XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 3303
leaching parameters and percent recoveries, represented by
five polynomial quadratic equations for Ni (Eq. 2 and 3 for
FeCl3 and AC, respectively). The model equation illustrates
the influence of the linear, two-way, and square interactions
between the process conditions and responses. Using these
empirical equations, it is feasible to forecast the leaching
recoveries of the rougher tailings for any desired parameter
level and ascertain the relative influence of the factors based
on their coefficients.
Ni recovery (%)FeCl
3
=30.73 +0.36 m1 – 0.62 m2
– 0.36 m3 – 0.11 m4 – 0.42 m12
+0.01 m22 +0.004 m32
+0.001 m42 +0.086 m1 m2
+0.042 m1 m3 – 0.056 m1 m4
+0.01 m2 m3 – 0.01 m2 m4
+0.03 m3 m4 (2)
0.8
1.3
1.8
2.3
2.8
3.3
3.8
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
2 Theta (°)
Bytownite
Calcite
Dolomite
Magnetite
Olivine
Pyrrhotite
Quartz
Metaschoepite
Pentlandite
Chalcopyrite
Safflorite
Perovskite
Figure 2. The powder diffraction pattern of the rougher tailings
Figure 3. The SEM micrograph analysis of the rougher tailings
Intensity
(a.u)
leaching parameters and percent recoveries, represented by
five polynomial quadratic equations for Ni (Eq. 2 and 3 for
FeCl3 and AC, respectively). The model equation illustrates
the influence of the linear, two-way, and square interactions
between the process conditions and responses. Using these
empirical equations, it is feasible to forecast the leaching
recoveries of the rougher tailings for any desired parameter
level and ascertain the relative influence of the factors based
on their coefficients.
Ni recovery (%)FeCl
3
=30.73 +0.36 m1 – 0.62 m2
– 0.36 m3 – 0.11 m4 – 0.42 m12
+0.01 m22 +0.004 m32
+0.001 m42 +0.086 m1 m2
+0.042 m1 m3 – 0.056 m1 m4
+0.01 m2 m3 – 0.01 m2 m4
+0.03 m3 m4 (2)
0.8
1.3
1.8
2.3
2.8
3.3
3.8
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
2 Theta (°)
Bytownite
Calcite
Dolomite
Magnetite
Olivine
Pyrrhotite
Quartz
Metaschoepite
Pentlandite
Chalcopyrite
Safflorite
Perovskite
Figure 2. The powder diffraction pattern of the rougher tailings
Figure 3. The SEM micrograph analysis of the rougher tailings
Intensity
(a.u)