XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 3061
the metallurgical indexes obtained to use these reagents by
separated. On the other hand, the mixture 80/20 ERVOs
/BSs reached the higher values of enrichment ratio (Re),
chalcopyrite/pyrite selectivity (I.S. Cpy-Py) and copper/
silica selectivity (I.S. Cu-Si).
CONCLUSIONS
The kinetic tests for each alternative collector achieved to
determine an estimated time of 8 minutes to obtain cop-
per recoveries greater than 91% in the case of ERVOs and
55% for ERVOs, both reagents presented a faster flotation
kinetics than the obtained with the traditional PAX col-
lector, which maximum copper recovery was 93.18% after
20 minutes of flotation. In terms of recovered mineral,
alternative collectors achieved chalcopyrite recoveries near
to 95%, very close to the obtained with PAX, which corre-
sponded to 99%.. However, the selectivity was higher than
the obtained with the conventional collector, attaining a
pyrite recovery near 65%. This value is lower than
the achieved by the PAX, which corresponded to 93%.
Regarding the metallurgical indexes, the 80/20 mixture of
ERVOs/BSs presents the highest values compared with the
different studied mixtures.
These results show that this mixture could be used as
collector in copper sulphides flotation, being an alternative
to replace the conventional collectors with the advantage
to be highly selective in rougher stages. In addition, this
work suggests that the use of these type of residues have
the potential to be added to the existing array of flotation
collectors and would represent a combined opportunity for
both the mining and sanitary industry, to reduce costs and
minimize the impact on the environment.
FUNDING
This research was funded by ANID/FONDAP/15130015,
ANID/FONDAP/1523A0001 ANID/ACT210030
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The researchers acknowledge Cristina Cereceda and Matias
Quiroz for their technical support.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
Arcos, F., &Uribe, L. 2021. Evaluation of the use of recy-
cled vegetable oil as a collector reagent in the flotation
of copper sulfide minerals using seawater. Recycling,
6(1), 1–17. doi: 10.3390/recycling6010005.
Brandao, P.R.G., Caires, L.G., &Queiroz, D.S.B. 1994.
Vegetable lipid oil-based collectors in the flotation of
apatite ores. Minerals Engineering, 7(7), 917–925. doi:
10.1016/08926875(94)90133-3.
Bulatovic, S. 2007. Handbook of Flotation Reagents
Chemistry, Theory and Practice: Flotation of Sulfide
Ores. Handbook of Flotation Reagents: Chemistry, Theory
and Practice Flotation of Sulfide Ores, 3. doi: 10.1016/
B978-0-444-53029-5.X5009-6.
CoChilco. 2019. Proyección de la producción de cobre en
Chile 2019–2030.
Dignac, M.-F., Urbain, V., Rybacki, D., Bruchet, A.,
Snidaro, D., &Scribe, P. 1998. Chemical description
of extracellular polymers: Implication on activated
sludge floc structure. Water Science and Technology,
38(8), 45–53. doi: 10.1016/S0273-1223(98)00676-3.
Gao, Y., &Pan, L. 2021. Understanding the mechanism
of froth flotation of molybdenite using oily collectors
from a perspective of thinning and rupture of thin liq-
uid film. Minerals Engineering, 163, 106805.
doi: 10.1016/j.mineng.2021.106805.
Greene, M.G., Walton, K.B., Dimas, P.A., Laney, D.G.,
Young, S.K., Young, T.L., &Reber, N.R.
(2012). Collectors for flotation of molybdenum-containing
ores. Google Patents.
Joaquín Villarino. 2015. Minería en Chile. Principales
desafíos y oportunidades.
Kim, M., Park, J., Kang, H., &Jeong, D. 2022. Efficiency
evaluation of the bottom ash flotation collector
by removed saturated fatty acids from soybean oil.
Physicochemical Problems of Mineral Processing, 58(1),
126–137. doi: 10.37190/ppmp/144775.
Table 3. Metallurgical indexes obtained to use different ERVOs/BSs mixtures and 15 g/t of MIBC as frother
ERVOs/BSs Rec. Cu Rec. Cpy Re I.S. (Cu-Si) I.S. (Cpy-Py)
100/0 80.6% 96.4% 0.72 2.20 1.88
80/20 86.5% 95.2% 6.43 4.72 3.41
60/40 71.6% 85.5% 2.52 2.47 2.32
40/60 75.1% 93.6% 3.01 4.08 3.36
20/80 67.2% 92.8% 2.05 4.11 3.22
0/100 55.2% 95.1% 0.34 3.15 1.91
Previous Page Next Page