XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 2967
The population was 8 and all plots follow a normal
distribution:
• For the overall mass pull, the probability plot shows
that the p-value (0.854) is greater than the the sig-
nificance level (0.05), meaning the null hypothesis
has failed to be rejected and the data set should be
considered normally distributed. Most of the data
follows the fitted distribution line. The mean mass
pull was 29.2% with a standard deviation of 11.5%.
• For the +150µm, the probability plot shows that the
p-value 0.71 (normally distributed) with most of the
data following the fitted distribution line. The mean
mass pull was 21.9% with a standard deviation of
8.3%.
• For the –150µm the probability plot shows that the
p-value is 0.927 (normally distributed) with most of
the data following the fitted distribution line. The
mean mass pull was 37.2% with a standard deviation
of 15.4%.
Figure 6 illustrates the main effects plot for the mass
pull:
For the levels tested, the variables affected the mass pull
as following:
• For all the fractions analyzed, the most significant
variable was the Jg and the highest mass pull is asso-
ciated with the biggest Jg.
• The froth level is the second most significant vari-
able for the +150µm, whereas for the –150µm frac-
tion the frother dosage was more significant than the
froth level.
• The collector dosage has no significant effect on mass
pull in any of the fractions analysed.
Effect of Variables on Cu Recovery
Recovery was the second response analyzed and the tar-
get was to understand the effect of each of the variables to
achieve the highest Cu recovery. Figures 7 illustrates the
probability plot for the Cu recovery:
Figure 5. Probability plot for mass pull – (A) Overall (B) +150µm (C) –150µm
The population was 8 and all plots follow a normal
distribution:
• For the overall mass pull, the probability plot shows
that the p-value (0.854) is greater than the the sig-
nificance level (0.05), meaning the null hypothesis
has failed to be rejected and the data set should be
considered normally distributed. Most of the data
follows the fitted distribution line. The mean mass
pull was 29.2% with a standard deviation of 11.5%.
• For the +150µm, the probability plot shows that the
p-value 0.71 (normally distributed) with most of the
data following the fitted distribution line. The mean
mass pull was 21.9% with a standard deviation of
8.3%.
• For the –150µm the probability plot shows that the
p-value is 0.927 (normally distributed) with most of
the data following the fitted distribution line. The
mean mass pull was 37.2% with a standard deviation
of 15.4%.
Figure 6 illustrates the main effects plot for the mass
pull:
For the levels tested, the variables affected the mass pull
as following:
• For all the fractions analyzed, the most significant
variable was the Jg and the highest mass pull is asso-
ciated with the biggest Jg.
• The froth level is the second most significant vari-
able for the +150µm, whereas for the –150µm frac-
tion the frother dosage was more significant than the
froth level.
• The collector dosage has no significant effect on mass
pull in any of the fractions analysed.
Effect of Variables on Cu Recovery
Recovery was the second response analyzed and the tar-
get was to understand the effect of each of the variables to
achieve the highest Cu recovery. Figures 7 illustrates the
probability plot for the Cu recovery:
Figure 5. Probability plot for mass pull – (A) Overall (B) +150µm (C) –150µm