Separation Science and Technology

ISSN: 0149-6395 (Print) 1520-5754 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lsst20

Beneficiation routes for upgrading iron ore tailings

with a teetered bed separator

O. Ozcan & I.B. Celik

To cite this article: O. Ozcan & I.B. Celik (2016) Beneficiation routes for upgrading iron ore tailings
with a teetered bed separator, Separation Science and Technology, 51:17, 2844-2855, DOI:
10.1080/01496395.2016.1218514

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2016.1218514

Accepted author version posted online: 11

Aug 2016.
Published online: 14 Sep 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 318

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 6 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lsst20
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
2016, VOL. 51, NO. 17, 2844–2855
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2016.1218514

Beneficiation routes for upgrading iron ore tailings with a teetered bed
separator
O. Ozcan and I.B. Celik
Department of Mining Engineering, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The aim of this study was to investigate the possibility of producing sinter/pellet grade concen- Received 9 May 2016
trate from iron ore tails. Two different wet flow sheets were considered. The first consists of a Accepted 26 July 2016
teetered bed separator (TBS) followed by a gravity concentration resulting in a product quality KEYWORDS
with 65.54% Fe, 4.96% SiO2 and 1.50% Al2O3 content ensuring 68.52% iron recovery. In the second Gravity concentration; iron
option, the iron ore tail is treated in a similar approach, but the gravity concentration replaced by ore tails; magnetic
magnetic separation results in a product quality with 65.34% Fe, 3.70% SiO2 and 1.00% Al2O3 with separation; teetered bed
70.91% of iron recovery. separator (TBS)

Introduction nugget process for low-grade iron ores which make

it possible to produce metallic iron directly from an
In most of the iron ore deposits, magnetite is found with a
ore eliminating concentrator circuit and need for
variety of less magnetic and/or nonmagnetic minerals
tailings’ disposal.
together. During magnetic separation, a substantial percen-
New generations of hindered settling classifiers are
tage of the iron bearing values is lost to tailings, since they
efficiently used in gravity circuits such as a TBS or a
are regarded as weakly magnetic. Sometimes, the beneficia-
Floatex Density Separator (FDS), as they have accep-
tion processes generate excessive amounts of slime, but this
tance not only with coal, but with regard to iron ore
fine fraction, or the tailing of the process, can be regarded
processing, chromite, beach sands, metal from slag
as the low grade iron ores because of their iron content.[1–3]
industries, etc., as an effective means of processing
These products, or sometimes the ore deposit itself,[4] need
low grade ores. TBS is an innovative design of hindered
to be upgraded in a cost effective manner for future uses.
settling classifiers and typically easy to control with two
Although iron ore tailings are sometimes admitted as sec-
basic operating parameters including teeter water velo-
ondary resources for various types of industries such as
city (TW) and pressure set point (SP) (Fig. 1). It can
ceramics, cement admixture, etc.[5,6] global demand of iron
also be used for mineral beneficiation in addition to
ore is increasing due to the tremendous consumption of
size classification. Heavier particles settle against rising
steel around the world. Therefore, recovery and re-use of
teeter water through a bed acting as an artificial heavy
iron from iron tailings has great importance in the sense of
medium. Settled particles accumulate at the bottom of a
environment protection and continuous resource supply
TBS forming a teetered bed. The apparent density and
for the iron and steel industry.[7–9]
viscosity of the bed of solids that develop are fairly
Gravity concentration such as tabling, jigging, tee-
high. Thus, the suspension offers more resistance in
tered bed separators (TBSs), a spiral or enhanced
terms of drag forces and buoyant forces to the settling
gravity separator, magnetic separation on dry/wet
particles. Both the effective suspension density and the
basis[10] and flotation are the general beneficiation
upward water velocity have substantial influence on the
methods for low-grade iron ores.[1,9,10–14] All these
separation density and hence on TBS performance.[16]
methods can be implemented to produce pellet grade
FDS is also another high capacity classifier used for
concentrate, but the contents of iron, silica and alu-
iron ore processing that separates the particles based
mina, and the liberation statements of these minerals,
on size and/or density.[1] Singh,[17] reported that FDS
is the determinants for feasible recovery and grade
has many installations worldwide and successful results
values. Along with many beneficiation techniques,
especially in significant reduction of silica content.
Srivastava and Kawatra,[15] also suggested an iron

CONTACT O. Ozcan ozgurozcan@hacettepe.edu.tr Department of Mining Engineering, Hacettepe University, 06800 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/lsst.
© 2016 Taylor & Francis

Figure 1. A simplified figure of a TBS.
Magnetic separation is another oft-used and reason-
ably cheap beneficiation technique for low grade iron
ore processing, conducted in either a dry/wet environ-
ment or high/low intensity. The dry permanent roll
high intensity magnetic separator (DHIMS) is one of
the most important and efficient permanent-magnetic
separators to separate paramagnetic minerals such as
hematite, goethite, ilmenite, garnet, etc.[18] Wet high
intensity magnetic separators (WHIMSs) are used to
separate magnetic from non-magnetic or weakly mag-
netic from strongly magnetic materials
In Central Anatolia of Turkey, an iron ore concentra-
tor produces huge amounts of dry low intensity magnetic
separator tails. But, this product is now being stockpiled
separately due to inappropriate flow sheet design of the
plant and less market value due to low Fe content.
However, it should be noted that stockpiling will be a
serious problem for both technical and environmental
reasons in the future. Eventually, accumulation of this
low-grade ore will be a potential source for sinter and
pellet making. In this regard, the objective of this study is
to develop possible beneficiation routes to upgrade dry
low intensity magnetic separator tails for future use by
conducting gravity and magnetic separation tests with
TBS. As a result, possible beneficiation flow sheets due
to dry and wet process options are proposed.
Materials and methods
The representative samples were obtained from the
stockpiled tail of the dry low intensity magnetic
separator in an iron ore beneficiation plant. The as-
received iron ore tail samples were subjected to mate-
rial characterization in terms of particle size distribu-
tion, the X-ray diffraction (XRD), chemical and
liberation analyses.
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2845
According to liberation data and considering the
efficient operation of TBS, size fraction samples were
prepared by wet sieving. To determine alternative ben-
eficiation routes, gravity and magnetic separation tests
were performed on each size fraction. In this scope; the
laboratory scale TBS, shaking table, roller type DHIMSs
and WHIMSs were used. Some important operational
parameters that may affect the performance of pro-
cesses such as teeter water in the TBS, magnetic field
intensity and roller speed in magnetic separation were
studied to determine the best recovery-grade values.
After determining the best beneficiation route, a
simplified flow sheet was proposed. All data gathered
from the tests were mass balanced to check errors
occurred during sampling or tests. For this purpose,
the JK-SimMet software was used and the accuracy of
the results was assessed by plotting the analyzed iron
contents against the calculated values (Fig. 2).
Ore characterization
The particle size distribution of the material was deter-
mined by wet sieving. The 80% of the sample (d80) is finer
than 3.2 mm and the d50 value is 1.3 mm. The XRD study
was performed to identify mineral phases of the ore. The
XRD pattern of the sample is given in Fig. 3.
As seen from the XRD pattern, the iron ore tail
consisted of hematite, quartz, albite and diopside as
major minerals. Chemical analysis indicated that the
iron ore tail contained 24.06% of total iron, 8.83%
alumina, 45.15% silica, 0.17% phosphorus, 0.32% tita-
nium and 1.53% Na2O, 3.97% K2O, 0.97% CaO, 0.33%
MgO and 0.03% MnO as alkaline. Considering the
amounts, hematite is found as the major iron-bearing
mineral in the ore.
In order to run the beneficiation processes effi-
ciently, the proper operational size ranges for the
equipment should be selected. The liberation and/or
70
Balanced Fe Grade (%)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Analyzed Fe Grade (%)
Figure 2. Reconciliation of analyzed and calculated Fe grade %
values.
2846 O. OZCAN AND I. B. CELIK

sizes, samples were prepared in fractions such as

−1.00 + 0.50 mm and 0.50 + 0.10 mm. Note that a
−0.10 mm slime fraction was also used. The schematic
view of sample preparation is given in Fig. 5.
The obtained samples were analyzed in terms of Fe
content (Table 1).
As seen from Table 1 Fe content is decreasing with
finer size fractions. The total Fe recovery of the
+0.10 mm is 95.10%. Slime fraction has the lowest Fe
content and recovery with amounts of 16.68% Fe and
4.90%, respectively.

Figure 3. XRD pattern of an iron ore tail.

Experimental procedure
mineral locking of valuable minerals with gangue is A simplified test procedure is given in Fig. 6.
admitted as the main determinant factor. In this Coarse and fine fractions were separately subjected
study, by considering the particle size distribution of to roughing beneficiation with the TBS and the under-
the ore, the whole sample was crushed down to −1 mm. flow product of the TBS was upgraded by gravity and
Below 1 mm suitable size fractions such as magnetic separation alternatives in the wet process.
−1.0 + 0.5 mm and −0.5 + 0.1 mm were prepared for Coarse and fine fractions were also subjected to mag-
liberation analysis of hematite mineral. For this purpose, an netic separation just in the dry process. TBS is a labora-
automatic optical image analyzer was used, namely Clemex
Vision PE 5.0. Polished sections of the −1.00 + 0.50 mm and
−0.50 + 0.10 mm size fractions were prepared and analyzed
under the microscope set to reflected light mode. The
liberation degrees of hematite for these size fractions were
recorded as 73.39% and 84.95%, respectively. As shown in
Fig. 4, the liberation of hematite was quite acceptable even
in these coarse sizes for beneficiation processes.

Sample preparation
It is known that TBS separates the particles based on
both particle size and density. In addition, if particles
are fed to a hindered settling classifier in narrow sizes,
the effect of size over density is eliminated, and besides
classifying, beneficiation will also be enhanced.[19] With
this fact and considering the liberation data narrow

90
80 -1.00+0.50 mm
70 -0.50+0.10 mm
60
Amount (%)

50
40
30 Figure 5. Schematic view of sample preparation.
20
10 Table 1. Weight and iron distribution of the head sample.
0 Sample Weight (%) Fe (%) Recovery (%)
95<x 75<x<95 50<x<75 0<x<50
(Liberated) −1.00 + 0.50 mm 50.50 28.80 60.45
Liberation Class −0.50 + 0.10 mm 42.43 19.65 34.65
−0.10 mm 7.07 16.68 4.90
Figure 4. Liberation degree of hematite. Head sample 100.00 24.06 100.00

Figure 6. A simplified test procedure for iron ore tail beneficiation.
tory scale cross flow design with dimensions of 100 mm
× 100 mm cross section and 500 mm high (square tank
height), followed by a 200 mm conical section.
The main aim of the rougher beneficiation study was
to produce a clean tail (TBS overflow) and a high iron
recovery for concentrate (TBS underflow). To obtain an
overflow product, the teeter water rate (12 lpm) was kept
at maximum for coarse fraction. The teeter water rate
changed as 4 and 7 lpm for fine fraction. In addition,
the pressure set point was also set to a relatively high value
to create the beneficiation effect because, it is known from
the literature, at lower pressure set points, the TBS merely
acts as a size classifier[20] and the beneficiation effect of
the teetered bed disappeared. Samples from the feed,
overflow and underflow streams were collected at steady
state conditions. Gravity concentration was performed on
the samples by a laboratory scale shaking table (500 ×
1200 mm). To obtain a high grade concentrate, wash
water rate (15 lpm) and tilt angle (5°) were kept at max-
imum during the test. Two different concentrates, mid-
dling and tail samples, were collected for each test.
As an alternative to gravity concentration, magnetic
separation was also conducted to the underflow pro-
duct of the TBS by using a laboratory scale WHIMS. In
the present work, magnetic field intensities were set as
6960, 8625 and 9630 gauss, respectively. The effect of
magnetic field intensity, and magnetic susceptibility
were studied simultaneously.
Magnetic separation of samples was also examined on
a dry basis. To propose an alternative flow sheet on dry
mode both fractions were upgraded by a high intensity
permanent magnetic roll separator (PERMROLL), which
has a 6000 gauss magnetic field strength. In the experi-
ments, the feeding rate was kept constant to create a
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2847
mono particle layer. While the splitter angle was set to
obtain a high grade concentrate, roller speed variation
(126, 201 and 276 rpm) was examined whether it has an
effect on grade and recovery.
Slime fraction was also subjected to the wet high
intensity magnetic separator to check if any upgrade
is possible. These series of tests were conducted by
varying the magnetic intensity, whereas the other vari-
ables such as the feed rate of dry solids (0.6 kg/hour),
pulp density of solids by weight (20%), and wash water
flow rate (5 lpm) were kept constant.
Results and discussions
In all beneficiation options, the upstream operation
involved classification by screens. Only for the wet
process was a rougher stage by TBS performed after
screening to see its impact on beneficiation. The under-
flow of the TBS was concentrated in two routes utiliz-
ing the difference of valuables and the gangue in terms
of gravity and magnetic susceptibility. Besides gravity
and magnetic separation as wet methods, a dry option
of the flow sheet was also considered.
Dry beneficiation by a high intensity magnetic
separator (Permroll separator)
In this study, the effect of roller speed and particle size
on the iron grade and recovery was investigated.
Sufficient magnet groups were used for coarse and
fine size fraction separately. The test conditions and
results are given in Table 2.
2848 O. OZCAN AND I. B. CELIK

Table 2. High intensity dry magnetic separation test results.

Coarse size fraction (−1.00 + 0.50 mm)
Stream Weight (%) Assay value (Fe %) Recovery (Fe %)
Roller speed (rpm) Feed 100.00 28.80 100.00
126 Concentrate 48.56 54.86 92.51
Tail 51.44 4.19 7.49
201 Concentrate 36.41 60.29 76.21
Tail 63.59 10.77 23.79
276 Concentrate 20.80 66.40 47.96
Tail 79.20 18.92 52.04
Fine size fraction (−0.50 + 0.10 mm)
Roller speed (rpm) Stream Weight (%) Assay value (Fe %) Recovery (Fe %)
Feed 100.00 19.65 100.00
126 Concentrate 67.45 28.26 97.04
Tail 32.55 1.79 2.96
201 Concentrate 51.74 34.21 90.09
Tail 48.26 4.03 9.91
276 Concentrate 30.14 42.08 64.56
Tail 69.86 9.97 35.44

The results indicate that the coarser size fraction Rougher beneficiation by TBS
(−1.00 + 0.50 mm) can be separated by this technique.
The geometrical properties of the TBS allow the creation
It is possible to increase the iron content of the tail
of a highly dewatered underflow product. The underflow
from 28.80% to 66.40% Fe for coarse fraction. However,
solid content of coarse fraction was determined to be
fine fraction can only be upgraded from 19.65% to
75.68% while the underflow solid contents of fine fraction
42.08% Fe.
were determined to be 74.25% and 75.48% for a low teeter
The roller speed in the Permroll determines the
water rate and a high teeter water rate, respectively. The
centrifugal force which in turn determines the grade
chemical analyses of the TBS products are given in Table 3
and mass yield to the concentrate, which means
for coarse and fine size fractions.
increasing the roller speed leads to only high mag-
As seen from Table 3, the underflow stream was
netic particles to concentrate. Improvement in the
concentrated up to 56.95% Fe from the feed value of
quality of the concentrate was achieved for both
28.80% Fe for coarse fraction. The Fe content of the
size fractions by increasing the roller speed, but the
overflow in the coarse fraction was only 3.44% and
target grade could be achieved at a coarse size frac-
Fe recovery in the underflow was recorded to be a
tion only. This could be attributed to the feed iron
considerably higher value such as 93.72%. The results
contents of these two different size fractions. Heavier
indicate that a significant upgrade could be achieved
coarse particles were affected more by the centrifugal
with the coarse size fraction in which the specific
force created by the roller and non-magnetic coarse
gravity differences of iron minerals and gangues are
particles can be easily reported to tail. However,
more pronounced. The relative settling velocity of
some weak magnetic and locked particles also report
particles depends on the size, shape and specific
to tail because of their weight and increased tail iron
gravity. If any two factors of the above are uniform,
content. Tail grade of coarse fraction at 276 rpm was
the settling velocity of particles depends only on the
the maximum. This is a clear effect of a high cen-
specific gravity. For example, if the particle has a
trifugal force. Fine fraction could not be influenced
narrow size distribution and the same shape in a
as much as the coarse fraction and some of the
given liquid the relative settling velocity is dependent
weakly magnetic particles reported to concentrate
on the specific gravity differences of particles. So, the
and reduced the iron content. The recovery of the
upward water can only report less dense gangue
concentrates decreased with the increase in roller
minerals to the overflow stream.[16]
speed for both size fractions as expected.

Table 3. Chemical assays of the products obtained from TBS tests.

Test conditions Weight, % Assay, Fe % Recovery, Fe %
Size fraction (mm) T.W. (lpm) S.P. Feed U/F O/F Feed U/F O/F Feed U/F O/F
−1.00 + 0.50 (Coarse) 12 130 100.0 47.39 52.61 28.80 56.95 3.44 100.0 93.72 6.28
−0.50 + 0.10 (Fine) 4 130 100.0 55.54 44.46 19.65 31.81 4.45 100.0 89.93 10.07
7 130 30.83 69.17 49.16 6.49 77.15 22.85
T.W.: teeter water rate, S.P.: set point.
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2849

The results of fine fraction can be compared in terms of Table 4. The results of shaking table tests for −1.0 + 0.50 mm
the teeter water rate. Fe content of the TBS underflow and −0.50 + 0.10 mm size fractions.
increases with an increasing teeter water rate. The con- Coarse size fraction (−1.00+0.50 mm)

centration of Fe was upgraded from the feed value of Weight (%) Fe (%) Recovery (%)
Feed 100.00 56.95 100.00
19.65% to 31.81% with a lower teeter water rate (4 lpm) Concentrate 1 48.60 67.81 57.87
and 49.16% with a higher teeter water rate (7 lpm). It is Concentrate 2 25.37 64.00 28.51
Middling 15.18 44.59 11.88
evident that an increase in the teeter water rate led to a Tail 10.85 9.09 1.73
decrease in the weighted amount and recovery of Fe from Concentrate (Combined) 73.97 66.50 86.38
the underflow. The amount of the underflow stream Fine size fraction (−0.50 + 0.10 mm)
decreased from 55.54% to 30.83%. This could be due to Weight (%) Fe (%) Recovery (%)
Feed 100.00 31.81 100.00
the change in the upward hydraulic transport force. Concentrate 1 21.32 66.97 44.90
Concentrate 2 9.07 62.99 17.96
Increase in teeter water increases the upward water velo- Middling 26.24 35.72 29.47
city in the column towards the overflow stream that in Tail 43.37 5.63 7.67
Concentrate (Combined) 30.39 65.78 62.85
turn pushes the coarser, denser, and locked particles to
the overflow stream. It is observed that the better product
quality of the underflow stream was achieved at a higher
level of teeter water. It can be noted that at a lower teeter a positive effect on performance. Some of the finer iron
water flow rate, there was a lower beneficiation in the minerals may have reported to middling and tail streams
underflow product of fine fraction. An increase in the because of a high wash water rate and tilt angle, but
teeter water could increase the superficial water velocity heavier iron minerals in the coarse size fraction could
in the vertical direction at the separation chamber, which easily be affected by table motion and reported to the
might have carried coarser gangue particles and locked concentrate. The feed grade of the fine fraction was also
particles into the overflow stream. much lower than that of the coarse fraction. This played a
Fe content of all overflow samples was quite low. big role in determining the performance as well. As for the
This can be explained with the positive effect of a middling, re-grind or middling beneficiation options can
narrow size fraction to the beneficiation operations. A be considered because of the particularly high grade of the
narrow feed size distribution clearly minimizes the coarse fraction. It is well known from the liberation stu-
effect of particle size for beneficiation.[16] dies that liberation degree was quite high at each size
The main aim of the rougher circuit was to obtain fraction. A microscopic analysis was performed to the
the highest recovery and produce a clean tail. middlings and it was found that the amount of liberated
Therefore, as the highest Fe recovery was obtained in hematite particles was quite high for both size fractions
the fine fraction with the low teeter water rate, this (Fig. 7). Scale size for coarse fraction was 2000 µm and
sample was decided to be used for the following tests. scale size for fine fraction was 1000 µm. In order for these
liberated hematite particles to beneficiate, middlings were
recycled to table feed.
Gravity concentration studies
The underflow fraction of the TBS contains 56.95% Fe
Wet high intensity magnetic separation studies
content for a coarse fraction and 31.81% Fe for a fine
fraction. Because Fe contents of these concentrates were Another beneficiation route utilizing the differences in
insufficient for making sinter/pellet concentrate, both size and magnetic susceptibility of minerals was con-
fractions were subjected to a shaking table beneficiation ducted. A number of tests were performed by using a
separately to improve the quality. The results of the laboratory scale WHIMS in which different magnetic
tests for both size fractions are given in Table 4. field intensities were applied. The results of the test are
For both size fractions, each concentrate had a satis- given in Table 5.
factory content of Fe, thus concentrates were combined. As seen from Table 5, 73.68% of the feed material from
From the coarse fraction, a combined concentrate with the coarse size fraction was collected as a concentrate with
~74% by weight, 66.50% of Fe grade and 86.38% recovery a Fe grade of 65.18% and a Fe recovery of 84.34% at the
was obtained. Although the combined concentrate’s grade lowest field intensity. In the same field intensity, only
for fine fraction was good, the recovery and particularly 35.96% of feed material was collected as a concentrate
the weight amount, was much less than the coarse frac- with a Fe grade of 65.67% and a Fe recovery of 74.25% at
tion. It can be said that the performance of the coarse size the fine size fraction. The recovery difference between
fraction was better than fine size fraction. Besides that; coarse and fine size fractions can be explained due to
narrow sizes obtained in the coarse fraction may have also the feed Fe contents of the fractions. As a result, combined
2850 O. OZCAN AND I. B. CELIK

Figure 7. Stereo microscopic view of middling products (Top: Coarse fraction, bottom: Fine fraction).

Table 5. High intensity wet magnetic separation test results.

Coarse size fraction (−1.00+0.50 mm)
Magnetic field intensity Stream Weight (%) Assay value (Fe %) Recovery (Fe %)
(gauss) Feed 100.00 56.95 100.00
6960 Concentrate 73.68 65.18 84.34
Tail 26.32 33.90 15.66
8625 Concentrate 82.67 63.42 92.05
Tail 17.33 26.11 7.95
9630 Concentrate 85.17 62.47 93.42
Tail 14.83 25.28 6.58
Magnetic field intensity Fine size fraction (−0.50+0.10 mm)
(gauss) Stream Weight (%) Assay value (Fe %) Recovery (Fe %)
Feed 100.00 31.81 100.00
6960 Concentrate 35.96 65.67 74.25
Tail 64.04 12.79 25.75
8625 Concentrate 42.20 61.53 81.63
Tail 57.80 10.11 18.37
9630 Concentrate 46.98 58.90 87.00
Tail 53.02 7.80 13.00

concentrate obtained at a magnetic field of 6960 gauss can

be used for sinter/pellet making.
It can be seen that Fe content of the magnetic con-
centrates decreases with increasing magnetic field
intensity for both size fractions. This result is due to
the degree of selectivity as a function of the field inten-
sity. At low field intensity only the high magnetically
susceptible particles are picked up by the magnetic
matrix, which produces a relatively high grade concen-
trate (65.18% Fe for coarse fraction, 65.67% Fe for fine
fraction) at low recovery (84.34% for coarse fraction,
74.25 for fine fraction). The low recovery is due to the
fact that a large portion of the locked particles includ-
ing Fe content reported to the non-magnetic fraction.
As a result, the concentrate obtained at a magnetic field
of 6960 gauss can be used for sinter/pellet making.
Slime beneficiation studies
It was recorded that −0.10 mm fraction, regarded as the
slime fraction, had a weight amount of 7.07% and an Fe
content of 16.68% with 4.90% recovery. Possibilities of
beneficiation from this slime fraction were also inves-
tigated by using a laboratory scale WHIMS. Different
magnetic field intensities were applied to catch at which
value obtained a product with feasible Fe content and
recovery. The results of the test are given in Table 6.
As seen from Table 6, Fe content of the concentrate
decreases with increasing the magnetic field intensity due
to the degree of selectivity as a function of the field intensity.
At low field intensity (6960 gauss), only 10% of the material
was collected by the magnetic matrix, which provided a
relatively high grade concentrate (66.67% Fe) at low
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2851

Table 6. The results of slime beneficiation test. gravity and/or magnetic separation techniques. After
Magnetic field Stream Weight, % Fe, % Fe Recovery, % mass balance studies, a dry and two wet notional flow
intensity
(gauss) Feed 100.00 16.68 100.00
sheets have been considered. The weight, grade, and
6960 Concentrate 10.00 66.67 39.96 recovery of all streams were calculated. The dry option
Tail 90.00 11.13 60.04 consists of size separation and high intensity dry magnetic
8625 Concentrate 17.01 52.34 53.37
Tail 82.99 9.37 46.63 separation. The first wet option consists of a TBS as a
9630 Concentrate 22.44 44.79 60.25 rougher beneficiation followed by gravity concentration
Tail 77.56 8.55 39.75
for cleaning while in the second wet option the iron ore
tail concentrated in a similar way but the gravity concen-
tration was replaced by wet high intensity magnetic
recovery (39.96%). As a result, the concentrate obtained at a separation. The slime fraction could not be concentrated
magnetic field of 6960 gauss can be used for sinter/pellet by the TBS because of fine and wide size distribution.
making but, the WHIMS beneficiation of this fraction adds
to only 0.71 to the total mass yield at this grade. Therefore,
slime beneficiation circuit is added as an optional part in the Option 1: Flow sheet including dry screening and a
flowsheets. The best results of each beneficiation study were dry high intensity magnetic Separator
used for flowsheet development.
This flow sheet includes a two-stage dry size classifica-
tion, and a one-stage high intensity dry magnetic
separation (Fig. 8).
Flow sheet options
It can be seen in Fig. 8 that a high grade coarse
It is evident from the beneficiation studies of the iron ore concentrate with 66.40% Fe could be obtained, but if
tail that a sinter/pellet grade product can be produced by it is mixed with fine concentrate then the Fe grade of

Figure 8. Dry beneficiation option.

2852 O. OZCAN AND I. B. CELIK

Figure 9. TBS and shaking table flow sheet.

the final concentrate can be only 53.05% Fe with a Option 3: Flow sheet including a TBS followed by
recovery of 51.36% Fe. It is explicit that the dry WHIMS
option does not serve for producing a sinter/pellet
This flow sheet differs from Option 2 by the addition of
grade concentrate.
high intensity magnetic separators instead of shaking
tables (Fig. 10).
Approximately 26% of the material can be taken as
Option 2: Flow sheet including TBS followed by the final concentrate with a 65.34% Fe content and the
shaking table total Fe recovery of 70.91%. The final tail includes
9.47% Fe with a 29.09% loss. Slime beneficiation is
This option includes two stages of size classification
added as an optional part in the flow sheet. Slime
followed by two stages of gravity separations by using
fraction (−0.1 mm) can be taken as tail. The impurities
a TBS and shaking table (Fig. 9). Beneficiation of the
that have importance for the sinter/pellet concentrates
slime fraction was also assessed.
were also checked on the final products obtained from
With the TBS followed by the gravity concentra-
Option 2 and 3 (Table 7).
tion option, approximately 30% of the material can
As noticed from the results in flow sheet 2 that the
be taken as the final concentrate with 65.54% Fe
iron grade could be improved to 65.54% with signifi-
content and the total Fe recovery of 68.52%. The
cant low alumina and silica values as 1.50% and 4.96%,
final tail includes 5.79% Fe with 15.56% loss. The
respectively. The overall yield is 30.58% and the overall
middling products were recycled to table feed
recovery of the total iron is 68.52% with respect to the
stream. If an optional slime beneficiation part is
original feed under these conditions.
added to the circuit, only 0.71% concentrate can be
A high grade concentrate composed of a 65.34%
obtained with 66.67% Fe content. In this condition
iron grade with 1.00% alumina and 3.70% silica can
total recovery can be increased from 68.52% to
be produced using flow sheet 3. The overall yield is
70.48%. This part should be considered with operat-
26.11% and the overall total recovery of the iron is
ing costs.
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2853

Figure 10. TBS and magnetic separator flow sheet.

Table 7. Detailed chemical analysis of final products.

Detailed chemical analysis of flow sheet 2
Stream name Weight (%) Al2O3 CaO Fe2O3 Fe K2O MgO MnO Na2O P2O5 SiO2 TiO2
Head sample 100.00 8.83 0.97 34.40 24.06 3.97 0.33 0.03 1.53 0.17 45.15 0.32
Final concentrate 30.58 1.50 0.40 93.70 65.54 0.30 0.33 0.10 0.79 0.19 4.96 0.38
Final tail 69.42 12.06 1.21 8.27 5.79 5.58 0.33 <0.1 1.86 0.17 62.86 0.29
Detailed chemical analysis of flow sheet 3
Head sample 100.00 8.83 0.97 34.40 24.06 3.97 0.33 0.03 1.53 0.17 45.15 0.32
Final concentrate 26.11 1.00 0.30 93.42 65.34 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.20 0.10 3.70 0.10
Final tail 73.89 11.60 1.20 13.54 9.47 5.30 0.30 <0.1 2.00 0.20 59.80 0.40

70.91% with respect to the original feed for this
condition.
It is calculated that 96.64% and 94.81% of silica
and alumina, respectively, were rejected in flow sheet
2. Concentrate produced from flow sheet 2 was sui-
table for the pellet/sinter making (65.54% Fe, 4.96%
SiO2 and 1.50% Al2O3) according to different iron
ore specifications.[13,14,21–23]. SiO2 content of the
head sample was measured in high amounts such as
45.15 and it could be reduced down to 4.96%. In
industry the general acceptance limit of SiO2 for
sinter/pellet feed is given as in the range of 1%–5%
in these references. It is also reported that SiO2 con-
tent can be as high as 9.5% in some cases.[22]
2854 O. OZCAN AND I. B. CELIK
The rejection value of silica and alumina in flow
sheet 3 are 97.86% and 97.04%, respectively. Similarly,
concentrate produced from flow sheet 3 was suitable
for the pellet/sinter making (65.34% Fe, 3.70% SiO2 and
1.00% Al2O3) according to different specifications.
Conclusions
Possibilities for beneficiation of a low grade iron ore
tailing from dry magnetic separation process of an
existing plant were evaluated in this study. The follow-
ing conclusions can be deduced:
● According to the characterization study; the main
iron-bearing mineral was hematite and it was
found that liberation size was below 1 mm. But,
to increase the efficiency of the beneficiation pro-
cesses, the feed material was classified as −1.00 +
0.50, −0.50+0.10 and −00.10 mm.
● As the existing plant uses dry magnetic separation
process, firstly a dry beneficiation route, including
classifying the material followed by high intensity
dry magnetic separation, was evaluated. The com-
bined final product only gave a 53% Fe grade with
a recovery of 51.36%.
● Application of the TBS was assessed with two dif-
ferent alternatives including gravity and magnetic
separations. Since the unit processing capacity of
TBS is larger than that of shaking tables and mag-
netic separators, the TBS reduced the amount of the
feed to the cleaner stage and increased grade. As the
Fe contents of the TBS’s overflow were much less, a
significant upgrade was achieved just before the
gravity and magnetic separation stages.
● Option 2, in which the TBS is followed by gravity
concentration with shaking tables, resulted in very
good quality concentrates. It should be noted that
the shaking table circuits use large amounts of
water, but this circuit has an advantage with the
feed fractions being relatively coarse and narrow,
simplifying the dewatering process.
● Option 3, in which the TBS is followed by high
intensity wet magnetic separators, also resulted in
a very acceptable quality of concentrate. In this
option, both the grade and recovery of final tail
were higher than the values from Option 2.
● The beneficiation of the slime fraction (−0.10 mm
fraction) was also studied. This condition was
integrated as an optional in both flow sheets.
● Impurity rejection values for the gangue contents
(silica and alumina) in these two flow sheets were
higher than 94%.
Finally, it is evident that upgradation of a low grade
iron tail can be possible in different beneficiation alter-
natives using a TBS. It should be noted that if the
proposed flow sheets are considered for operation,
they should be re-evaluated in terms of the number of
required equipment, amount of water, and some other
operational parameters considering market prices.
References
[1] Raghukumar, C.; Tripathy, S.K.; Mohanan, S. (2012)
Beneficiation of Indian high alumina iron ore fines – a
case study. International Journal of Mining Engineering
and Mineral Processing, 1 (2): 94.
[2] Jena, S.K.; Sahoo, H.; Rath, S.S.; Rao, D.S.; Das, S.K.;
Das, B. (2015) Characterization and processing of iron
ore slimes for recovery of iron values. Mineral
Processing & Extractive Metallurgy Review, 36 (3): 174.
[3] Mohanty, S.; Das, B. (2010) Optimization studies of
hydrocyclone for beneficiation of iron ore slimes.
Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy Review, 31
(2): 86.
[4] Seifelnassr, A.A.S.; Moslim, E.M.; Abouzeid, A.M. (2013)
Beneficiation of a Sudanese low-grade iron ore.
International Journal of Mineral Processing, 122: 59.
[5] Osinubi, K.J.; Yohanna, P.; Eberemu, A.O. (2015)
Cement modification of tropical black clay using iron
ore tailings as admixture. Transportation Geotechnics,
5: 35.
[6] da Silva, F.L.; Araújo, F.G.S.; Teixeira, M.P.; Gomes, R.
C.; von Krüger, F.L. (2014) Study of the recovery and
recycling of tailings from the beneficiation of iron ore
for the production of ceramic. Ceramics International,
40: 16085.
[7] Chao, L.; Henghu, S.; Jing, B.; Longtu, L. (2010)
Innovative methodology for comprehensive utilization
of iron ore tailings Part 1. The recovery of iron from
iron ore tailings using magnetic separation after mag-
netizing roasting. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 174:
71.
[8] Singh, S.; Sahoo, H.; Rath, S.S.; Sahu, A.K.; Das, B.
(2015) Recovery of iron minerals from Indian iron
ore slimes using colloidal magnetic coating. Powder
Technology, 269: 38.
[9] Liu, S.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, W.; Wen, S. (2014)
Beneficiation of a low-grade, hematite-magnetite ore
in China. Minerals & Metallurgical Processing, 31 (2):
136.
[10] Kumar, R.; Srinivas, R.D.; Ram, R.P.S. (2013) Magnetic
separation studies for a low grade siliceous iron ore
sample. International Journal of Mining Science and
Technology, 23: 1.
[11] Rath, R.K.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, B.; Singh, R.;
Bhattacharyya, K.K. (2013) A comparative study on
processing of high alumina hematite iron ore by grav-
ity, magnetic and flotation methods. Journal of
Materials Science and Engineering A, 3 (5): 349.
[12] Das, B.; Prakash, S.; Das, S.K.; Reddy, P.S.R. (2007)
Effective beneficiation of low grade iron ore through

jigging operation. Journal of Minerals & Materials
Characterization & Engineering, 7 (1): 27.
[13] Shobhana, D.; Santosh, P.; Mohanta, M.K.; Singh, R.
(2012) Utilization of iron ore slimes: a future prospec-
tive. Separation Science and Technology, 47 (5): 769.
[14] Roy, S.; Das, A.; Mohanty, M.K. (2007) Feasibility of
producing pellet grade concentrate by beneficiation of
iron ore slime in India. Separation Science and
Technology, 42 (14): 3271.
[15] Srivastava, U.; Komar Kawatra, S. (2009) Strategies for
processing low-grade iron ore minerals. Mineral
Processing & Extractive Metallurgy Review, 30 (4): 361.
[16] Tripathy, S.K.; Bhoja, S.K.; Kumar, C.R.; Suresh, N.
(2015) A short review on hydraulic classification and
its development in mineral industry. Powder
Technology, 270: 205.
[17] Singh, R.; Maulik, S.C.; Chakravorty, N. (April, 1994)
Advances in gravity beneficiation of ores and minerals.
In: National Seminar on Indian Mineral Processing
Advances, Puri.
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2855
[18] Svoboda, J.; Fujita, T. (2003) Recent developments in
magnetic methods of material separation. Minerals
Engineering, 16 (9): 785.
[19] Das, A.; Sarkar, B.; Mehraotra, S.P. (2009) Prediction of
separation performance of Floatex Density Separator
for processing of fine coal particles. International
Journal of Mineral Processing, 91 (1–2): 41.
[20] Bhaskar, K.; Govindarajan, B.; Barnwal, J.P.; Rao, K.K.;
Gupta, B.K.; Rao, T.C. (2005) Classification studies of
lead–zinc ore fines using water-injection cyclone.
International Journal of Mineral Processing, 77: 80.
[21] Iron Ore Products. (2009) website; http://vale.basecent.
com/admin/resources/images/2/4/1342.pdf
[22] Harman, J.; Anglo American Iron Ore Quality and
Volume. (2012) website; http://www.angloamerican.
com /~/media/Files/A/Anglo-American-PLC-V2/pre
sentations/2012pres/global_iron_ore.pdf
[23] Mark Wren, M.; Henry, D.; Iron ore 64.5 % Fe speci-
fication: website; http://www.ipccaustralia.com /down
loads/ipcc-iron-ore-64-specifications-brazil-web.pdf