2848 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
for a similar water recovery to the base case. The way in
which each funnel affected the water flows and the cell fluid
dynamics are explored using SPH simulations.
CFD Simulations with SPH
Figure 11 shows the simulated solid and gas content
produced with each design after 30 seconds of flotation
approximately. It can be observed that both funnels tend to
accumulate particles on their surface. Funnel 1 accumulates
fewer particles, as these can slide and fall near the walls,
while Funnel 2 has points of solid accumulation in the cor-
ners near the walls. The holes of the mesh design prevent
more particles from settling over the funnel. Notably, all
the cases evidence some accumulation of particles at the
base, which could imply some suspension issues.
In terms of air fluid dynamics, it is observed that the
funnels modify the motion of bubbles. Funnel 1 gener-
ates an accumulation of gas, which could result in zones of
coalescence, fast-moving air flows, and a general disruption
of froth stability. This result is in agreement with the results
observed in Figure 7. Funnel 2, on the other hand, allows
for air to move through the holes of the mesh, resulting
in less disruption of the froth zone. Both funnels generate
considerably reduced flows of bubbles near the lip of the
tank, which could result in a reduced entrainment by the
bubble swarm effect.
Future work will focus on expanding the SPH simula-
tions to observe the results for the multiple particle classes
and the overall motion of fine particles, to assess the effect
of funnels on entrainment. It is worth noticing, however,
Figure 11. Solid and air content after 30 seconds of flotation for the different designs. Colours represent the volumetric
content of the different phases
for a similar water recovery to the base case. The way in
which each funnel affected the water flows and the cell fluid
dynamics are explored using SPH simulations.
CFD Simulations with SPH
Figure 11 shows the simulated solid and gas content
produced with each design after 30 seconds of flotation
approximately. It can be observed that both funnels tend to
accumulate particles on their surface. Funnel 1 accumulates
fewer particles, as these can slide and fall near the walls,
while Funnel 2 has points of solid accumulation in the cor-
ners near the walls. The holes of the mesh design prevent
more particles from settling over the funnel. Notably, all
the cases evidence some accumulation of particles at the
base, which could imply some suspension issues.
In terms of air fluid dynamics, it is observed that the
funnels modify the motion of bubbles. Funnel 1 gener-
ates an accumulation of gas, which could result in zones of
coalescence, fast-moving air flows, and a general disruption
of froth stability. This result is in agreement with the results
observed in Figure 7. Funnel 2, on the other hand, allows
for air to move through the holes of the mesh, resulting
in less disruption of the froth zone. Both funnels generate
considerably reduced flows of bubbles near the lip of the
tank, which could result in a reduced entrainment by the
bubble swarm effect.
Future work will focus on expanding the SPH simula-
tions to observe the results for the multiple particle classes
and the overall motion of fine particles, to assess the effect
of funnels on entrainment. It is worth noticing, however,
Figure 11. Solid and air content after 30 seconds of flotation for the different designs. Colours represent the volumetric
content of the different phases