3150 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
before and after the adsorption measured in g/t. V shows
the volume (L) used during the tests, while W represents
the mass (g) of the sample.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Mineralogical and Chemical Purity Characteristics
X-ray diffraction (XRD) was employed to confirm the
mineralogical phases of chalcopyrite and the two pyrrhotite
superstructures (monoclinic and hexagonal). The results, as
depicted in Figure 2a-b, validate that the primary phases of
the investigated minerals (chalcopyrite, monoclinic pyrrho-
tite, and hexagonal pyrrhotite) exhibit distinct diffraction
peaks corresponding to their crystal structures. Figure 2a
highlights three clearly identifiable peaks at 2θ locations of
29°, 48.5°, and 57.5°, corresponding to the crystallographic
planes 112, 204, and 312 of chalcopyrite. Additionally,
Figures 2b reflect the characteristic XRD peaks for pyrrho-
tite at 29°, 33.7°, and 44°, corresponding to crystal planes
(100), (101), and (102). The stoichiometric composition of
minerals is detailed in Table 1, providing confirmation of
the chemical makeup of individual minerals.
Influence of Galvanic Interactions and Pulp Chemistry
on the Flotation Performance of Chalcopyrite
The flotation process for concentrating chalcopyrite from
its associated mineral assemblages is highly sensitive to
variations in chemical and electrochemical conditions. This
study systematically explored the relationship between gal-
vanic interactions and pulp chemistry parameters (pH and
ORP) and their influence on mineral surface properties.
The flotation performance of chalcopyrite was examined
under a range of conditions (Eh and pH), both in the pres-
ence and absence of either hexagonal or monoclinic pyr-
rhotite, (Figures 3a and 3b). The results underscore the
susceptibility of chalcopyrite’s flotation performance to
the influence of both galvanic interactions with pyrrhotite
and changes in pulp chemistry variables. Figure 4a reveals
that a slight pH shift between 9 and 10 induced a notice-
able change in the flotation behaviour of chalcopyrite, with
the optimum pH for chalcopyrite flotation identified at
around 9.5. Similarly, Figure 3b indicates that across differ-
ent ORP values, the flotation performance of chalcopyrite
varied, with higher efficiency obtained at an ORP around
–160 mV. The results illustrate that with the presence of
pyrrhotite superstructures results in significant changes in
chalcopyrite flotation performance (Figure 3a). Notably,
monoclinic pyrrhotite had a more detrimental effect on
the flotation performance of chalcopyrite, compared with
hexagonal pyrrhotite. These results were validated using
a student t-test, reflecting a statistically significant differ-
ence (with a confidence level exceeding 95%) between the
results of chalcopyrite in the presence and absence of pyr-
rhotite superstructures.
The flotation performance results reveal that modi-
fications in pulp chemistry and galvanic interaction
Figure 2. XRD spectra of (chalcopyrite a) and monoclinic pyrrhotite (b), presented in Figure 2. The distinct peaks in each
spectrum confirm the crystallographic structures of chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite
Table 1. Chemical composition of the minerals used in this
study
Sample Fe S Cu
Chalcopyrite 29.0276 34.1982 36.7742
Hexagonal pyrrhotite 56.0043 43.9966 —
Monoclinic pyrrhotite 56.5805 43.4195 —
before and after the adsorption measured in g/t. V shows
the volume (L) used during the tests, while W represents
the mass (g) of the sample.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Mineralogical and Chemical Purity Characteristics
X-ray diffraction (XRD) was employed to confirm the
mineralogical phases of chalcopyrite and the two pyrrhotite
superstructures (monoclinic and hexagonal). The results, as
depicted in Figure 2a-b, validate that the primary phases of
the investigated minerals (chalcopyrite, monoclinic pyrrho-
tite, and hexagonal pyrrhotite) exhibit distinct diffraction
peaks corresponding to their crystal structures. Figure 2a
highlights three clearly identifiable peaks at 2θ locations of
29°, 48.5°, and 57.5°, corresponding to the crystallographic
planes 112, 204, and 312 of chalcopyrite. Additionally,
Figures 2b reflect the characteristic XRD peaks for pyrrho-
tite at 29°, 33.7°, and 44°, corresponding to crystal planes
(100), (101), and (102). The stoichiometric composition of
minerals is detailed in Table 1, providing confirmation of
the chemical makeup of individual minerals.
Influence of Galvanic Interactions and Pulp Chemistry
on the Flotation Performance of Chalcopyrite
The flotation process for concentrating chalcopyrite from
its associated mineral assemblages is highly sensitive to
variations in chemical and electrochemical conditions. This
study systematically explored the relationship between gal-
vanic interactions and pulp chemistry parameters (pH and
ORP) and their influence on mineral surface properties.
The flotation performance of chalcopyrite was examined
under a range of conditions (Eh and pH), both in the pres-
ence and absence of either hexagonal or monoclinic pyr-
rhotite, (Figures 3a and 3b). The results underscore the
susceptibility of chalcopyrite’s flotation performance to
the influence of both galvanic interactions with pyrrhotite
and changes in pulp chemistry variables. Figure 4a reveals
that a slight pH shift between 9 and 10 induced a notice-
able change in the flotation behaviour of chalcopyrite, with
the optimum pH for chalcopyrite flotation identified at
around 9.5. Similarly, Figure 3b indicates that across differ-
ent ORP values, the flotation performance of chalcopyrite
varied, with higher efficiency obtained at an ORP around
–160 mV. The results illustrate that with the presence of
pyrrhotite superstructures results in significant changes in
chalcopyrite flotation performance (Figure 3a). Notably,
monoclinic pyrrhotite had a more detrimental effect on
the flotation performance of chalcopyrite, compared with
hexagonal pyrrhotite. These results were validated using
a student t-test, reflecting a statistically significant differ-
ence (with a confidence level exceeding 95%) between the
results of chalcopyrite in the presence and absence of pyr-
rhotite superstructures.
The flotation performance results reveal that modi-
fications in pulp chemistry and galvanic interaction
Figure 2. XRD spectra of (chalcopyrite a) and monoclinic pyrrhotite (b), presented in Figure 2. The distinct peaks in each
spectrum confirm the crystallographic structures of chalcopyrite and pyrrhotite
Table 1. Chemical composition of the minerals used in this
study
Sample Fe S Cu
Chalcopyrite 29.0276 34.1982 36.7742
Hexagonal pyrrhotite 56.0043 43.9966 —
Monoclinic pyrrhotite 56.5805 43.4195 —