XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 2455
.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Pulp potential (mV vs SHE)
Millerite pH 9
Pentlandite pH 7
Pentlandite pH 9
Pentlandite pH 11
Figure 2. Mineral recovery at 8 min as a function of pulp potential for millerite and pentlandite (120 g/t
KeX) from single mineral tests. Adapted from Smith et al. (2011) and Senior et al. (1994)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Pulp Potential (mV vs SHE)
Millerite
Pentlandite
Figure 3. Mineral recovery at 8 min as a function of pulp potential for millerite and pentlandite (100 g/t
KeX, pH 9) from the nickel sulphide sample
Percent
Recovery
of
Mineral
(%)
Percent
recovery
of
Mineral(%)
.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Pulp potential (mV vs SHE)
Millerite pH 9
Pentlandite pH 7
Pentlandite pH 9
Pentlandite pH 11
Figure 2. Mineral recovery at 8 min as a function of pulp potential for millerite and pentlandite (120 g/t
KeX) from single mineral tests. Adapted from Smith et al. (2011) and Senior et al. (1994)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Pulp Potential (mV vs SHE)
Millerite
Pentlandite
Figure 3. Mineral recovery at 8 min as a function of pulp potential for millerite and pentlandite (100 g/t
KeX, pH 9) from the nickel sulphide sample
Percent
Recovery
of
Mineral
(%)
Percent
recovery
of
Mineral(%)