XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 2959
may not function well in large mills, where fluctuations in
the feed rate, particle size distribution, grade, and recovery
will always occur. The large tank cells, by virtue of their
size and consequent retention time, will to a large extent
smooth out these fluctuations, while the smaller pneumatic
cells may not.
An example of considering the overall benefit com-
pared to the single stream benefit is demonstrated in the
treatment of flotation tailings in a HydroFloatÔ flotation
cell to improve coarse particle recovery. The coarse par-
ticles recovered are essential valuable mineral composites
that need finer grinding to liberate the valuable mineral
and then refloating the ground product to produce and
acceptable concentrate grade for marketing. Generally, the
re-flotation will be performed within the available flotation
cleaner and filtration capacity available making metallur-
gical accounting difficult. Unfortunately, there is no pub-
lished information on operating benefits measured in an
industrial setting.
CONCLUSIONS
Tank cells are widely used and are the standard for large and
very large concentrators. The costs of operating and main-
taining very large tank cells (300 m3) is still unknown,
as it takes at least 5 years to obtain good maintenance
data. Metallurgical performance data, especially as related
to particle size, is much more difficult to get. Difficult
logistics and enormous costs make it hard to generate reli-
able and statistically significant information. Months of
sampling, sample preparation, and chemical analysis are
needed. Given the large number of samples required, this
not a trivial nor an inexpensive exercise, and it is doubt-
ful that such information will be readily available in the
future. Operators are more likely to focus on determining
tailings losses in rougher-scavenger flotation, and the min-
eralogy in the different particle size fractions, with the aim
of improving recoveries. This again is not a trivial exercise,
and requires many data points to ensure that measurements
of losses are consistent and well understood in relation to
the ore deposit. In addition, legal restrictions such as non-
disclosure agreements can further impede the dissemina-
tion of information into the public domain.
The well-known pneumatic machines described in
this paper, such as the Jameson cell and flotation columns
have been shown to work well for fine particles, in different
combinations. They should be considered for smaller vol-
ume operations, and as components in the flotation circuit
where recovery of fine particles can add value. However, it
is not yet clear how such applications improve overall per-
formance because comprehensive, definitive information is
not publicly available.
Similarly, the verdict is still out for pneumatic flota-
tion of coarse particles, as there is no available data showing
definitive improvements to overall recovery at grade. Again,
gathering such data is not a trivial exercise, and there may be
added difficulties arising from confidentiality requirements.
In answer to the question posed in the title of this
paper, “Is there a place for a new flotation cell?” the authors
would answer, “Small, entrepreneurial organizations and
university research groups will continue to develop new
flotation equipment and to publicize the improvements
shown by these at flotation cells laboratory and pilot plant
tests. Before installing brand-new machines, industrial users
should first understand the maintenance and metallurgical
performance of the current class of ‘new’ flotation machines,
such as the Woodgrove, RefluxÔ and ConcordeÔ cells, by
completing the industrial-scale testing that is required.”
REFERENCES
Anzoom, S.J., Bournival, G., and Ata, S. 2024. Course
Particle Flotation: A Review. Minerals Engineering,
206: July, 108499.
Battersby, M.J.G., Fletcher, M.G., Imhof, R.M., Singh, A.A.
and Puder, F., 2005, August. The Advantages of
the Imhoflot G-Cell Pneumatic Flotation Process
with Centrifugal Froth Removal–Two Case Studies.
In Randol Innovative Metallurgy Forum, August 21–24,
Burswood Intercontinental Resort, Perth, Western
Australia.
Berg, G., and Yianatos., J.B. 2003. Flotation column auto-
mation: state of the art, Control Engineering Practice
11, 1, 67–72.
Boutin, P., and Tremblay, R.J. 1964. Froth Flotation
Method with Counter-current Separation. U.S. Patent
3.339,730.
Chen, J., Chimonyo, W., and Peng, Y. 2022. Flotation
behaviour in reflux flotation cell – A critical review,
Minerals Engineering, 181.
Ciensci, T., and V. Coffin. 1981. Column Flotation
Operation at Mines Gaspé Molybdenum Circuit.
Presented at the Thirteenth Annual CMP Meeting,
Ottawa, Canada. https://www.onemine.org/documents
/column-flotation-operation-at-mines-gasp-molyb
denum-circuit. Accessed February 2024.
Coleman, R. 2009. Flotation Cells: Selecting the Correct
Concentrate Launder Design. Filtration+Separation.
may not function well in large mills, where fluctuations in
the feed rate, particle size distribution, grade, and recovery
will always occur. The large tank cells, by virtue of their
size and consequent retention time, will to a large extent
smooth out these fluctuations, while the smaller pneumatic
cells may not.
An example of considering the overall benefit com-
pared to the single stream benefit is demonstrated in the
treatment of flotation tailings in a HydroFloatÔ flotation
cell to improve coarse particle recovery. The coarse par-
ticles recovered are essential valuable mineral composites
that need finer grinding to liberate the valuable mineral
and then refloating the ground product to produce and
acceptable concentrate grade for marketing. Generally, the
re-flotation will be performed within the available flotation
cleaner and filtration capacity available making metallur-
gical accounting difficult. Unfortunately, there is no pub-
lished information on operating benefits measured in an
industrial setting.
CONCLUSIONS
Tank cells are widely used and are the standard for large and
very large concentrators. The costs of operating and main-
taining very large tank cells (300 m3) is still unknown,
as it takes at least 5 years to obtain good maintenance
data. Metallurgical performance data, especially as related
to particle size, is much more difficult to get. Difficult
logistics and enormous costs make it hard to generate reli-
able and statistically significant information. Months of
sampling, sample preparation, and chemical analysis are
needed. Given the large number of samples required, this
not a trivial nor an inexpensive exercise, and it is doubt-
ful that such information will be readily available in the
future. Operators are more likely to focus on determining
tailings losses in rougher-scavenger flotation, and the min-
eralogy in the different particle size fractions, with the aim
of improving recoveries. This again is not a trivial exercise,
and requires many data points to ensure that measurements
of losses are consistent and well understood in relation to
the ore deposit. In addition, legal restrictions such as non-
disclosure agreements can further impede the dissemina-
tion of information into the public domain.
The well-known pneumatic machines described in
this paper, such as the Jameson cell and flotation columns
have been shown to work well for fine particles, in different
combinations. They should be considered for smaller vol-
ume operations, and as components in the flotation circuit
where recovery of fine particles can add value. However, it
is not yet clear how such applications improve overall per-
formance because comprehensive, definitive information is
not publicly available.
Similarly, the verdict is still out for pneumatic flota-
tion of coarse particles, as there is no available data showing
definitive improvements to overall recovery at grade. Again,
gathering such data is not a trivial exercise, and there may be
added difficulties arising from confidentiality requirements.
In answer to the question posed in the title of this
paper, “Is there a place for a new flotation cell?” the authors
would answer, “Small, entrepreneurial organizations and
university research groups will continue to develop new
flotation equipment and to publicize the improvements
shown by these at flotation cells laboratory and pilot plant
tests. Before installing brand-new machines, industrial users
should first understand the maintenance and metallurgical
performance of the current class of ‘new’ flotation machines,
such as the Woodgrove, RefluxÔ and ConcordeÔ cells, by
completing the industrial-scale testing that is required.”
REFERENCES
Anzoom, S.J., Bournival, G., and Ata, S. 2024. Course
Particle Flotation: A Review. Minerals Engineering,
206: July, 108499.
Battersby, M.J.G., Fletcher, M.G., Imhof, R.M., Singh, A.A.
and Puder, F., 2005, August. The Advantages of
the Imhoflot G-Cell Pneumatic Flotation Process
with Centrifugal Froth Removal–Two Case Studies.
In Randol Innovative Metallurgy Forum, August 21–24,
Burswood Intercontinental Resort, Perth, Western
Australia.
Berg, G., and Yianatos., J.B. 2003. Flotation column auto-
mation: state of the art, Control Engineering Practice
11, 1, 67–72.
Boutin, P., and Tremblay, R.J. 1964. Froth Flotation
Method with Counter-current Separation. U.S. Patent
3.339,730.
Chen, J., Chimonyo, W., and Peng, Y. 2022. Flotation
behaviour in reflux flotation cell – A critical review,
Minerals Engineering, 181.
Ciensci, T., and V. Coffin. 1981. Column Flotation
Operation at Mines Gaspé Molybdenum Circuit.
Presented at the Thirteenth Annual CMP Meeting,
Ottawa, Canada. https://www.onemine.org/documents
/column-flotation-operation-at-mines-gasp-molyb
denum-circuit. Accessed February 2024.
Coleman, R. 2009. Flotation Cells: Selecting the Correct
Concentrate Launder Design. Filtration+Separation.