4
to automatically control the mass pull to achieve optimal
recoveries while maintaining operational constraints such
as saleable concentrate grades.
In addition, the Digital One expert system can also
adjust, automatically, the flotation reagents by utilizing
VisioFroth ™ camera information.
The VisioFroth ™ system commissioning process
included gathering, observing, and reviewing plant and
process variables, information and VisioFroth ™ param-
eters. The visualization of ore variabilities was reflected in
froth velocity measurement when level setpoint persisted
(Figure 2). This situation may not be anticipated by the
control room operator, and this may also correct by itself.
However, this causes less mass pull which leads to lost
opportunity for recovery and, thus, lost plant revenue.
The above trend was fit into a histogram chart
(Figure 3). The average froth velocity was 4.14 cm/s with
standard deviation 1.3344. It was clearly shown that there
were two operating situations, which may be due to ore
variability.
The initial froth velocity control was configured to
maintain froth velocity at a setpoint by manipulating the
level setpoint. In Figure 4, the Expert Control was turned
on at around 07:00, illustrating how the level setpoint was
changed to maintain froth velocity at setpoint. Due to ore
variability, froth velocity was low (decreased), and Expert
Control’s reaction was to decrease the level setpoint (make
the froth depth shallower) in order to increase froth veloc-
ity. In general, the control philosophy for froth velocity is:
• if froth velocity is fast, then level setpoint should
increase.
• if froth velocity is low, then level setpoint should
decrease.
The idea of controlling the mass pull is to: 1. maximize
recovery when ore is good (high grade) and 2. to optimize
Figure 2. Froth Velocity without Expert Control System line plot
Figure 3. Froth Velocity without Expert Control System histogram plot
to automatically control the mass pull to achieve optimal
recoveries while maintaining operational constraints such
as saleable concentrate grades.
In addition, the Digital One expert system can also
adjust, automatically, the flotation reagents by utilizing
VisioFroth ™ camera information.
The VisioFroth ™ system commissioning process
included gathering, observing, and reviewing plant and
process variables, information and VisioFroth ™ param-
eters. The visualization of ore variabilities was reflected in
froth velocity measurement when level setpoint persisted
(Figure 2). This situation may not be anticipated by the
control room operator, and this may also correct by itself.
However, this causes less mass pull which leads to lost
opportunity for recovery and, thus, lost plant revenue.
The above trend was fit into a histogram chart
(Figure 3). The average froth velocity was 4.14 cm/s with
standard deviation 1.3344. It was clearly shown that there
were two operating situations, which may be due to ore
variability.
The initial froth velocity control was configured to
maintain froth velocity at a setpoint by manipulating the
level setpoint. In Figure 4, the Expert Control was turned
on at around 07:00, illustrating how the level setpoint was
changed to maintain froth velocity at setpoint. Due to ore
variability, froth velocity was low (decreased), and Expert
Control’s reaction was to decrease the level setpoint (make
the froth depth shallower) in order to increase froth veloc-
ity. In general, the control philosophy for froth velocity is:
• if froth velocity is fast, then level setpoint should
increase.
• if froth velocity is low, then level setpoint should
decrease.
The idea of controlling the mass pull is to: 1. maximize
recovery when ore is good (high grade) and 2. to optimize
Figure 2. Froth Velocity without Expert Control System line plot
Figure 3. Froth Velocity without Expert Control System histogram plot