2078 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
Figure 4. The mass fraction of the material for each cyclone, as well as the fraction that is lost consisting of
mostly ultrafine particles, for calcite, fluorite and magnesite
Figure 5. The particle size distribution of the feed and of each cyclone for calcite (left), fluorite (middle) and magnesite (right)
measured by laser diffraction (HELOS, SYMPATEC, Germany)
Table 1. The cut size d
T and the separation efficiency k of each cyclone for calcite, fluorite and magnesite, where 0.3 k 0.6,
0.6 k 0.8, 0.8 k 0.9 indicates a technical separation, a sharp technical separation and a sharp analytical separation,
respectively
Sample Name
Cut Size dT in µm Separation Efficiency k
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
Calcite 53.4 40.2 25.2 15.3 10.9 0.76 0.53 0.61 0.73 0.72
Fluorite 49.0 38.6 22.4 13.5 9.3 0.73 0.56 0.62 0.70 0.68
Magnesite 47.1 34.6 21.8 13.6 10.3 0.75 0.55 0.64 0.74 0.69
Figure 4. The mass fraction of the material for each cyclone, as well as the fraction that is lost consisting of
mostly ultrafine particles, for calcite, fluorite and magnesite
Figure 5. The particle size distribution of the feed and of each cyclone for calcite (left), fluorite (middle) and magnesite (right)
measured by laser diffraction (HELOS, SYMPATEC, Germany)
Table 1. The cut size d
T and the separation efficiency k of each cyclone for calcite, fluorite and magnesite, where 0.3 k 0.6,
0.6 k 0.8, 0.8 k 0.9 indicates a technical separation, a sharp technical separation and a sharp analytical separation,
respectively
Sample Name
Cut Size dT in µm Separation Efficiency k
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
Calcite 53.4 40.2 25.2 15.3 10.9 0.76 0.53 0.61 0.73 0.72
Fluorite 49.0 38.6 22.4 13.5 9.3 0.73 0.56 0.62 0.70 0.68
Magnesite 47.1 34.6 21.8 13.6 10.3 0.75 0.55 0.64 0.74 0.69