Xstrata Process Support (XPS)

Falconbridge, Ontario
COM 2009 Geometallurgy Short Course August 22 – 23, 2009

Peter J. Whittaker, Ph.D., P.Geo.

1
Process Mineralogy at Xstrata Process Support:
Outline

•Introduction
•Applications and Enabling Concepts
•Geometallurgy
•Data Review
•Sampling
•Mineralogical Input
•Metallurgical Input
•Examples / Case Studies
•Conclusions

2
XPS Process Mineralogy

Sampling & Statistics

Process
Mineralogy

3
 XPS Process Mineralogy

• XPS Process Mineralogy is an integrated multi-

disciplinary study of geology, sampling, mineralogy, and
mineral processing that links the orebody to the
concentrator process, providing improved mineral
separation
• Designs more suitable flowsheets to treat the orebody
more efficiently
The orebody consists of minerals not assays

4
 Process Engineers &
Geoscientists

• Work closely together as integrated project teams

• Ore mineralogy data feeds into process design
[ can be concentrators, hydrometallurgy,
pyrometallurgy, environment ]
• Product mineralogy leads to process optimization
• QA/QC embedded in all procedures

5
 Three Applications

On-site Support &

Replacement Orebodies
Plant Optimization
at Existing Mines ( Statistical Benchmark
(Brownfields) Surveys, Troubleshooting, Lab
Testwork )

New Orebodies, New

Concentrators
(Exploration, Plant Startup)

6
 Enabling Technologies & Concepts
• Samples not Specimens
• Drill-Core Sampling Models
Outcome:
• Map Entire Orebody – Life-of-Mine View
• Statistical Benchmark Surveying Accurate Plant
• Minerals not Assays Design and Scale-
• QEMSCAN
up, Right Capex, No
• Probe
Surprises
• Geometallurgical Unit Definition
• High-Confidence Flotation Testing
• Distribution Modelling
• Mini-Pilot Plant

Methods and Procedures Developed

to Support Enabling Technologies at
the 95% Confidence Level 7
 Geometallurgy

A Geological and Metallurgical Definition

disseminated sulphides
Ore type or group of ore types
that possess a unique set of
textural and compositional
net-textured sulphides
properties from which it can be
predicted they will have similar
metallurgical performance
massive sulphides

gabbro footwall
1m

8
 XPS Flowsheet Development

Grain Sizes
Modal Analysis
Mineral Compositions
Drill Core PTS or
Data Review QEMSCAN
Pyrite
Summary Modal Mineralogy
Chalcopyrite
Averaged by Blends

Coarse
Chalco_Text
Tennantite/Enargite
Sphalerite
Blend 6 Molybdenite

Sample Plan MicroProbe

Quartz
Blend 5 Orthoclase

Composites
Plagioclase
Qtz-Plag-Orth/Text
Blend 4
Garnet
Garnet-Textures

GeoMet Unit Definition

Blend 3b Diopside
Amphibole
Blend 3a Muscovite
Biotite
Calcite
Blend 2
Fe Oxides
Alteration Minerals
Blend 1 Other Sulphides
Other Silicates

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Accessory Minerals

Other

Results
and Review
Virtual Flowsheet

Bankable
Design Criteria
Grade/Rec for
Flotation
Economics
Testing/DOE/
Mini Pilot Plant
Optimization 9
 Ore Type Assessment
Zone Variability – Data Review

10
Proposed Zones for Geomet Unit Samples

E
C
G
N

11
 Sampling

Aim is to produce a representative sample of a given ore type

Composite samples from drill core enable this

Smaller sample masses can result

Ore type composite – average mineralogy and metallurgical results

for the given ore type

Variability composites – test variability within a given ore type

Outcome can be that different ore types may have similar metallurgical
response and can be grouped, or a problematic ore type may be identified
and isolated

12
 Stratified Sampling

A wide variance will require a larger

sample mass

Tighter variance for each unit can be

Represented by smaller masses

grade

C
A B

Zone X

frequency distribution

13
Stratified Sampling – Sample
Preparation

Capable of processing up to 150kg/hr

Crushing & Blending Plant Features

dry solids

Drillcore or 6 inch rock feed size

Any product (mesh) size down to

1.7mm can be achieved

Revolutionary blending technology

Primary Jaw Crusher

Rocklabs Boyd Crusher

Vibrating screens

Spinning rifflers and load cells ensure

replicate samples are produced

Commissioned October 2008

14
 Sampling Case Study

•Powerful Sampling Model

By GU 1.2
Block Model
Reference Distributions Sample
•Produces Representative Samples for 1
Testing
Spatially Representative 0.8

0.6

Porphyry Cu, Chile 0.4

Error of <1% on Cu grades gives

0.2
confidence in samples to be
used for metallurgical test work 0
HHG HLG WES SES TUF

15
 Stratified Sampling

•Benefit of stratified sampling applies to smaller

and representative masses

•Mineralogical work is more representative

•Metallurgical test work is tied to the same sample

as mineralogy

•Impact of variability on metallurgical performance

can be tested

•Provides a basis for modeling different blends of mill

feed or different life of mine blends

16
 Mineralogical Input

Data from automated mineralogy: QEMSCAN, MLA

modal %
grain size averages and distributions
mineral associations
mineral liberation
texture %

Data from quantitative mineral analyses; EPMA

mineral compositions, particulary trace concentrations

Combined data gives metal deportment to recoverable and

non-recoverable minerals, identifies problematic minerals and textures
for metallurgy

17
 Quantitative Mineralogy:
Minerals not Assays
•QEMSCAN & Microprobe

18
 Impact of Texture on
Mill

Particles (+106um)
Lost to Tailing
1.7 mm
19
 Textures can create metallurgical problems –
quantification of textures can become critical

•Mineralogical measurements can be grouped into proportions of textural and/or

mineralogical populations within each composite which may have processing implications.

20
Modal mineralogy of gangue as
critical as that of pay minerals

21
 Ni Distribution by Mineral

100
90
80
Ni % Distribution

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Ni (Pn) Ni (Po)

Main North Shallow North Deep UM1A

Ni in Pn - ~31%
Co in Pn - ~2%
22
 Mineralogical data from testing of deposit
variability plus knowledge of current best
practice leads to preliminary flowsheet

Talc Rougher Copper Rougher

Zinc Rougher

Primary Grind
Final Tailings
MS Ball Mill
Copper 1st
p80 = 45 microns Copper 1st
Cleaner
Cleaner Scav
Talc Cleaner

Copper Regrind
Ball Mill
To Final Tailings p80 = 20 microns Copper 2nd
Cleaner

Final Tailings

Copper 2nd Cleaner

Concentrate

Zinc 1st Cleaner

Scavenger Zinc 1st Cleaner

Zinc 1st Clnr Scav

Tailings Zinc Regrind
Ball Mill
p80 = 20 microns
Zinc 1st Clnr
Scav Conc

Zinc 2nd Cleaner

Zinc 2nd Cleaner

Tailings

Zinc 3rd Cleaner

Zinc 3rd Cleaner

Tailings

Zinc 3rd Cleaner

Concentrate

23
 Flotation products – test by GU or
variability composite for performance diagnostics

Strong positive flotation by liberated chalcopyrite

Locked Middling Liberated
Chalcopyrite Liberation in 2nd Cleaner Concentrate
Fraction -420/+212 0.03 0.03 0.06
-212/+106 0.15 0.39 3.32
-106/+53 0.24 1.07 18.15 Locked
CS1-2 0.30 1.53 30.96 Middling
CS3-4 0.22 1.24 20.87 35 Liberated
CS5 0.04 0.26 6.72
CS6 0.17 0.96 9.54 30
Calc CS7 0.09 0.53 3.12

% Chalcopyrite
25
Combined 1.24 6.01 92.75
20

15
10 Liberated
5 Middling
0 Locked
Calc CS7

CS6

CS5

CS3-4

CS1-2

-106/+53

-212/+106

-420/+212
Size Fraction

24
 Bench scale high-confidence flotation
trials test the flowsheet

•Minimises Metal Balance Errors

•Develops Reproducible Results
•Sampling and Results at 95% Level of Confidence
•Quality Control System

25
 Flow sheet validation is carried out with a mini-pilot plant; smaller
masses made possible by geomet units feed the MPP as
representative samples

• Sized for Drill-Core

• Continuous Operation Ability to Simulate Existing
• Campaign 3-12 days (750-3000 Concentrators Has Been Demonstrated
kg ore) – no need for pilot shaft
• 10 kg/h nominal feed rate
• 1 Flowsheet/3 day run
• Allows for Testing by GU
• Wide range of Flowsheets
• Produces Design Level
• Mass/value Balance
• Grade/recovery Performance
• 95% Level of Confidence
– Quantitative Quality
Assurance Programme

26
 Raglan flowsheet developments tied to future ores
program on a Geomet foundation with Process Mineralogy test
work validation

• Statistical Benchmark Surveying

• Extracts Sample Suite
– at 95% Confidence Level
• QEMSCAN Measurement
• Identifies Flowsheet Opportunities
Payback on Overall Investment
92% IRR

Raglan 1998-2002
NPV $12.7 million in 2002 financial
terms

27
Montcalm – Predicting Startup

Timmins

28
 Montcalm – Predicting Startup

Comparison of Montcalm Start-up Curve with McNulty Curves

120

Montcalm start-up Type 1

Ni output in Ni and Cu conc,% of design

100
Type 2

Type 3
80

Type 4
60

Equal to or 40

better than
Type 1
20

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Montcalm start-up - October 2004
Quarter after start-up

29
 Montcalm Scaleup

•Successful Scale-Up
90
• High-Confidence
Flotation Testing 2001-
2003
85 84
– 82.9% Ni Recovery 82.9
• Statistical Benchmark
Survey of Operations
July 2005 80
– 84.0% Recovery

75
HCFT Survey
Type 1 Startup

30
 XPS Process Mineralogy
Highlights of Kabanga Process
Development

• Scoping Phase 1 (2005)

– Ore Characterisation/Geo Met Unit Definition
• Scoping Phase 2 (2006)
– Recovery and Grade Validation/Minor Element and Self Heating
assessment
• PFS (2007)
– Flowsheet Optimization
– Reagent/Circuit Configuration DOEs
– Mini Pilot Plant/Design Basis
• FS (2009)
– Self Heating Full Scale Trials
– Water Recycle Impacts
– Final QEMSCAN on Flotation Products

31
 Mini Pilot Plant Results

MPP1 and 2 summary Grade/Recovery

23

22

21
Ni % Grade

20 MPP 1 Run 2 North

MPP 1 Run 3 North - Tembo
19 MPP 2 Run 1 North - Tembo
MPP 2 Run 2 North - Tembo - Main
18 MPP 2 Run 3 Tembo
HCFT North Opt.
17 HCFT Math. Blend North - Tembo
open sampling data
16 Tembo HCFT

15
60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
Ni% Recovery
32
 Conclusions

•Geometallurgy is a powerful source of information to

support Process Mineralogy

•Variability within a deposit in terms of mineralogy and

its effect on metallurgical performance can be quantified

•Metallurgical risks can be identified and mitigated

•Flowsheet development time and validation to design

criteria and bankable feasibility level can be minimized, this
represents large savings for project costs and improved rates
of return

33
Some of our Clients

34