Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

Effects of operating variables on modified flotation

parameters in the mineral separation
M. Ucurum a, , O. Bayat b
a

Cukurova University, Vocational College of Karaisali, 01770 Adana, Turkey

Cukurova University, Mining Engineering Department, Balcali, 01330 Adana, Turkey

Received 25 August 2006; received in revised form 25 November 2006; accepted 26 November 2006

Abstract
An attempt has been made in this paper to investigate effect of collector type, particle size distribution, collector dosage, air flow rate, pulp
density and wash water rate parameters on modified flotation parameters on sphalerite flotation in a flotation column. In the experimental studies,
the fractional recoveries after 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 5, 10 and 20 min of flotation time were fitted to first-order kinetic model R = R [1 exp(kt)], where
R is recovery at t time, R is ultimate recovery and k is the first-order rate constant was used to draw the timerecovery curves. Two parameters,
the ultimate recovery (R ) and first-order rate constant (k), were then obtained from the model to fit an experimental timerecovery curve. A
modified flotation rate constant (Km ) defined as product of R and k, i.e., Km = R k, and selectivity index (SI) defined as the ratio of the modified
rate constant of mineral I to the modified rate constant of mineral II (SI = Km of mineral I/Km of mineral II), which could be collectively called
modified flotation parameters, were calculated for each test and it was used to measure of flotation separation selectivity of sphalerite over pyrite.
Timed batch tests on ground ore using a pilot flotation column and subsequent recovery and grade of experimental data and modified flotation
parameters indicated that the optimum parameters are as follows: Dithiophospates collector type, finer particle size distribution (d80 = 0.125 mm),
low collector dosage (500 g/t), low air flow rate (1.30 cm/s), high pulp density (20% solids) and high wash water rate (0.5 L/min).
2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Mineral separation; Froth flotation; Flotation kinetics

1. Introduction
Flotation is one of the most complex mineral processing operations as it is affected by a very large number of variables. Many
of these are beyond the control of the mineral engineer, and some
cannot be even measured quantitatively with the available instruments. The relations between measured and controlled variables
are intricately related. Sometimes simultaneously changing various component settings will reinforce a particular attribute. In
addition, various component settings can cancel or counteract
each other if changes are not chosen wisely [1]. Froth flotation is
the separation method most commonly used to concentrate minerals. Conventionally, the separation is conducted in mechanical
cells where the entrainment of fine gangue (hydrophilic) particles in the froth phase, due to the inherent mechanics of the
phenomenon, had a deleterious effect on the metallurgical per-

Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 322 551 20 57; fax: +90 322 551 22 55.
E-mail address: cevher@cu.edu.tr (M. Ucurum).

1383-5866/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2006.11.019

formance of the process. An effective method to hinder such fine

gangue entrainment emerged with the invention of the column
flotation cell, which uses a deep froth zone (0.52 m) counter
currently washed with water (termed wash water) to induce a
cleaning action of the froth. This is one of the reasons that explain
the metallurgical benefits gained by the introduction of the column to the conventional flotation circuits [2]. During the last
decades, extensive research has been done on column flotation
reflecting the increased interest in this technology. As a result,
many aspects of column flotation have been studied. Satisfactory models of collection mechanism and scale-up have been
developed and applied successfully [3]. Such as, Jameson Cell
which was developed jointly by Mount Isa Mines and Professor G.J. Jameson of the University of Newcastle [4] and Turbo
flotation column which has been developed by Multotec Process
Equipment Ltd. in South Africa [5]. Columns out perform conventional mechanical cells in cleaning operations (better product
grade) due to their particular froth operation, discussed in detail
by Finch and Dobby [6]. More degrees of freedom in operating variables of flotation columns have led to large variations

174

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

in metallurgical performance and have therefore provided much

scope for improving their control [7].
Traditionally, the evaluation of flotation tests is based largely
on a rougher recovery value achieved at a defined time. Since the
cumulative recovery of a component in the concentrate is proportional to flotation time, the flotation process can be considered as
a timerate recovery process. Therefore, a mathematical flotation model that incorporates both a recovery and a rate function
can completely describe flotation timerecovery profiles. They
provide an excellent tool to evaluate flotation tests [8]. Lynch et
al. [9] have conveniently defined three categories for these models: (i) empirical models, (ii) probability models, and (iii) kinetic
models. The main advantage of the empirical models is that they
are often less expensive in personnel and time. However, predictions outside the range of the models database should be
treated warily, while estimation of the performance of alternate
circuits for a particular ore is not possible. Unlike the empirical approach, the probability approach does allow recognition
of the individual compartments and more importantly the pulp
and froth volumes in each compartment [10,11]. The probability models basically consider the probabilities of particle bubble
collision, adhesion, froth stability, etc. The simple form of the
probability approach is similar to the simplest form of the kinetic
model [12].
In froth flotation, air bubbles are injected into a moving
stream of aqueous slurry containing a mixture of particles, so
that only hydrophobic ores collected on the bubble surface and
exit the stream. Owing to its simplicity, the process is widely
used for separating a great variety of solid particles. However,
a number of complex chemical and physical interaction aspects
are involved in the literature on the study of this process, which
has been studied from contact angles. Of these, kinetic approach
has been highly instrumental in better understanding leading to
reasonably accurate predictions [13].
Kinetic models can be used to analyze batch flotation results.
Two parameters which are R (ultimate recovery) and k (firstorder rate constant) are obtained from the model fit to an
experimental recoverytime curve. They can be effectively used
to evaluate variables affecting flotation process [14]. Understanding and interpreting changes in the values of R and k
are very important and can often be misleading [15]. In many
laboratory studies, changing one condition leads to a change in
both R and k values. This can make it difficult to compare
flotation rate data between tests or to establish a trend for R
and k values under different conditions. For instance, changing
one condition may lead to an increase in k but a decrease in
R , while selectivity between the valuable and gangue minerals might be unchanged, increased or decreased depending only
on the combined measure of k and R . One way to overcome
the difficulty of comparing k and R values is to introduce a
modified rate constant (Km ), which takes into account both ultimate recovery, and rate constant [16]. Consequently, a selectivity
index (SI) based on the modified rate constant between different
minerals in a flotation system can be obtained. The two could
be collectively called modified flotation parameters [12].
The value of a flotation concentrate containing a given mineral from which a desired metal is extracted by a metallurgical

process decreases with an increase in the presence of minerals

containing metals other than that of prime interest. It is thus necessary to design specific selective flotation collectors to separate
the desired mineral from the gangue [17]. Sulphide mineral ores
remain the major source of base metals. The flotation of valuable
minerals of copper, lead and zinc from pyrite, the main sulphide
gangue, has received considerable attention [18,19].
2. Experimental
2.1. Materials
The flotation experiments were carried out using samples of
sphalerite ore obtained from Postalli Mining Company, Kayseri, Turkey. Chemical analysis indicated that the ore contained
mainly 16.47% Zn, 23.72% Fe, 0.87% Pb, 22.52% SiO2 and
8.82% MgO (Table 1). X-ray diffraction analysis pointed out
that sphalerite and pyrite were the primary sulphides and quartz,
and dolomite as gangue minerals (Fig. 1).
Cytec International, Holland and SELSAN Metal Limited
Company, Turkey supplied the collecting agents which were
Dithiophospates (Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279) and Potassium Amyl Xanthate. Sodium silicate and copper sulphate were
obtained from Sigma and Fluka Co., respectively. Tap water was
used throughout the experiments. The pulp pH was adjusted
using lime.
2.2. Flotation
The individual flotation tests were performed in a flotation
column. The experimental column set-up with auxiliary instrumentation is shown in Fig. 2. The column was constructed in
stainless steel, 13.5 cm in diameter and 280 cm in total length.
The downcomer was 4.5 cm in diameter and 100 cm in length.
The gas entry point was located in the column bottom section
and was pointed upwards and the slurry was introduced into
the downcomer via a nozzle to form a jet, compared to the
conventional column where the feed was introduced near the
froth/slurry interface. Feed was introduced into the feed sump
and a fixed speed feed pump feeds the material into the aerator
where slurry was injected into the feed downcomer. Air was selfTable 1
Chemical composition of the ore sample
Species

wt.%

SiO2
CaO
MgO
Pb
Zn
Fe
Cu
Cd
Mn
Au
Ag
Loss of ignition

22.52
1.70
8.82
0.87
16.47
23.72
0.29
0.09
0.04
Trace
0.007
22.60

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

175

Fig. 1. X-ray diffraction patterns of the ore (Sp: sphalerite; Py: pyrite; Qz: quartz; Dm: dolomite).

induced into the cell. A fast flotation occurs in the downcomer

prior to the mixture being discharged into the flotation column.
The induced bubbles with floatable particles attached to them,
rise to the column top to be discharged as concentrate (which
is usually washed). The remainder of the feed slurry containing
floatable and non-floatable material settles down to the flotation
columns base. The column base was equipped with a secondary
bubble injection system via a sparger system that introduces
small air bubbles. The floatable material has a second opportunity for bubble attachment, thus simulating two flotation units
in series. The non-floatable material discharges via the column
base as tailings at a controlled rate. Instead of the tailings discharging directly to the tailings sump, it was fed to a dummy

sump inside the feed sump. The dummy sump was designed
with two outlets, a high level overflow that feeds the tails sump
and a non-return orifice communicating with the feed sump.
Volumetric fluctuations in the feed to the flotation column were
eliminated as a constant volumetric flow rate is pumped to the
flotation column through a fixed speed pump. As the level of the
feed sump dropped, more tailings slurry flowed from the dummy
sump to the feed sump due to larger level differences and vice
versa. The excess tailings overflowed to the actual tails sump.
Much shorter time periods were required to re-stabilize the plant
when fresh feed was re-introduced.
For a standard flotation test, a sub-sample (0.5 kg) was ground
in a stainless steel mill at a pulp density of 70 wt.%. The ball

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the experimental flotation column.

176

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

Table 2
Flotation column design and operating specifications

Fig. 3. Particle size distribution of the sphalerite sample after two different
grinding times.

mill had the dimensions, 200 mm 200 mm, and was charged
with 5 kg of stainless steel balls. The grinding times were 5
and 10 min, giving particle size distributions of d80 = 0.180 and
0.125 mm, respectively. The size analyses of the feed and two
individual fractions are shown in Fig. 3. Firstly, optimum collector type and size distribution were determined using pH 12 (with
lime), 2.20 cm/s feed velocity, 1.30 cm/s air flow rate, 7.5 wt.%
pulp density, 600 g/t collector dosage, 250 g/t Na2 SiO3 , 575 g/t
CuSO4 and 0 L/min wash water rate in the flotation column.
Then, other parameters were studied with optimum collector
type (Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279) and particle size distribution (d80 = 0.125 mm) [20].
In this study, the fractional recoveries after 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 5,
10 and 20 min of flotation time were fitted to the model. To
determine kinetic parameters such as, flotation rate constant k
and the ultimate recovery R , a statistical programme SPSS for
Windows 9.0 was used to treat the data in the mode non-linear
regression.
The floating and sinking fractions were recovered, vacuum
filtered and dried in an oven at 90 5 C to constant weight
and assayed for Zn and Fe contents using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer. Design and flotation test parameters are
presented in Table 2.

Column variable

Pilot column

Diameter (mm)
Total height (mm)
Downcomer diameter (mm)
Downcomer height (mm)
Froth height (mm)
Sparger type
Superficial feed velocity (cm/s)
d80 (mm)
Superficial air velocity (cm/s)
Pulp density (%)
Wash water rate (L/min)
pH
Na2 SiO3 (g/t)
CuSO4 (g/t)
Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279 (g/t)

135
3200
45
1000
Variable
Internal
2.20
0.180, 0.125
1.30, 2.20
7.5, 20
0, 0.5
12 (with lime)
250
575
250 + 250, 300 + 300

Fig. 4. Comparison Zn and Fe recovery vs. concentrate Zn and Fe grade for

Dithiophospate (Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279) and Potassium Amyl Xanthate (Dp: Dithiophospate; PAX: Potassium Amyl Xanthate).

pyrite using modified flotation parameters. Fig. 4 shows Zn

recovery versus concentrate Zn grade and Fe recovery versus
concentrate Fe grade for the effect of type of collectors. Table 3
presents the ultimate recovery (R ), flotation rate constant (k),
modified rate constant (Km ), selectivity index (SI) and correlation coefficient (R2 ). Dithiophospates give better grade and
recovery curve for Zn while Potassium Amyl Xanthate produces
better grade and recovery for Fe. Dithiophospates appear to have
a higher modified rate constant (0.252) while Potassium Amyl
Xanthate has a lower value (0.192) for Zn. The modified rate
constant of Potassium Amyl Xanthate collector is higher (0.059)
than Dithiophospates collectors (0.032) for Fe. In terms of Zn/Fe

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Effect of collector type
In this study, collector performance of Potassium Amyl
Xanthate was compared with Dithiophospates (Aerofloat
7048 + Aerofloat 7279) on the separation of sphalerite from

Table 3
Parameters obtained from model (R = R [1 exp(kt)]) fit to data set for Zn and Fe
Collector type

Dithiophospate
Potassium Amyl Xanthate

Zn

Fe

Km

R2

0.895
0.874

0.282
0.220

0.252
0.192

0.993
0.991

SI

Km

R2

0.226
0.424

0.140
0.139

0.032
0.059

0.980
0.956

7.88
3.25

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

177

Fig. 6. Zn and Fe recovery vs. concentrate Zn and Fe grade for d80 = 0.180 and
0.125 mm size distribution.

Fig. 5. Fitted to data set for collectors on Zn and Fe recovery for Dithiophospate (Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279) and Potassium Amyl Xanthate
(Exp. = experimental).

lation coefficient (R2 ). Fig. 6 also presents recovery and grade

curves for Zn and Fe.
d80 = 0.125 mm size distribution gives better results for ultimative recovery (R ), flotation rate constant (k), modified rate
constant (Km ) and recovery and grade values for Zn. Furthermore, the size distribution is higher than d80 = 0.180 mm in terms
of selectivity index (12.58 and 7.88, respectively). This study has
examined the effects of particle size distribution on the flotation behaviour of sphalerite. Timed batch tests on ground ore
using a pilot flotation column and subsequent statistical analysis of experimental data indicated that the optimum feed size for
the ore should be d80 = 0.125 mm. In tests, finer size particles
were also observed to form smaller and more stable bubbles,
resulting in more efficient flotation. Modelling indicated that a

selectivity index, Dithiophospates give a much better result than

Potassium Amyl Xanthate with a value of 7.88.
The xanthates have been the workhorse of sulphide mineral
flotation since the 1920s and represent the largest volume of any
sulfide mineral collector. Xanthates are very good at recovering
in unselective manner bulk sulfide minerals, including iron sulfides. The dithiophosphate collector family is the second major
class of sulphide collectors from a collector volume viewpoint.
Dithiophosphates generally show better iron sulfide rejection
capability than do the xanthates [21]. In this study, the experimental trials show that Dithiophosphate collectors (Aerofloat
7048 + Aerofloat 7279) are better than xanthate collector (Potassium Amyl Xanthate) in terms of modified flotation parameters
in the separation from sphalerite to pyrite. Results in Fig. 5 confirm that the model fits the experimental data very well for both
collectors.
3.2. Effect of size distribution
Particle liberation plays an important role in flotation processes, as demonstrated by studies on the detachment of particles
during bubble coalescence, or by comparison of kinetic parameters for liberated or locked particles. The size to which ore to
be processed should be ground in order to optimise processing
profitability while taking into account metallurgical balance and
size-reduction cost is a very important parameter [22]. This study
examined the effects of particle size distribution (i.e. d80 = 0.180
and 0.125 mm) on the flotation behaviour of sphalerite. Table 4
gives the ultimate recovery (R ), flotation rate constant (k),
modified rate constant (Km ), selectivity index (SI) and corre-

Fig. 7. Fitted to data set for size distribution on Zn and Fe recovery.

Table 4
Parameters obtained from model (R = R [1 exp(kt)]) fit to data set for Zn and Fe
Size distribution, d80 (mm)

0.180
0.125

Zn

Fe

Km

R2

0.895
0.954

0.282
0.409

0.252
0.390

0.993
0.994

SI

Km

R2

0.226
0.259

0.140
0.118

0.032
0.031

0.980
0.982

7.88
12.58

178

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

Table 5
Parameters obtained from model (R = R [1 exp(kt)]) fit to data set for Zn and Fe
Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279 (g/t)

Zn

500
600

Fe

Km

R2

0.937
0.942

0.316
0.317

0.296
0.299

0.997
0.993

SI

Km

R2

0.190
0.315

0.186
0.165

0.035
0.052

0.982
0.995

8.46
5.75

Fig. 9. Fitted to data set for collector dosages on Zn and Fe recovery.

Fig. 8. Zn and Fe recovery vs. concentrate Zn and Fe grade for 500 and 600 g/t
of collector dosages.

first-order kinetic model incorporating a rectangular distribution

of floatabilities gave the best fit for experimental data (Fig. 7).
3.3. Effect of collector dosage
It is well known that the collector dosage of sulphide ores
flotation is an important variable. The effect of collector dosage
on modified flotation parameters was investigated using 500 and
600 g/t of Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279. Table 5 gives the
ultimate recovery (R ), flotation rate constant (k), modified rate
constant (Km ), selectivity index (SI) and correlation coefficient
(R2 ). Fig. 8 also presents recovery and grade curves for Zn and
Fe. As can be seen from the figure, in terms of recovery and grade
values, 500 g/t collector dosage presents better results for Zn,
600 g/t collector dosage for Fe. For the selectivity index, based
on the modified rate constant between Km of Zn modified rate
constant and Km of Fe modified rate constant can be obtained,
500 g/t of collector dosage gives higher result with 8.46 values.
Therefore, lower collector dosage (500 g/t) can be chosen as an
optimum value for sphalerite flotation. The model could present
the timerecovery curves of flotation tests for both collector
dosages quite well for Zn and Fe (Fig. 9).

Fig. 10. Zn and Fe recovery vs. concentrate Zn and Fe grade for 1.30 and
2.20 cm/s air flow rates.

3.4. Effect of air flow rate

In this study, two tests in batch operation were performed at
two different air flow rates such as, 1.30 and 2.20 cm/s. Fig. 10
shows Zn recovery versus Zn grade and Fe recovery versus
Fe grade. Table 6 presents ultimate recovery (R ), flotation
rate constant (k) obtained from fitting, including the modified

Table 6
Parameters obtained from model (R = R [1 exp(kt)]) fit to data set for Zn and Fe
Air flow rate (cm/s)

1.30
2.20

Zn

Fe

Km

R2

0.954
0.942

0.408
0.317

0.390
0.299

0.994
0.993

SI

Km

R2

0.259
0.315

0.118
0.165

0.031
0.052

0.989
0.995

12.58
5.75

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

179

Fig. 11. Fitted to data set for air flow rates on Zn and Fe recovery.
Fig. 13. Fitted to data set for pulp densities on Zn and Fe recovery.

Fig. 12. Zn and Fe recovery vs. concentrate Zn and Fe grade for 7.5 and 20 wt.%
pulp densities.

rate constant (Km ) and correlation coefficient (R2 ). 1.30 cm/s

air flow rate gives better result in terms of grade and recovery
for Zn while 2.20 cm/s air flow rate presents a better result for
Fe. However the air flow rate shows better result for the modified rate constant with a value of 0.390 for Zn while 2.20 cm/s
air flow rate presents a better value (0.052) for Fe. As well as
1.30 cm/s air flow rate gives higher value (12.58) for selectivity
index. The results show that an improved separation of sphalerite from pyrite can be obtained with 1.30 cm/s. Model fits the
experimental data very well for Zn and Fe as indicated in Fig. 11.
3.5. Effect of pulp density
In order to examine the effect of pulp density on the flotation,
7.5 and 20 wt.% of pulp densities were used and the results are
given Fig. 12. Table 7 presents ultimate recovery (R ), flotation

rate constant (k) obtained from fitting, including the modified

rate constant (Km ) and correlation coefficient (R2 ). In terms of
recovery and grade values 20 wt.% of pulp density shows better
results than 7.5% for Zn, but 7.5% solids confers a better value
for Fe. 7.5 wt.% of pulp density gives higher results for ultimate
recovery (R ), rate constant (k) and modified rate constant (Km )
for Zn. However, it has lower ratio with 5.75 for calculation of
Zn/Fe selectivity index. Furthermore, 20% solids are strongly
higher than 7.5% solids in terms of selectivity index with 12.00.
The increase selectivity in flotation between sphalerite and pyrite
observed when the pulp density is enhanced from 7.5 to 20 wt.%.
Therefore, 20% solids is the optimum pulp concentration for the
sphalerite flotation. The first-order flotation model fits the pulp
densities experimental data very well (Fig. 13) for Zn and Fe.
3.6. Effect of wash water rate
The froth phase is extremely important in the operation of a
flotation cell, seeing that, it is critical in determining the amount
of unwanted gangue collected to the concentrate and thus the
purity of product [23]. To achieve this, the effect of wash water
was examined using two different rates (0 and 0.50 L/min).
Recovery and grade curves are given Fig. 14 for Zn and Fe.
Fig. 15 shows the recovery of Zn and Fe as a function of flotation
time and model fits at the two different wash water rates. Table 8
presents kinetic parameters (k, R ), modified rate constant (Km ),
selectivity index and correlation coefficients (R2 ) from the fittings for Zn and Fe. In terms of recovery and grade values
0.50 L/min wash water rate gives better results for Zn but for Fe,
0 L/min wash water rate put forward better results. In the laboratory column flotation tests with the studied wash water rates,

Table 7
Parameters obtained from model (R = R [1 exp(kt)]) fit to data set for Zn and Fe
Pulp density (wt.%)

7.5
20

Zn

Fe

Km

R2

0.942
0.910

0.317
0.303

0.299
0.276

0.993
0.998

SI

Km

R2

0.315
0.139

0.165
0.166

0.052
0.023

0.995
0.994

5.75
12.00

180

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

Table 8
Parameters obtained from model (R = R [1 exp(kt)]) fit to data set for Zn and Fe
Wash water rate (L/min)

0
0.50

Zn

Fe

Km

R2

0.942
0.946

0.317
0.448

0.299
0.424

0.993
0.998

SI

Km

R2

0.315
0.161

0.165
0.202

0.052
0.033

0.995
0.993

5.75
12.85

Table 9
Cleaner and scavenger flotation conditions

Fig. 14. Zn and Fe recovery vs. concentrate Zn and Fe grade for 0 and 0.5 L/min
wash water rate.

0.5 L/min, gives better result for flotation kinetics parameters

(R , k), modified rate constant (Km ) as 0.946, 0.448 and 0.424,
respectively. Increasing wash water rate from 0 to 0.5 L/min
increased Zn/Fe selectivity (5.75 for 0 L/min, 12.85 for
0.5 L/min). Therefore, 0.5 L/min wash water rate for the Zn flotation was judged to result in better overall flotation performance.
With no wash water addition, the Zn/Fe selectivity was too
low. However, with wash water, the Zn/Fe selectivity increased
sharply with wash water rate up to 0.5 L/min. Fig. 15 shows that
the model fits the experimental data quite well for Zn and Fe.
3.7. Optimization
This study has examined the effect of collector types, particle size distribution, collector dosages, air flow rates, pulp

Variable

Value

Froth height (cm)

Wash water rate (L/min)
d80 (mm)
Air flow rate (cm/s)

Variable
0.5
0.125
1.30

Cleaner flotation conditions

pH
Na2 SiO3 (g/t)
CuSO4 (g/t)
Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279 (g/t)

12

50
37.5 + 37.5

Scavenger flotation conditions

pH
Na2 SiO3 (g/t)
CuSO4 (g/t)
Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279 (g/t)

12

50 + 50

densities and wash waters rate on modified flotation parameters

for sphalerite flotation. Results indicated that Dithiophospate
collectors (Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat 7279), finer size distribution (d80 = 0.125 mm), low collector dosage (500 g/t), low air
flow rate (1.30 cm/s), high pulp density (20% solids) and high
wash water rate (0.5 L/min) gave the best results for grade and
recovery and modified flotation parameters. Two flotation tests
were made under optimum flotation conditions and then concentrations of the rough flotation tests were unified. The rougher
concentrate (46.73% Zn) was subjected to a cleaner flotation
and scavenger flotation as the optimum conditions were detailed
in Table 9. Consequently, final concentrate was obtained with
93.74% recovery and 55.23% Zn grade. The tailings were discharged with 4.55% recovery and 0.99 Zn grade.
4. Conclusions

Fig. 15. Fitted to data set for wash water rates on Zn and Fe recovery.

(i) Zn and Fe recovery data; collector types (Dithiophospate and Potassium Amyl Xanthate), size distribution
(d80 = 0.180 and 0.125 mm), collector dosages (500 and
600 g/t), air flow rates (1.30 and 2.20 cm/s), pulp densities
(7.5 and 20 wt.%) and wash water rates (0 and 0.5 L/min)
fitted to first-order kinetic model, R = R [1 exp(kt)].
The fitted to data sets figures and correlation coefficients
(R2 ) showed that first-order kinetic model could represent
the timerecovery curves of flotation tests very well.
(ii) The modified flotation rate constant Km defined as the product of fractional ultimate recovery (R ) and first-order
rate constant (k), i.e., Km = R k and selectivity index (SI)
defined as the ratio of the modified rate constant of Zn to
the modifier rate constant of Fe (SI = Km of Zn/Km of Fe)

M. Ucurum, O. Bayat / Separation and Purification Technology 55 (2007) 173181

and recovery and grade curves of Zn and Fe were used to

determine optimum flotation parameters. In this study, used
above approaches, the first conclusions to be drawn from
results is that Dithiophospates (Aerofloat 7048 + Aerofloat
7279) more selective collector than Potassium Amyl Xanthate and d80 = 0.125 mm is better size distribution for the
separation of sphalerite from pyrite for the ore. In the mean
time, it was found that low collector dosage (500 g/t), low
air flow rate (1.30 cm/s), high pulp density (20% solids) and
high wash water rate (0.5 L/min) could be used to separate
efficiently sphalerite from pyrite.
(iii) In the experimental studies showed that modified flotation
rate constant and selectivity index are useful parameters in
the flotation studies.
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by Cukurova University, Scientific Research Projects Directorate (BAP), project
FBE.2002.D.215.
References
[1] P.K. Naik, P.S.R. Reddy, V.N. Misra, Interpretation of interaction effects
and optimization of reagent dosages for fine coal flotation, Int. J. Miner.
Process. 75 (2005) 8390.
[2] A.S. Uribe, V. Vazquez, R.G. Perez, F.A. Nava, A statistical model for the
concentrate water in flotation columns, Miner. Eng. 12 (8) (1999) 937948.
[3] M. Falutsu, Column flotation froth characteristicsstability of the
bubbleparticle system, Int. J. Miner. Process. 40 (1994) 225243.
[4] G.J. Harborts, B.R. Jackson, E.V. Manlapig, Recent advances in Jameson
flotation cell technology, Miner. Eng. 7 (1994) 319332.

[5] A.N. Terblanche, W.A. Grobler, G. Onal,

A. Guney, Turbo Flotation Column with Enhanced Flotation Performance, Balkema, Rotterdam, 1998,
ISBN: 90 5809 0132.
[6] J.A. Finch, G.S. Dobby, Column Flotation, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1990.
[7] L.G. Bergh, J.B. Yianatos, A. Leon, Multivariate projection methods
applied to flotation columns, Miner. Eng. 18 (7) (2005) 721723.

181

[8] X.M. Yuan, B.I. Palsson, K.S.E. Forssberg, Statistical interpretation of

flotation kinetics for a complex sulphide ore, Miner. Eng. 9 (4) (1996)
429442.
[9] A.J. Lynch, N.W. Johnson, E.V. Manlapig, C.G. Thorne, Mineral and coal
flotation circuits, Chapter 3: mathematical models of flotation, in: D.W.
Fuerstenau (Ed.), Development in Mineral Processing, Elseiver, Amsterdam, 1981.
[10] E.C. Dowling, R.R. Klimpel, F.F. Aplan, Use of kinetic model to analyze
industrial flotation circuits, in: Proceedings of the International Symposium
on Innovative Technology and Reactor Design in Extractive Metallurgy,
Warrendale, 1987, pp. 533552.
[11] C.C. Harris, H.W. Rimmer, Study of a two phase model of the flotation
process, Inst. Min. Metall. (1996) 153161.
[12] R. Sripriya, P.V.T. Rao, R.B. Choudhury, Optimization of operating variables of fine coal flotation using a combination of modified flotation
parameters and statistical techniques, Int. J. Miner. Process. 68 (2003)
109127.
[13] F. Hernainz, M. Calero, Froth flotation: kinetic models based on chemical
analogy, Chem. Eng. Process. 40 (2001) 269275.
[14] M. Xu, Modified flotation rate constant and selectivity index, Miner. Eng.
11 (3) (1998) 271278.
[15] P. Kind, Design criteria recent developments on large capacityWemco flotation cells, The South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 76 (8)
(1976) 345362.
[16] G.E. Agar, R. Stralton-Crawly, T.J. Bruce, Optimising the design of flotation circuits, CIM Bull. 73 (1986) 173181.
[17] M. Barbaro, L. Piga, Comparison of PbZn selective collectors using statistical methods, Miner. Eng. 12 (4) (1999) 355366.
[18] G.S. Dobby, S.R. Rao, Processing of Complex Ore, CIM, Montreal,
1989.
[19] K.S.E. Forssberg, Flotation of Sulphide Minerals, Elsevier, New York,
1985.
[20] M. Ucurum, PhD Thesis, C
ukurova University, Adana, Turkey, 2004.
[21] K.N. Han, E.C. Dowling, in: B.K. Parekh, J.D. Miller (Eds.), Sulfides
and Precious Metals, Advanced in Flotation Technology, Society for
Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc., Littleton, 1999, pp. 117
118.
[22] G. Morizot, P. Conll, M.V. Durance, F.G. Badri, Liberation and its role in
flotation-based flowsheet development, Int. J. Miner. Process. 51 (1977)
3949.
[23] S.J. Neethling, J.J. Cilliers, Simulation of the effect of froth washing on
flotation performance, Chem. Eng. Sci. (2001) 63036311.