these were calculated from the cost of smaller amounts of
reagent. From the obtained dosages of the two reagents, the amount of reagent in
tons, required to treat a ton of ore was determined. From the obtained amount of
reagents required, the total costs of the reagents for a ton of ore treated were
calculated, and the two were compared to determine which reagent costs more for
the same amount of ore treated.
37
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
This chapter provides results of various experiments carried out, as well as all
analyses done to obtain information that was vital for fulfilling the objectives of the
project.
4.1 Ore Grades
Table 5 shows the copper, zinc as well as sulphur grades of the three ores collected,
as well as for the ore blend that was prepared as described in chapter 3, sections 3.1
and 3.2.2, respectively.
Table 5. Ore grades for the samples collected and for the blend produced
Ore grades
%Cu %Zn %S ppb Au ppm Ag
9 level 2.14 0.92 19.12
Matchless 2.83 0.43 12.41
Underground 1.37 0.17 13.54
Blended ore 2.06 0.55 14.02 229.00 6.00
38
4.2 X-ray diffraction results
The results of the XRD analysis done showed the following mineralogical composition
of the blended ore, full XRD plot is in Appendix A, Figure A1:
Table 6. Mineralogical analysis of blended ore
Mineral Formula % Composition

Nimite (Ni,Mg,Al)6(Si,Al)4O10(OH)8 17.99
Muscovite (K,NH4,Na)Al2(Si,Al)4O10(OH)2 12.92
Chalcopyrite CuFeS2 15.46
Quartz low SiO2 39.00
Actinolite Ca2(Mg,Fe)5Si8O22(OH) 4.83
Pyrite FeS2 9.79
The researcher did calculations to determine the pyrite and chalcopyrite percent
compositions of the blended ore, based on the sample’s sulphur content. The
calculations, however gave percent compositions differing from the values obtained
using the XRD method. The calculated percent compositions were 20.06%
Chalcopyrite and 13.12% Pyrite, respectively. Detailed calculations are in Appendix C.
4.3 Grinding And Particle Size Analysis
a) Particle size analyses for randomly chosen days from months July to November
2012 are as shown in Table 7.
39
Table 7. Cumulative percent passing for particle size analysis for months July to
September 2012
Particle size analysis

6-Jul 10-Aug 16-Sep 12-Oct 1-Nov
300 90.4 88.8 93.6 83.2 98.0
250 85.6 83.4 89.0 75.8 96.6
212 80.2 76.8 82.6 68.4 94.4
150 65.0 60.0 64.8 49.4 86.0
75 39.6 34.6 31.8 22.2 66.6
45 23.4 24.2 16.6 13.4 52.0
-45 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
The data in Table 7 were plotted to give graphs of cumulative percent passing versus
aperture size, as is shown in Figure 17.
Cumulative % passing, July to November 2012

100.0
90.0
80.0
Cumulative % passing
70.0
60.0 6-Jul
50.0 10-Aug
40.0 16-Sep
30.0 12-Oct
20.0 1-Nov
10.0
0.0
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Aperture size (µm)
Figure 17. Plot of cumulative % passing for months July to November, 2012
40
2. Particle size analyses for 17 minutes grinding (17 min), 25 minutes grinding
(25 min) as well as for the plant float feed sample (sample was taken from the
plant)
Table 8. Cumulative percent passing for particle size analysis for plant float feed, as
well as for 17 and 25 minutes grinding
17 min 25 min Plant float feed

300 99.0 99.6 99.4
250 97.2 99.4 98.4
212 93.8 97.6 94.6
150 77.0 88.6 80.6
75 39.4 53.6 42.4
45 22.8 28.8 23.8
-45 0.0 0.0 0.0
The data from Table 8 was used to plot graphs of cumulative percent passing versus
aperture size, as shown in Figure 18.
Cumulative % passing for plant float feed as well

as 17 and 25 minutes grinding
100.0
90.0
80.0
Cumulative % passing
70.0
60.0
50.0 17 min
40.0 25 min
30.0 Plant float feed
20.0
10.0
0.0
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Aperture size (µm)
Figure 18. Plot of cumulative % passing versus screen aperture size, for plant float
feed, as well as for 17 and 25 minutes grinding
41
4.4 Individual Ore Flotation
The flotation of individual ore produced the following results:
Table 9. Concentrate grade for individual ore flotation
Ore Concentrate grade (%Cu)

Otjihase 9-level 10.69
Otjihase underground 17.73
Matchless 16.36
4.5 Collector (Senkol 294) Optimization
Section 4.5 provides graphs of results obtained for the collector optimization
experiments that were carried out. As described in chapter 3, section 3.6.1.
with addition of sulphidiser to flotation circuit
42
without addition of sulphidiser to flotation circuit
with addition of sulphidiser to flotation circuit
43
4.6 Depressant (NaCN) Optimization
Section 4.5 gives the results of the depressant NaCN optimization experiments that
were carried out as described in section 3.6.2
Figure 22. Plot of Cu recovery versus concentrate grade for NaCN optimization, (run
1)
Figure 23. Plot of Cu

recovery versus concentrate grade for NaCN optimization (run 2)
44
The following two graphs show the results obtained on gold and silver for the
collector as well as NaCN optimization experiments. The graphs compare the
concentrate grades and recoveries obtained for various Senkol 294 and NaCN
dosages.
Plot of Au vs Ag grades in
concentrate
50.00 2.00
40.00 1.50
ppm Au
ppm Ag
30.00
1.00
20.00
10.00 0.50 ppm Ag
0.00 0.00 ppm Au
19.5 26 32.5 20 25
NaCN NaCN NaCN Senkol Senkol
294 294
Reagents dosages (g/t)
Figure 24. Plot of Au and Ag grades in concentrate
Plot of recoveries of Au and Ag

80
Percentage recovery
70
60
50
40
30 Gold
20
10 Silver
0
19.5 g/t 26 g/t NaCN 32.5 g/t 20g/t 25 g/t
NaCN NaCN Senkol 294 Senkol 294
Collector and depressant dosages (g/t)
Figure 25. Plot of Au and Ag grades for various Senkol 294 and NaCN dosages
45
4.7 Blending Ratio Optimization
Table 10 shows calculated float feed grades for the various ore blending ratios
chosen for flotation experiments, as described in chapter 3, section 3.7.
Table 10. Calculated float feed grades for the various blending ratios
Float feed grade

Blend %
1 2.44
2 2.17
3 2.31
4 2.52
5 2.34
6 2.38
7 2.55
8 2.64
9 2.67
10 2.63
Figure 26 shows the results obtained on the concentrate grade and recovery, for all
the ten ore blends used for the flotation experiments.
46
Figure 26. Plot of Cu recovery versus concentrate grade for various ore blending
ratios
4.8 Reagent Consumption Assessment
Table 11 compares concentrate grades obtained when hydrated lime and sodium
cyanide where used, respectively as pyrite depressants, as well as the cost estimates
of each of the two reagents for a ton of ore treated.
Table 11. Data for Reagent Consumption Assessment, Hydrated Lime versus Sodium
Cyanide
Hydrated Lime Sodium Cyanide

Concentrate grade (Cu) % 17.04 23.83
Concentrate grade (Au) ppm 0.97 1.59
Concentrate grade (Ag) ppm 32.75 43.50
Depressant dosage (g/t) 540.00 26.00
Treated ore (t) 1.00 1.00
Total depressant required (t) 0.54 0.026
Cost (N$/t) 2420.00 330200.00
Total cost per ton of ore (N$) 1306.80 8585.20
47
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
5.1 Ore grades
The grades of the ore samples collected differed from one another, since the ores
were from different mining sites. The grade of the ore treated in the Otjihase
concentration plant, varies from time to time. The Matchless ore sample assayed
2.83%, the highest Cu grade obtained from all the three ore samples collected. The
Otjihase 9-level ore had the second highest Cu grade of 2.14%, while the Otjihase
ubderground ore had the lowest Cu grade of 1.37%.
When the three ores were blended, the blend had an average copper grade of
2.06%. The individual ores were not analysed for gold and silver. Only the blend,
from which samples for the optimization experiments were taken, was analysed. The
ore blend assayed 229ppb (parts per billion of Au) and 6ppm (parts per million of
Ag).
5.2 Mineralogical Examination Using The X-Ray Diffraction

Technique
The XRD analysis detected only six (6) minerals in the ore blend sample, as
presented in Table 6. The copper in the ore was all contained in the mineral
chalcopyrite (CuFeS2), according to the XRD analysis, and no copper oxide mineral
was detected in the sample. This contradicts the flotation set up at the Otjihase
concentration plant, which uses a sulphurdiser to sulphurdise copper oxide minerals
contained in the ore. However, the absence of copper oxide minerals could be
48
attributed to the mineral being present in a very low concentration, and may hence
not be detected by the XRD analyser.
The mineral in abundance in the ore blend was found to be silica (SiO2), followed by
nimite (Ni,Mg,Al)6(Si,Al)4O10(OH)8, and then chalcopyrite (CuFES2) the third highest in
abundance. Pyrite, the mineral that interferes with the copper flotation at the
Otjihase concentration plant [17] was the second least in abundance.
5.3 Grinding and Particle Size Analysis
a) Particle size analyses for randomly chosen days from months July to November
2012
The results of particle size analyses for samples randomly taken from months July to
November 2012 were graphed in Figure 17. From the graph, the P80 of each particle
size analysis done can be obtained. Reading from the graph, therefore, the P80 for
each of the 5 months is as indicated in Table 12.
Table 12. Obtained p80 values for random samples taken from months July to
November 2012
Month P80 (µm)

July 210
August 225
September 200
October 275
November 125
Average P80 207
49
As it may be seen from the results obtained on the p80’s of the five randomly taken
screen analysis samples, the P80 value is not consistent. It could be that the grinding
in the plant was not done the same way over the 5 months, or the cyclone, that
separates the fine ore particles going to the flotation circuit from the coarse ore
particles going back into the grinding mill, was not consistently efficient. Except for
the P80 obtained for the screen sample taken for November, the samples sent to the
flotation circuit for all other four months had a higher particle size range, as their P80
is above the recommended P80 value of “160-190µm”, as stated by the Otjihase
Processing Manager, Mr O.K. Ilunga.
The average P80 obtained (207µm) was therefore higher than the recommended
value, and therefore grinding experiments had to be carried out on the blended ore,
varying the residence time of the samples in the mill, and carrying out particle size
analysis after each grinding experiment, to determine the grinding time that would
yield the desired P80 value.
b) Particle size analyses for 17 minutes grinding, 25 minutes grinding, as well as

for the plant float feed sample
Figure 18 shows a graph of cumulative percentage passing for 17 and 25 minutes

grinding, as well as for the float feed sample taken from the plant. From the graph,
the P80s of the three particle size analyses done could be obtained, and they are as
appears in Table 13:
Table 13. Obtained p80 values for plant float feed, and for 17 and 25 minutes
grinding
Sample P80 (µm)

Plant Float Feed 150
17 minutes grinding 160
25 minutes grinding 130
50
The P80 obtained for the plant float feed was 150µm.
The P80 obtained for 17 minutes grinding was in the desired P80 range, and was
hence taken as the grinding residence time for all flotation experiments done.
However, for 25 minutes grinding, the P80 was found to be lower than the desired
P80 range, which means the longer grinding time resulted in more fine ore particles
than is required. This grinding time was not chosen as the residence time for the
flotation experiments.
5.4 Individual Ore Flotation
The individual ore flotation results shown in Table 9 reveal that the Otjihase
underground ore produced a concentrate with the highest copper grade, followed by
the Matchless ore, and the Otjihase 9-level ore produced a concentrate with the
lowest copper grade. The difference in the grades obtained from flotation of these
ores could be attributed to the difference in the mineralogy of the ores.
5.5 Collector Optimization
From the trial experiments, the Senkol 294 dosage was reduced from 50g/t to 35g/t,
and hence, initially, three different dosages were used to study the response of the
ore blend to the flotation process. These dosages were 30g/t, 35g/t as well as 40g/t
Senkol 294. The results of these three flotation experiments are as appears in Figure
19. It may be read from the graph that the dosage of 30g/t yielded the concentrate
with the highest copper grade of 23.26% with a recovery of 67.19%, while 35g/t
produced a concentrate with a copper grade of 20.81 g/t, with a recovery of 79.33%.
51
The dosage of 40g/t produced a concentrate with a lower copper grade of 15.00%,
with a higher recovery of 81.49%.
The recovery, in the case of the concentration of a metallic ore, is the

percentage of the total metal contained in the ore that is recovered from the
concentrate [3]; a recovery of 90% means that 90% of the metal in the ore is
recovered in the concentrate and 10% is lost in the tailings.
From the graph therefore it is visible that as the collector dosage is increased, the
concentrate grade drops, and the recovery increases. This corresponds to what B.A.
Wills [3] states on the grade-recovery curve; that a flotation system should be
controlled in order to improve metallurgical efficiency, and this is done by carrying
out experiments to produce the best possible grade-recovery curve.
Also, the findings of these three experiments may confirm previous studies done by
Chandra et. al. [9] as discussed in section 2.2. Increasing the collector dosage may
result in the flotation of pyrite, which then reduces the concentrate grade. However,
there is also a possibility on the sulphidiser used to be affecting the results of the
flotation experiments done, and resulting in more sulphide minerals being floated into
the concentrate. The second series of experiments for the collector optimization were
hence carried out without addition of the sulphidiser to the flotation circuit.
More dosages were introduced, and as the graph in Figure 20 shows, dosages of 25,
30, 35, 40 and 45g/t Senkol 294 were each used in the experiments.
The graph shows a high concentrate grade for the lowest Senkol 294 dosage of
25g/t, which is 22.61%, with a copper recovery of 73.56%. This recovery grade
combination showed the best result for this experiment, as other dosages produced
concentrates with lower copper grades. For 40g/t however, the concentrate grade
was higher with a grade of 20.34% with a much lower recovery of 42.22%.
52
Since the best grade-recovery combination for flotation experiments without
sulphidiser was obtained at the lowest Senkol 294 dosage of 25g/t, it was decided
that a dosage of 20g/t be introduced for the flotation experiments, and that the
flotation be carried out using all reagents used in the plant (re-introducing the
sulphidiser).
The results for the experiments with the sulphidiser re-introduced are as appears in
Figure 21. Although the dosage of 25g/t produced a concentrate with the highest
grade of 21.06%, the copper recovery had dropped to 65.24%. The highest recovery
was 93.79%, obtained for the dosage of 20g/t Senkol 294, with a concentrate grade
of 17.04%. Comparing this result to the grade-recovery combinations of other
dosages, this result was the best for the collector optimization experiments, and was
therefore used as collector dosage for the sodium cyanide optimization experiments.
5.6 Sodium Cyanide Optimization
The graphs in Figures 22 and 23 show the results obtained when sodium cyanide was
used as a pyrite depressant, instead of hydrated lime. The sodium cyanide
experiments were done twice for each dosage, for the results to be comparable.
For run one, it is visible from the graph that sodium cyanide is a very good pyrite
depressant, since the copper recovery for all dosages was above 85%. Good grade-
recovery combinations were obtained for dosages of 19.5, 26 as well as 32.5g/t
NaCN, with grades 23.88%, 23.83%, 22.61% and recoveries of 95.18%, 96.35% and
98.46% respectively. The high grade and recoveries obtained show that sodium
cyanide effectively depresses the pyrite in the ore, which is the mineral that interferes
with copper flotation. When the pyrite is depressed, the collector will effectively
53
collect copper, and more copper will be recovered from the pulp, resulting in high
grade concentrates with high recoveries.
For run 2, the copper recoveries obtained for all five NaCN dosages were above 90%.
However, good grade-recovery combinations were still obtained for the same dosages
as in run one. These are dosages of 19.5, 26 and 32.5g/t NaCN. These dosages
produced concentrates with grades 19.63%, 19.8% and 25.56%, as well as
recoveries of 97.78%, 97.01% and 94.57%, respectively. These findings confirm the
literature stated in chapter two that sodium cyanide is a good pyrite depressant.
Gold and silver results
From the graph in Figure 24, the concentrate grades obtained for gold and silver
from the samples that were sent for gold and silver analyses are shown. These are
the samples that yielded good copper grade and recovery combinations. The Ag
grade of the concentrates was much higher than the Au grade, since the ore assayed
more silver than gold. However, for NaCN dosages, the Au grade of the concentrate
decreased as the dosage was increased, this is because Au is soluble in NaCN, and as
the concentration of NaCN is increased, the solubility of gold increase.
When lime was used as a depressant, for the collector optimization experiments, the
gold grades of the concentrates were lower than when NaCN was used as a
depressant. The high Au grade was obtained at dosages of 19.5g/t and 26g/t NaCN,
which were 1.88 and 1.59ppm respectively. This is inconsistent with literature
because hydrated lime should not reduce the Au grade since Au does not dissolve in
hydrated lime.
For silver, the concentrate grade when NaCN was used as a depressant did not show
a specific trend. However, the highest silver grade of 43.5ppm was obtained at a
dosage of 26g/t NaCN, and the second highest grade of 41.5ppm was obtained at
19.5g/t NaCN.
54
When lime was used as a depressant, the silver grades of the concentrates did not
vary by a large margin from the grades obtained when NaCN was used as a
depressant. The Senkol 294 dosage that produced a concentrate assaying more silver
was 25g/t, giving a concentrate grade of 42.0ppm Ag.
Looking at the recoveries of both Ag and Au in Figure 25, the results showed higher
recoveries of both metals when NaCN was used as a depressant. The two NaCN
dosages that recovered the most Ag and Au from the pulp were 19.5 and 26g/t, with
gold recoveries of 68.83% and 60.78%, and silver recoveries of 57.99% and 63.47%,
respectively. When sodium cyanide was used as a depressant, the pH of the system
was below pH 9 for all experiments, which explains why higher Au and Ag grades
were obtained, since Au and Ag could not be dissolved by NaCN at lower pH,
The results obtained from the experiments done can be applied to a flotation plant
that concentrates a pyrite containing copper ore, replacing hydrated lime as a
depressant with NaCN. However, all the necessary feasibility studies need to be
carried out before one decides to run a plant using results that were obtained in the
laboratory. Therefore, the findings of this research project may be used first in a pilot
plant, to study whether or not similar results would be obtained from the pilot plant
operations.
Table 10 shows the calculated float feed grades for all the ten (10) ore blends. Blends
2, 3 and 5 had low feed grades of 2.17%, 2.31% and 2.34%, respectively. While the
three ore blends with the highest float feed grades were blends 8, 9 and 10, with
float feed grades 2.64%, 2.67% and 2.63%, respectively.
55
Since the Matchless ore had the highest copper grade (3.16%), the ore blends that
had a higher Matchless ore proportion assayed more copper than those with a lesser
proportion of the Matchless ore.
Figure 26 shows the grade-recovery combinations for all the ten (10) ore blends.
Blend 1 with a feed grade of 2.44% Cu produced a concentrate with the lowest
copper grade of 21.99%, with a recovery of 97.20%. Overall, however, all the ten
(10) ore blends yielded very satisfactory results. For all the ore blends, the presumed
optimum collector (Senkol 294) and depressant (NaCN) dosages were used, that is
20g/t and 26g/t, respectively. Therefore the results obtained for the ore blending
experiments produced the results that were expected (high concentrate grades and
recoveries). However, each ore responded differently to the flotation process, and the
three highest concentrate grades were obtained for ore blends 7, 9 and 10, whereas
the highest recoveries were obtained for ore blends 2, 3 and 10, although overall,
recoveries of all ten blends were high, above 90%.
The ore blend that produced a concentrate with the best grade-recovery combination
was blend 10, which had a concentrate grade of 30.71% at a copper recovery of
97.60%.
The amount and cost of each reagent (Senkol 294 and NaCN) required for a ton of
ore processed are displayed in Table 11, in which the copper grade of the
concentrate for the determined optimum collector and depressant dosages are also
displayed. Calculations done to determine how much each reagent would cost per ton
of ore treated showed that hydrated lime would cost N$1306.80, whereas NaCN
would cost N$8585.20. However, the unit price used for NaCN used was for a 500g
56
container (since the price for a 50kg bag could not be obtained) which means
N$8585.20 would be the highest amount to be spent on NaCN per ton of ore treated.
However, NaCN produced a concentrate assaying relatively high Cu, Au and Ag than
the concentrate produced when lime was used as a pyrite depressant. The recoveries
of all metals were as well higher when NaCN was used as a pyrite depressant.
The cost of NaCN required per ton of ore treated (based on this calculation) is 6.6
times the amount spent on lime. However one cannot determine from the calculation
done whether the most economical advantageous depressant is hydrated lime or
sodium cyanide, since there are many other financial aspects to be looked at, before
a concrete conclusion is made on the most economical viable depressant.
57
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter summarises the findings of the research project, and outlines the
recommendations that the researcher made, towards the subject studied.
6.1 Conclusions
Based on this research, the following conclusions can be reached:
 The optimum collector dosage is 20g/t, which produced a concentrate

assaying 17.04% Cu, 0.965ppmAu and 32.5ppm Ag, at recoveries of 93.04%,
15.66% and 20.28%, respectively
 The optimum NaCN dosage is 26g/t, a dosage that produced a concentrate
yielding 23.83% Cu, 1.59ppm Au and 43.5ppm Ag, at recoveries 96.35%,
60.78% and 63.47% respectively
 Based on the concentrate grades obtained, it may be concluded that NaCN is a
very effective pyrite depressant than hydrated lime, because it produced
concentrates with a higher Cu grade, in comparison to hydrates lime, while at
the same time producing a concentrate with higher Au and Ag grades and
recoveries
 The ore blending ratio of 60% Matchless ore, 25% Otjihase underground ore
and 15% Otjihase 9-level ore produced the optimum copper grade and
recovery combination, when the optimum collector and depressant (NaCN)
dosages were used
58
The objectives of the research project were achieved. The collector and depressant
dosages were optimized, the minerals in all the three ores as well as in the blend
were identified through XRD analysis, from which possible fast collecting minerals
were identified. Also, reagent cost analysis was done to determine the cost of each of
the two reagents (Senkol 294 and NaCN), per ton of ore treated, although conclusion
on the cost effective depressant could not be established.
Through the research, it was learnt that a little overdose of the flotation reagent can
cause a very significant difference in the outcome of the flotation process, as was
observed during the collector optimization experiments. It was also learnt that ore
from the same ore body may respond differently to the flotation process, as was the
case with the collected ore samples, that failed to produce results similar to the ones
obtained in the plant, when the same reagent dosages used in the plant are used in
the laboratory.
What remains to be studied however, is the collecting effects of NaCN, because it

was observed that it does not only improve the concentrate grade, but the copper
recovery as well. Also, there is a need to find a method of determining the collector
consumption for various ore blends (ores with different float feed grades), in order to
come up with a dosing rate formula, that may determine how much of the collector
should be added for a particular ore grade.
Possible application of the study is in the Otjihase concentration plant flotation circuit,
for increased copper recovery, as was established in this research. Also, the findings
of this research may be used in an upcoming copper concentration plant, that aims to
use the flotation process, and in which the ore contains pyrite as a gangue mineral.
The findings however need to be applied to a pilot plant, to determine whether or not
the same results will be achieved in an operation larger than the laboratory.
59
6.2 Recommendations
Based on the findings of the research, it is recommended that:
 a sodium cyanide dosing system be designed before the findings of the

research are applied into the plant, due to the reagent’s high toxicity and
possible environmental pollution
 studies on the copper collection effects (or not) of the pyrite depressant NaCN
be pursued
 studies be pursued towards finding a method for determining the collector
consumption for various ore blends, in order to come up with a model for the
collector dosage in the flotation circuit
 information should be gathered on the costs and/or payments involved in the
processing and exportation of the Otjihase copper concentrate, to obtain
information that allows the Net Smelter Return (NSR) to be calculated, which
will help determine the most economically effective pyrite depressant in the
Otjihase copper flotation circuit
60
REFERENCES
[1] Personal communication with Mr. Odilon K. Ilunga, The Department of

Processing, Otjihase Copper Concentration Plant, October 2012
[2] W. K. Leonard, “PYRITE DEPRESSING OPTIMISATION (COMPARISON

USING SODIUM CYANIDE AND HYDRATED LIME)”, University of Namibia,
Department of Mining and Metallurgical Enginerring, June 2012
[3] B. A. Wills and T. J. Napier-Munn, Mineral Processing Technology: An

Introduction to the Practical Aspects of Ore Treatment and Mineral
Recovery. The University of Queensland, Australia: Elsevier Science &
Technology Books, 2006.
[4] G. Dombo, Lecture Notes for Process Engineering (II), Chapter 2.
University of Namibia, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology,
First semester, 2010.
[5] K. Lee, Archibald, D., McLean J., & Reuter, M. A., Minerals Engineering:
Flotation of mixed copper oxide and sulphide minerals with xanthate and
hydroxamate collectors. Australia: Ausmelt Limited, 12 Kitchen Road,
Dandenong, Victoria 3175, 2008.
[6] S. M. Bulatovic, Handbook of flotation reagents, Chemistry Theory and
Practice: Flotation of sulfide ores. The Boulevard, Langford Lane,
Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, UK: Elsevier B.V., 2007.
[7] V. P. Kohad, Froth flotation recent trends: Flotation of sulphide ores – HZL
Experience. Zawar Mines, Udaipur: Hindustan Zinc Ltd. 1988.
[8] K. Milena, Original scientific paper: Depression of pyrite with cyanide and
ferrous/ferric salts. Underground Mining Engineering, Faculty of Mining and
Geology, Belgrade, 2011.
61
[9] A. P Chandra, J. Cavallaro, & A. R. Gerson, Earth and Environmental
Science: Spatial Distribution of Xanthate on Copper Activated Pyrite by IR-
Microscopy. University of South Australia: Applied Centre for Structural and
Synchrotron Studies (ACeSSS), 2009.
[10] L. Ergun, Z. Ekmekci, O. Gulsoy, & Benzer,
H., (2004). Physicochemical Problems of Mineral Processing: The evaluation
of a copper flotation plant performance by plant survey and laboratory
tests. Georgia Madneuli Copper Ore flotation plant, 2004.
[11] R. B. Mermillod, M. Kongolo, P. de Donato, M. Benzaazoua, O. Barres, B.

Bussiere, & M. Aubertin. Pyrite Flotation with Xanthate under Alkaline
Conditions: Application to Environmental Desulfurisation . Brisbane: QLD, 2005.
[12] CHEMICALLAND21: Calcium Hydroxide, (n.d.).

http://www.chemicalland21.com/industrialchem/inorganic/CALCIUM%20HYDR
OXIDE.htm, Retrieved on January 09, 2013
[13] H. K Lin, “Journal of Minerals Characterization & Engineering:

Characterization and Flotation of Sulfur from Chalcopyrite Leaching
Concentrate”. University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks: Mineral Research
Laboratory, 2003.
[14] E. Muzenda, A. S. Afolabi, A. S. Abdulkareem, & F. Ntuli, Proceedings of

the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science: Effect of pH on the
Recovery and Grade of Base Metal Sulphides (PGMs) by Flotation. San
Francisco, USA: WCECS, 2011.
[15] A. L. Mular, D. N. Halbe, & D. J. Barratt, “Mineral Processing Plant Design,

Practice and Control Proceedings”, Volume 1. Littleton, Colorado USA: Society
for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc. 2002.
62
[16] J. A. Eisele, A. H. Hunt, & D. L. Lampshire, “Bureau of Mines Report of
Investigations: Leaching Gold-Silver Ores with Sodium Cyanide and Thiourea
under Comparable Conditions”, United States: Department of the Interior,
1988.
[17] Jelen Do, NEXE: Lime. Serbia, Jelen Do a.d. Jelen Do. 2007.
http://www.nexe.hr/userDocsImages/dokumenti/nexe_lime_en.pdf, Retrieved
on January 10, 2013
[18] R. W. Lehne, Treatment and Microscopy of Gold and Base Metal Ores,
(Script with Sketches & Tables). Geneva University: Department of Mineralogy,
2006
[19] A. K. Williams, Cyanide Leaching. San Pedro, Costa Rica

http://webpages.charter.net/kwilliams00/bcftp/docs/cyanide.htm, Retrieved on
January 13, 2013.
[20] Material Safety Data Sheet, Sodium Cyanide MSDS , Science Lab.com,
Chemicals & Laboratory Equipment
63
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Ore Blend Mineralogy
Figure A1: XRD plot for the ore blend used for Senkol 294 and NaCN optimization
64
Appendix B: Calculations for chalcopyrite and pyrite composition of
blended ore sample
Analysis showed that the sample contained 14.02% S.
Chalcopyrite (CuFeS2) contains: 2(32.07)/(63.55+55.85+32.07*2) = 34.95% S
Pyrite (FeS2) contains: 2(32.07)/(55.85+32.07*2) = 53.45% S
However, both chalcopyrite and pyrite contain the same amount (in grams) of S,
which is 64.14g per mole of compound
Considering a 1000g (1kg) sample, it would contain: (14.02/100*1000g)=140.2g of S
Of this sulphur, the ratio of sulphur in CuFeS2 : sulfur in FeS2 is 1:1, which means
each compound will contain half of the total amount of S contained in the sample,
i.e., 70.1g
Using the percent composition of S in CuFeS2, and using cross multiplication:
70.1 ------34.95%
x ------100%
100% = 200.57g CuFeS2, which gives a percent composition of:
(200.57g/1000g)*100% = 20.06% CuFeS2
Using the percent composition of S in FeS2, and using cross multiplication:
70.1 ------ 53.45%
x ------100%
100% = 131.15g FeS2, which gives a percent composition of:

(131.15g/1000g)*100% = 13.12% FeS2
65
Rougher tails Cleaner conc Cleaner tails
Mass (g) %Cu %Zn %S Mass (g) %Cu %Zn %S Mass (g) %Cu %Zn %S
30 823.8 0.87 0.27 10.8 54.5 23.26 1.55 39.66 85.2 2.35 0.36 49.23 With Sulfurdiser
25 Senkol 820.6 0.94 0.28 11.5 72.2 22.61 2.21 37.60 132.3 3.88 0.36 44.54 Without Sulfurdiser
Appendix C: Flotation results
6.5 g/t NaCN 835.4 0.11 0.09 8.2 79.2 17.53 2.62 42.22 128.3 7.89 1.03 45.03 With Sulfurdiser
13 g/t NaCN 1070.5 0.41 0.09 11.0 96.6 15.07 2.72 43.30 108.0 11.31 0.92 42.06 With Sulfurdiser
26 g/t NaCN 1076.4 0.10 0.00 13.1 113.8 23.83 0.26 39.42 51.1 2.46 0.43 28.19 With Sulfurdiser
6.5 (2) 881.5 0.16 1.02 2.7 170.0 14.55 1.16 44.61 166.1 2.44 1.02 42.60 With Sulfurdiser
13 (2) 923.0 0.09 0.01 9.5 148.9 16.68 1.16 43.62 87.5 1.94 1.26 38.54 With Sulfurdiser
26 (2) 1096.4 0.08 0.04 13.5 138.3 19.80 2.78 41.09 54.1 2.04 1.21 30.48 With Sulfurdiser
Blend 1 1093.9 0.08 0.26 20.4 133.6 21.99 0.14 41.74 44.8 2.34 1.54 35.61 With Sulfurdiser
Blend 5 1058.6 0.16 0.22 N/A 85.2 29.43 1.79 N/A 40.0 1.50 0.88 N/A With Sulfurdiser
Figure C1: Flotation results for Senkol 294 and NaCN optimization experiments
66
ROUGHER CLEANER
Before pH adjustment Before introducing air After flotation process Lime added Before pH adjustment Before introducing air After flotation process Lime added
pH Temp (°C)Potential (mV) pH Temp (°C) Potential (mV) pH Temp (°C) Potential (mV)(ml) pH Temp (°C) Potential (mV) pH Temp (°C) Potential (mV) pH Temp (°C) Potential (mV)(ml)
30 7.58 24.4 -17.5 9.36 25.4 -110.0 8.70 26.1 -76.5 5.0 8.27 24.0 -53.4 10.57 24.8 -172.4 9.52 25.1 -118.3 2
35 7.59 24.3 -17.6 9.37 24.6 -109.5 8.66 25.7 -73.2 2.5 8.17 22.3 -46.4 12.16 22.3 -46.4 11.68 23.9 -228.7 1
40 7.77 24.5 -27.2 9.42 25.6 -112.7 9.05 26.4 -93.2 3.0 8.42 24.7 -61.2 10.20 25.6 -153.9 9.22 25.7 -103.4 2
25 Senkol 7.41 23 -8.3 9.40 24.1 -111.3 8.86 24.8 -82.9 5.5 8.62 23.6 -70.6 10.55 24.4 -170.4 9.82 24.7 -132.4 2
30 Senkol 7.67 23.5 -23.0 9.41 24.5 -111.4 8.90 25.0 -90.4 5.0 8.84 23.8 -82.0 10.53 24.6 -170.0 9.60 25.1 -121.7 1.5
35 Senkol 7.81 23.8 -29.1 9.36 24.3 -108.9 9.04 25.1 -93.0 3.5 8.67 23.6 -73.5 10.45 23.8 -165.1 9.48 24.2 -114.4 1.5
40 Senkol 7.27 27.4 -1.7 9.29 28.3 -106.9 8.72 28.8 -78.2 2.0 8.35 26.3 -57.8 10.47 26.7 -168.4 9.42 26.9 -112.9 1.25
45 Senkol 7.76 25.2 -26.7 9.36 25.8 -109.4 8.63 26.4 -72.0 4.0 8.33 23.9 -55.9 10.37 25.3 -162.2 9.43 25.4 -113.6 2
20 7.44 26.1 -10.2 9.42 26.9 -113.5 8.80 27.7 -82.3 7.0 8.6 25.7 -70.1 10.44 26.1 -165.4 9.68 26.6 -125.9 2
25 7.47 24.9 -12.8 9.41 25.5 -111.7 8.57 26.2 -69.5 7.0 8.24 24.2 -51.9 10.39 24.9 -162.2 9.90 25.3 -137.1 2.5
30 7.47 24.6 -11.5 9.40 26.1 -112.2 8.81 27.0 -81.4 8.0 8.48 25.3 -64.3 10.42 26.6 -165.2 9.67 27 -126.0 2.5
35 7.46 24.7 -12.9 9.42 27.6 -113.4 8.81 28.5 -81.2 5.0 8.67 26.2 -73.6 10.45 26.5 -166.1 9.67 26.8 -127.0 2
optimization experiments
40 7.65 25.1 -21.9 9.37 26.0 -110.2 8.80 25.4 -80.0 8.63 25.2 -72.0 10.37 25.3 -162.0 9.37 25.5 -109.2 2
45 7.52 25.4 -14.6 9.30 26.1 -106.1 8.79 25.7 -80.1 8.4 24.8 -60.0 10.51 25.2 -168.2 9.46 25.4 -115.8
6.5 g/t NaCN 7.40 25.5 -7.8 7.35 26.0 -5.5 7.67 27.1 -24.8 N/A 7.47 25.8 -11.4 N/A N/A N/A 7.71 26.1 -23.9 N/A
13 g/t NaCN 7.46 24.9 -10.5 7.42 25.0 -9.1 7.78 26.0 -27.9 N/A 7.58 25.1 -17.7 N/A N/A N/A 7.86 25.2 -32.2 N/A
26 g/t NaCN 7.60 22.6 -18.2 7.61 23.0 -18.8 8.00 24.3 -39.5 N/A 7.81 22.9 -28.6 N/A N/A N/A 8.19 23.1 -48.8 N/A
6.5 7.02 28.7 10.2 7.17 29.4 4.2 7.79 30.1 -28.0 N/A 7.58 27.5 -17.6 N/A N/A N/A 7.97 27.8 -38.8 N/A
13 7.26 30.9 -0.7 7.33 31.3 -5.1 7.84 32.2 -31.7 N/A 7.71 28.2 -24.4 N/A N/A N/A 8.13 28.7 -46.3 N/A
19.5 7.29 26.3 -2.4 7.19 27.2 3.2 7.60 28.3 -18.9 N/A 7.42 26.7 -9.3 N/A N/A N/A 7.80 27.3 -29.0 N/A
Appendix D: Flotation parameters
26 7.18 25.6 3.4 7.25 26.9 -0.5 7.74 28.0 -26.2 N/A 7.53 26.4 -14.5 N/A N/A N/A 7.88 26.6 -33.5 N/A
32.5 7.50 26.9 -12.9 7.46 27.6 -11.5 7.84 28.5 -31.2 N/A 7.65 27.8 -21.9 N/A N/A N/A 7.99 27.9 -39.0 N/A
Blend 1 7.68 24.1 -22.9 7.80 24.5 -28.8 7.83 25.7 -30.3 N/A 7.67 23.8 -21.5 N/A N/A N/A 8.04 23.9 -40.9 N/A
Blend 8 7.87 24.4 -32.6 8.02 25.1 -41.5 7.75 26.4 -26.1 N/A 7.58 23.0 -17.9 N/A N/A N/A 7.90 -34.4 25.2 N/A
Figure D1: pH, temperature and potential measurements for Senkol 294 and NaCN
67
Appendix E: Sodium Cyanide Safety
a) Hazards Identification
 Sodium cyanide is toxic. It is classified, as a class two poison [19].

 Cyanide reacts with the hemoglobin in the human blood. It takes the place of
oxygen. Oxygen combines with hemoglobin in the lungs and is transported to
the muscles etc., where it releases its oxygen to be utilized in energy
producing metabolism. The hemoglobin is now returned to the lungs to pick up
another load of oxygen. Cyanide, as opposed to oxygen, cannot be released
from the hemoglobin, thus, the hemoglobin cannot carry any more oxygen.
Hemoglobin combined with cyanide is essentially dead. If enough cyanide
reacts with your hemoglobin the blood will be unable to transport enough
oxygen to maintain your body and you will die of asphyxiation [19].
 Sodium cyanide may be toxic to skin, eyes and central nervous system.
Repeated or prolonged exposure to it can produce target organs damage [20].
 Repeated inhalation of sodium cyanide dust can produce varying degree of
respiratory irritation or lung damage [2019]
b) First Aid Measures
 In case of contact with eyes or skin, flush eyes and/or skin with plenty of cold
water for at least 15 minutes, and get medical help immediately [20]
 In case of serious inhalation, evacuate victim to safe area as soon as possible,
and loosen any tight clothing. Administer oxygen if breathing is difficult, and
seek medical attention immediately [20].
68
c) Handling and Storage
 The sodium cyanide container must be kept dry and locked up, away from
heat and sources of ignition. Empty containers pose a fire risk [20]
 The container must be tightly closed and kept in a cool, well-ventilated area.
Do not store above 24°C [20]
 Ground all equipment containing material [20]
 Respiratory equipment, such as a respirator must be worn in case of
insufficient ventilation [20]
69

Microwave Leaching

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

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

Microwave Leaching

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

OPTIMISATION OF FLOTATION REAGENTS IN THE

OTJIHASE CONCENTRATION PLANT

Victoria Ligola Amuthenu (200830538)

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of BSc. (Hon) Degree in Metallurgical

DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND INFORMATION

This report is a presentation of my original research work. Wherever contributions of

Victoria L. Amuthenu ________________ Date: ______________

In my capacity as supervisor of the candidate’s project, I certify that the above

Mr G. Dombo ________________ Date: ______________

I am most grateful to the Namibia Oil Corporation (NAMCOR)’s Petroleum Training

Weatherly mining Namibia for granting me an opportunity to pursue my final year

Special thanks to Mr I. Funtua, for providing a home away from home

Table 1. Preparation of flotation reagents ............................................................. 24

Figure 1. Various sub-processes controlling the flotation process [7] ........................ 7

PAX Potassium Amyl Xanthate

ppm Parts per million

ppb Parts per billion

NaCN Sodium cyanide

FeSO4 Iron (II) Sulphate

K3[Fe(CN)6] Potassium ferricyanide

K4[Fe(CN)6] Potassium ferrocyanide

Ca(OH)2 Calcium hydroxide (Hydrated lime)

CaO Calcium oxide

CaCO3 Calcium carbonate

FeO(OH) Ferric OxyHydroxide

Fe(OH)3 Iron (III) Hydroxide

Ca(CN)2 Calcium cyanamide

NaOH Sodium Hydroxide

Na[Au(CN)2 Sodium aurocyanide

HCN Hydrogen cyanide

rpm Revolutions per minute

GSN Geological Survey of Namibia

1.1 Problem Statement

While this appears to be a positive development, there is potential loss of Au and Ag

1.3 Justification of the Study

1.4.1 Gold and Silver Analyses

1.4.2 Scale of Project

This section summarises information obtained from previous researches pursued on

2.1 The Flotation Process

2.1.1 Description of the flotation process

Flotation is a physico-chemical separation process that utilises the difference in

1. Selective attachment to air bubbles (or "true flotation")

The attachment of valuable minerals to air bubbles is the most important

The flotation process may either be direct or indirect [5]:

Activators, depressants and pH regulators are often referred to in the literature as

Figure 1. Various sub-processes controlling the flotation process [7]

2.2 Common Trends in Similar Operations

KBX is Potassium Butyl Xanthate, a copper collector

NaCN > K 3[Fe(CN)6 ] > K 4[Fe(CN)6 ] > FeSO4 ………………………………………..(1)

Effective separation of valuable minerals becomes problematic when other minerals

At the Madneuli copper concentrator in Georgia, three different types, named as

2.3 Minerals that Hinder Depression of Pyrite

Flotation was high at pH 6 and dropped rapidly at a pH above 6 to approach the

2.4.1 Overview of Hydrated Lime

Hydrated lime, chemically known as calcium hydroxide, calcium hydrate or caustic

CaCO3 + heat CaO + CO2 …………………………………………………(2)

2.4.2 Hydrated Lime as a pH Regulator

Lime is normally used as a pH regulator exclusively in sulphide mineral flotation [5].

Research done at the Mineral Industry Research Laboratory at the University of

Flotation where possible, is carried out in an alkaline medium, as most collectors

The lowering of the pH can be attained by the addition of sulphuric acid or

Victoria L. Amuthenu __ Date:

Mr G. Dombo __ Date: