XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 1185
show that scheelite, wolframite, and cassiterite exhibit dif-
ferentiated optimal pH ranges and flotation rates. The opti-
mal pH range for scheelite recovery is 8.5–9.0, while for
wolframite and cassiterite, it is around 9.5. Additionally,
the flotation rate of scheelite is markedly faster than that of
wolframite and cassiterite.
Quantum chemical analysis of the crystal structures
of these minerals illustrated that the HOMO-LUMO gap
(ΔE) follows the order: cassiterite wolframite scheelite.
The different hydration degrees of mineral surfaces explain
the differences in flotation rates. The adsorption of Pb-BHA
on wolframite and cassiterite requires more energy to coun-
teract the denser hydration layer compared to scheelite.
a low-grade concentrate, of which WO3 and Sn grade is
7.23% and 3.04%, and production is 10 t/d. According
to its market price in the market, this increases revenue by
$7000/d. Meanwhile, the additional cost under the modi-
fied flotation process is shown in Table 9, which consists of
reagents and power consumption, a total of $1038.87/d.
Therefore, the process modification yielded a profit of
$5961.13/d.
CONCLUSION
The simultaneous recovery of scheelite, wolframite, and
cassiterite using Pb-BHA as a collector presents a signifi-
cant challenge. The single-mineral flotation experiments
Figure 15. The observed images, images viewed under ultraviolet light, and XRD patterns of the main process concentrate(a–c)
and secondary process concentrate(d–f)
Table 9. Additional cost under the modified flotation process (1500 t/day, daily)
Additional Costs Amount Unit Price Cost $/d
MBHA, g/t 75 1792 $/t 201.6
Pb(NO3)2, g/t 75 1260 $/t 141.75
Power consumption of new equipment, KW/h 207 0.14 $/kW 695.52
Total — — 1038.87
show that scheelite, wolframite, and cassiterite exhibit dif-
ferentiated optimal pH ranges and flotation rates. The opti-
mal pH range for scheelite recovery is 8.5–9.0, while for
wolframite and cassiterite, it is around 9.5. Additionally,
the flotation rate of scheelite is markedly faster than that of
wolframite and cassiterite.
Quantum chemical analysis of the crystal structures
of these minerals illustrated that the HOMO-LUMO gap
(ΔE) follows the order: cassiterite wolframite scheelite.
The different hydration degrees of mineral surfaces explain
the differences in flotation rates. The adsorption of Pb-BHA
on wolframite and cassiterite requires more energy to coun-
teract the denser hydration layer compared to scheelite.
a low-grade concentrate, of which WO3 and Sn grade is
7.23% and 3.04%, and production is 10 t/d. According
to its market price in the market, this increases revenue by
$7000/d. Meanwhile, the additional cost under the modi-
fied flotation process is shown in Table 9, which consists of
reagents and power consumption, a total of $1038.87/d.
Therefore, the process modification yielded a profit of
$5961.13/d.
CONCLUSION
The simultaneous recovery of scheelite, wolframite, and
cassiterite using Pb-BHA as a collector presents a signifi-
cant challenge. The single-mineral flotation experiments
Figure 15. The observed images, images viewed under ultraviolet light, and XRD patterns of the main process concentrate(a–c)
and secondary process concentrate(d–f)
Table 9. Additional cost under the modified flotation process (1500 t/day, daily)
Additional Costs Amount Unit Price Cost $/d
MBHA, g/t 75 1792 $/t 201.6
Pb(NO3)2, g/t 75 1260 $/t 141.75
Power consumption of new equipment, KW/h 207 0.14 $/kW 695.52
Total — — 1038.87