• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Evaluation of Modal Size Distribution of Beach Sand Minerals by…
125 
Evaluation of Modal Size Distribution in Beach SandMinerals by Image Analysis
Paromita Biswas, Manoj K. Mohanta, Rajendra K. Rath, Bibhuranjan Nayak and Kalyan K. Bhattacharyya
Mineral Processing Division, National Metallurgical Laboratory, (CSIR)Jamshedpur-831007, IndiaE-mail: mkm_nml@yahoo.co.in
ABSTRACT:
The size distribution in beach sand minerals is evaluated by measuring the weight percentage of sieve fractions in a conventional size analysis. As the minerals in each size fractions are of diverse specificgravity, the size analysis may not give any information on the modal distribution of heavy minerals. A mineralmodal analysis was attempted by interfacing a Stereomicroscope with CCD camera and image analysis systemfor image acquisition and data generation. The grain size of the minerals in beach sand was measured. The preliminary investigation shows that the mineral mode of the size distribution is different for different minerals(heavy minerals and quartz). The study has significance for devising mineral processing selective to size andshape.
1. INTRODUCTION
Placer deposit along the Indian coast line is a potential resource for ilmenite, zircon, monazite,garnet and sillimanite (Ali et al., 2001 a & b;Chandrasekharan and Murugan, 2001; Krishnanet al., 2001; Rao et al., 2001; Rajamanickam,2004; Ravi et al., 2001). The resource poten-tiality of non-nuclear minerals has drawnattention for the exploration and exploitation onconcurrence to new mineral policy of India.These minerals of interest are associated withother gangue components such as quartz,amphibole and pyroxene in the beach sand(Bhattacharya et al., 2004, 2006). The availableinformation and personal communicationssuggest that the mineralogical distribution of these minerals in beach sand is widely variableand sometimes cause a nightmare in bene-ficiation when some of the gangue minerals bear a physical property close to an ore mineral. Itrequires a detailed characterization of theminerals in the beach sand so that advantage can be taken of these properties.Conventionally, the beach sand is charac-terised by its mineralogical attributes under optical microscopy, scanning electron micro-scopy, X-ray diffractometry etc. The heavymineral concentrate is obtained by gravityseparation (heavy liquid) and the concentrate isstudied for the identification and modal distri- bution by grain counting. The sedimentologicaltexture is also studied by size analysis, shape,surface features etc. Reyneke and Van der Westhuizen (2001) reported the characterizationof magnetic fractions (based on magneticsusceptibility) of the heavy minerals. Nayak et al.(2006) indicated the hematite-ilmenite inter-growth texture in the grains of ilmenite fromChavakkad-Ponnani. The present work carriedout the characterization of minerals in three beach sand samples by size and shape. Thesample from Warkala (W-1) and Chavakkad-Ponnani (CHP-1) contain ilmenite as thedominant heavy mineral whereas second samplefrom Chavakkad-Ponnani (CHP-2) containsamphibole and pyroxene.
2. METHODOLOGY
The beach sand sample was treated with bromoform of sp. gr. 2.88 to separate the ‘heavymineral concentrate’ (HMC) and ‘light fraction’.Observation of the minerals was made under azoom stereo microscope interfaced with CCDcamera and image analysis system for imageacquisition and data generation. The dimension(length and breadth) of grains in each mineraltype in these fractions was measured from theimages by drawing tie lines along minimum
 
126 
 
Mineral Processing Technology (MPT 2007)
width and maximum length. Conventional sizeanalysis of the bulk sample was carried out by aRo-tap sieve shaker.
3. OBSERVATION
The size analysis of the as received sample fromWarkala shows almost a Gaussian distributionwhereas that from Chavakkad-Ponnani showstwo samples skewing oppositely, CHP-1 skewed positive whereas CHP-2 skewed negative(Figure-1). The size distribution in all the threesamples is distinctly different. While CHP-1 isdominated by the minerals of fine size, CHP-2 isdominated by the minerals of coarser size and theW-1 is dominated by the minerals of intermediatesize. The mode of the distribution is 177-354 μmfor W-1, 125-177μm for CHP-1 and 354-500 μmfor CHP-2.
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
0102030405060
   0   0  -   6   3   6   3  -   8   8   8   8  -  1   2   5  1   2   5  -  1   7   7  1   7   7  -   2   5   0   2   5   0  -   3   5  4   3   5  4  -   5   0   0   5   0   0  -   7   0   7   7   0   7  -  1   0   0   0  1   0   0   0  -  1  4  1   0  1  4  1   0  -   2   0   0   0
Size class (micron)
   M   i  n  e  r  a   l   d   i  s   t  r   i   b  u   t   i  o  n   (   W   t   %   )
CHP-1CHP-2W-1
 
Fig. 1:
Size distribution of minerals in the bulksamples of the beach sand from three locality.The distribution is in weight percent of theminerals present in each size class
The dimension of the heavy mineralconcentrate and of the light fraction measured byimage analysis system provides information onsize if the width of the grain is considered. Thenumber of grains counted on the different sizeclasses is computed in percentage, which provides a reasonable distribution pattern of eachmineral in a given sample (Figure 2a-c). Quartzis the common mineral in the light fraction of allthe three samples. Ilmenite and zircon are thedominant heavy minerals in W-1 whereassillimanite is additional heavy mineral in CHP-1and amphibole/pyroxene dominate the HMC inCHP-2.
WARKALA0102030405063-88 88-125125-177177-250250-354354-500500-707
Size Class (micron)
   M   i  n  e  r  a   l  m  o   d  a   l   %
IlmZir SillQzPyr 
a
CHAVAKKAD PONNANI (1)0102030405063-88 88-125125-177177-250250-354354-500500-707
Size class (micron)
   M   i  n  e  r  a   l  m  o   d  a   l   %
IlmZir SillQzPyr 
b
CHAVAKKAD PONNANI (2)0102030405063-8888-125125-177177-250250-354354-500500-707
Size class (micron)
   M   i  n  e  r  a   l  m  o   d  a   l   %
IlmZir SillQzPyr 
c
Figure 2:
Modal distribution of each mineralfraction in different size classes for the sample W-1 (a), CHP-1 (b), and CHP-2 (c). The number of grains belonging to a size class is decided by thebreadth of the mineral grains. Ilm= ilmenite, Zir=zircon, Sill= sillimanite, Qz= quartz, Pyr=amphibole/pyroxene.
The modal size analysis of individualminerals shows that quartz invariably dominatesin the size class 250-354 μm (mode) in all thesamples. In the sample W-1, zircon dominates in
 
Evaluation of Modal Size Distribution of Beach Sand Minerals by…
127 
the size class 88-177 μm with a mode at 125-177μm. Ilmenite dominates in the size class 125-250μm with a mode at 177-250 μm. In the sampleCHP-1, Ilmenite dominates in the size class 125-250 μm whereas zircon dominates in 88-177 μm both having a common mode at 125-177 μm.Sillimanite has a mode in the size class 125-177μm. In the sample CHP-2, the amphibole/ pyroxene has a mode at 177-250 μm.
4. DISCUSSION
All the heavy minerals of interest such asilmenite, zircon and sillimanite belong to a sizeclass smaller than 250μm whereas associatedquartz is of larger size (250-354 μm). Ilmenite isof size narrowly larger than zircon and has acommon mode at 125-177 μm. As the modalabundance of ilmenite is much higher than thezircon and sillimanite in these samples,significant recovery of ilmenite is possible bysize selective beneficiation route. It is to be notedthat sillimanite belongs to a size class close toilmenite but has a shape factor much higher. Thelength to breadth ratio in ilmenite is 1.3 to 1.5whereas that of sillimanite is above 1.3 and ashigh as 2.5. It is because of the crystallographicform and the size in their primary source rock.
5. CONCLUSION
The modal size distribution of individualminerals in the beach sand shows the variation inthe size which is mineral specific. The grain sizeincreases in the order of zircon < ilmenite <sillimanite < amphibole/pyroxene < quartz. Itsuggests that there is a possibility of separationof ilmenite and zircon from quartz, amphiboleand pyroxene by evolving a suitable mineral processing technique selective to size and shape.
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are thankful to the Director, NMLfor the permission for publication. They arethankful to Dr. P. K. Bhattacharyya for providingthe sample from CSIR-network project.
REFERENCES
[1]Ali, M.A., Desapati, T. and Deshmukh, R.D.,
 Heavy mineral resources in the beach placers of Maharashtra
. Exploration and Research for Atomic Minerals, 13, 157-159 (2001a)[2]Ali, M.A., Krishnan, S. and Banerjee, D.C.,
 Beach and inland heavy minerals sand investigation and deposits in India
. Explorationand Research for Atomic Minerals, 13, 1-21(2001b).[3]Bhattacharyya, P., Bhattacharyya, K.K., Kumar,V., Nayak, B., Mohandas, P.N., Vidyadhar, A.,Swamy, N., Chattoraj, U.S., and Maulik, S.C.,
Studies on medium grade ilmenite-depleted beach placer deposit of Chavakkad Ponnanicoast, Kerala.
In Proceedings of the InternationalSeminar on Mineral Processing Technology-2006, Chennai (India) Eds. G. Bhaskar Raju, S.Prabhakar, S. Subba Rao, D.S. Rao and T.V.V.Kumar, Indian Institute of Mineral Engineers,Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd., India, 2006, pp. 544-552.[4]Bhattacharya, P., Singh, R., Srivastava, J.P.,
 Recovery of values from Indian beach placer deposits.
In National Workshop and Seminar onSustainable Development of Coastal Placer Minerals (PLACER-2004), Eds. V.J. Lovesonand D.D. Mishra, Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd.,India, 2004, pp.151-169.[5]Chandrasekharan, S. and Murugan, C.,
 Heavyminerals in the beach and coastal red sands(Terris) of Tamil Nadu.
Exploration and Researchfor Atomic Minerals, 13, 87-109 (2001).[6]Krishnan, S., Vishwanathan, G., andBalachandran, K.
 Heavy minerals sand depositsof Kerala.
Exploration and Research for AtomicMinerals, 13, 111-146 (2001).[7]Nayak, B., Bhattacharyya, P., Bhattacharyya,K.K.
Characters of ilmenite from unexploited beach sand of Chavakkad-Ponnani deposit, Kerala coast, India
. In Abstract volume, 60
th
Annual Technical Meeting, Jamshedpur (India),Indian Institute of Metals, (2006) 4.[8]Rajamanickam, G.V., Chandrasekhar, N.Anguswamy, N, and Loveson, V.J.
 Placer  garnets in the beaches of Tamil Nadu
. In National Workshop and Seminar on SustainableDevelopment of Coastal Placer Minerals(PLACER-2004), Eds. V.J. Loveson and D.D.Mishra, Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd., India, 2004, pp.65-78.[9]Rao, R.G., Sahoo, P., and Panda, N.K.
 HeavyMineral Sand Deposit of Orissa
, Exploration andResearch for Atomic Minerals, 13, 23-52 (2001).
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...