1952 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
Processed Material Characterization
XRD Analysis
The mineralogical phase composition analysis of the –25
micron processed sample was conducted by XRD and the
results are shown in Figure 18. Figure 18(A) displays the
froth concentrate with major peaks of carbon and silicon
carbide. The presence of hematite peaks indicates the pres-
ence of iron content found in the froth by wet chemical
analysis. Other minerals present in the froth mainly consist
of alkali siliceous minerals.
Figure 18(B) displays LIMS magnetic concentrate
with the major phase being magnetite and the minor phase
being hematite. The absence of carbon or carbide peaks
indicates that no carbonaceous material was attracted in
LIMS. Alumina and silicate of calcium magnesium are also
reported in LIMS magnetic concentrate.
Figure 18(C) displays the results of the LIMS Non
Mag XRD analysis. The analysis indicates that carbon and
silicates, which are less magnetic susceptible minerals, are
the major components in LIMS non-mag. Although some
hematite minerals are still present in the non-magnetic
portion, they will require higher intensities to be detected,
but this will decrease the iron grade. Additionally, the pres-
ence of fayalite can be observed in LIMS non-mag, which
responds adversely to a magnetic field.
SEM-EDX
The distribution of elements in different areas for two bulk
BFD feed sizes is presented in Figures 19 and 20. The SEM-
EDS analysis shows the effect of particle liberation. In the
case of –25 micron, areas 1, 3, and 4 have carbon as the
dominant phase, while area 2 has iron oxide associated with
40.39
56.13
63.99
68.24
73.13
42.44
40.56 39.08 38.10 36.78
8.94
10.94
12.68
13.87
14.79
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
80.00
2500 5500 7500 11500 13000
Magnetic Field Intensity, Gauss
WHIMS Mag Yield, %Fe(T), %FC, %
Figure 17. Effect of magnetic intensity on magnetic concentrate for –75 micron feed
Table 5. Overall iron and carbon recovery
Recovery –25 micron –45 micron –75 micron
Carbon Recovery in Froth Product %61.25 49.46 32.64
Fe recovery in Magnetic Product %86.60 87.64 88.85
Table 6. Chemical analysis of representative processes sample
Wt% Fe(T) %FC %SiO
2 Al
2 O
3 LOI
Floatation Conc. 22.27 15.75 44.90 8.89 9.37 54.43
LIMS Mag 3.04 62.78 0.00 2.86 3.44 NA
WHIMS Mag 62.0 43.9 7.8 11.87 12.33 30.29
WHIMS Non-Mag 12.7 18.4 37.2 10.22 18.56 44.13
Processed Material Characterization
XRD Analysis
The mineralogical phase composition analysis of the –25
micron processed sample was conducted by XRD and the
results are shown in Figure 18. Figure 18(A) displays the
froth concentrate with major peaks of carbon and silicon
carbide. The presence of hematite peaks indicates the pres-
ence of iron content found in the froth by wet chemical
analysis. Other minerals present in the froth mainly consist
of alkali siliceous minerals.
Figure 18(B) displays LIMS magnetic concentrate
with the major phase being magnetite and the minor phase
being hematite. The absence of carbon or carbide peaks
indicates that no carbonaceous material was attracted in
LIMS. Alumina and silicate of calcium magnesium are also
reported in LIMS magnetic concentrate.
Figure 18(C) displays the results of the LIMS Non
Mag XRD analysis. The analysis indicates that carbon and
silicates, which are less magnetic susceptible minerals, are
the major components in LIMS non-mag. Although some
hematite minerals are still present in the non-magnetic
portion, they will require higher intensities to be detected,
but this will decrease the iron grade. Additionally, the pres-
ence of fayalite can be observed in LIMS non-mag, which
responds adversely to a magnetic field.
SEM-EDX
The distribution of elements in different areas for two bulk
BFD feed sizes is presented in Figures 19 and 20. The SEM-
EDS analysis shows the effect of particle liberation. In the
case of –25 micron, areas 1, 3, and 4 have carbon as the
dominant phase, while area 2 has iron oxide associated with
40.39
56.13
63.99
68.24
73.13
42.44
40.56 39.08 38.10 36.78
8.94
10.94
12.68
13.87
14.79
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
80.00
2500 5500 7500 11500 13000
Magnetic Field Intensity, Gauss
WHIMS Mag Yield, %Fe(T), %FC, %
Figure 17. Effect of magnetic intensity on magnetic concentrate for –75 micron feed
Table 5. Overall iron and carbon recovery
Recovery –25 micron –45 micron –75 micron
Carbon Recovery in Froth Product %61.25 49.46 32.64
Fe recovery in Magnetic Product %86.60 87.64 88.85
Table 6. Chemical analysis of representative processes sample
Wt% Fe(T) %FC %SiO
2 Al
2 O
3 LOI
Floatation Conc. 22.27 15.75 44.90 8.89 9.37 54.43
LIMS Mag 3.04 62.78 0.00 2.86 3.44 NA
WHIMS Mag 62.0 43.9 7.8 11.87 12.33 30.29
WHIMS Non-Mag 12.7 18.4 37.2 10.22 18.56 44.13