634 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
• Solids recirculation ratio (SRR)
• LD =Lime Demand
• SF =Solids Formed
• Characterization of the feed, thickener overflow
solutions, and sludge (pH, SO4 and metals)
• Biological activity
Tests for the design of a thickener:
• Modified Talmadge-Fitch-Kinch sedimentation test.
• Dorr-Oliver clarification test
Sand Filters
Green sand multimedia filtration is a process that is effec-
tive in removing iron and manganese from water. The solu-
tion that fed this process was a mixture of RO permeate
water and HDS treated water. The main parameters moni-
tored in this SF process during piloting were:
• Feed flow
• Differential pressure
• Backwash times
• Characterization of the feed and filtrated solutions
(pH, SO4, and metals)
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF
RESULTS
For comparison, process design criteria with a feed flow of
1,000 m3/h is considered.
The proven technological arrangement involving the
processes described in the previous section is shown in
Figure 6. The conventional process, normally used in the
mining industry is shown in Figure 7. Table 2 shows the
main comparative advantages.
Dorr-Oliver clarification test
Milk of lime
Feed
concentrate from
reverse osmosis
Flocculant
Treated
water
Air Air
Sludge
B1 B2 B3
A
Thickener
A
Figure 4. HDS process
Sand
Filter
Treated water from HDS
Final treated water
(no solids)
Permeate from RO
Figure 5. Sand filter process
• Solids recirculation ratio (SRR)
• LD =Lime Demand
• SF =Solids Formed
• Characterization of the feed, thickener overflow
solutions, and sludge (pH, SO4 and metals)
• Biological activity
Tests for the design of a thickener:
• Modified Talmadge-Fitch-Kinch sedimentation test.
• Dorr-Oliver clarification test
Sand Filters
Green sand multimedia filtration is a process that is effec-
tive in removing iron and manganese from water. The solu-
tion that fed this process was a mixture of RO permeate
water and HDS treated water. The main parameters moni-
tored in this SF process during piloting were:
• Feed flow
• Differential pressure
• Backwash times
• Characterization of the feed and filtrated solutions
(pH, SO4, and metals)
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF
RESULTS
For comparison, process design criteria with a feed flow of
1,000 m3/h is considered.
The proven technological arrangement involving the
processes described in the previous section is shown in
Figure 6. The conventional process, normally used in the
mining industry is shown in Figure 7. Table 2 shows the
main comparative advantages.
Dorr-Oliver clarification test
Milk of lime
Feed
concentrate from
reverse osmosis
Flocculant
Treated
water
Air Air
Sludge
B1 B2 B3
A
Thickener
A
Figure 4. HDS process
Sand
Filter
Treated water from HDS
Final treated water
(no solids)
Permeate from RO
Figure 5. Sand filter process