Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17

This article is also available online at:

www.elsevier.com/locate/mineng

A mechanistic approach to modelling Knelson concentrators

T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe *

Department of Mineral Science and Extractive Metallurgy, Murdoch University, South Street, Perth, Murdoch 6150, WA, Australia

Received 3 May 2004; accepted 22 June 2004

Abstract

A model has been developed to describe the operation of a Knelson concentrator by considering the main forces that act on par-
ticles within the concentrating chamber. It is postulated that the deportment of particles is dependent on the dynamic equilibrium
between the fluid drag, centripetal and BagnoldÕs forces, which are functions of the material properties as well as the key operating
parameters such as fluidisation water flowrate and speed of rotation. Based on this concept a criterion has been developed that deter-
mines the recovery of minerals of different sizes and densities adequately. It has also been shown that this criterion determines the
extent of competition between particles that exist within Knelson concentrators.

2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Gravity concentration; Shear forces; Gold ores

1. Introduction circuit of a gold operation, where gold often accumu-

The use of gravity concentration in the gold industry
has grown significantly since the 1970s. This resurgence
is in part due to the growing emphasis on sustainable
development (Burt, 1999) where maximum recovery no
longer holds precedence to improving the economics of
the process. Demand for more efficient machines lead to
the development of centrifugal devices such as the Knel-
son and Falcon concentrators. Silva (1987) demon-
strated that Knelson concentrators (KC) are capable
of achieving 96% recovery of free liberated gold coarser
then 30 lm with a limit of recovery down to 0.3 lm.
The Knelson concentrators are commonly used in the
gold industry as gravity concentration devices because
of their ability to recover coarse and fine gold from both
alluvial and primary deposits. The device is most com-
monly installed (Banisi et al., 1991) in the grinding
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 8 9360 2568; fax: +61 8 9360
6343.
E-mail address: n.subasinghe@murdoch.edu.au (G.K.N.
Subasinghe).
lates due to its grinding and classification behaviour.
Fig. 1 provides an illustrated example of how concen-
tration takes place within a KC. The feed material, most
commonly cyclone underflow or ball mill discharge, en-
ters through a central feed tube as a slurry. The slurry
descends onto the base plate at the bottom of the rotat-
ing conical bowl and is thrown outwards as initially
there is no centripetal force acting on the particles to
maintain a circular path. As a result some of the parti-
cles get trapped within the grooves of the bowl forming
a concentrate bed while the excess get carried upward
into the tailings stream by the rising current of water.
Injection of water through fluidisation ports located in
the ribs of the bowl prevents compaction of the concen-
trate bed. This creates a fluidised bed (Harris, 1984)
which acts as a concentrating chamber for heavier parti-
cles such as coarse and fine gold, under enhanced grav-
itational force.
Installation of a KC unit into the grinding circuit is
dependent on the economics as well as the presence of
coarse liberated gold in the grinding circuit. Laplante
et al. (1994) has reported on the advantages of using

0892-6875/$ - see front matter
2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2004.06.035
10 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a Knelson concentrator.
gravity concentrators through savings on costs of leach-
ing and flotation reagents. The decision is based on
whether the unit itself or combined with cyanidation will
give rise to optimising the recovery of gold while mini-
mising capital and operating costs. To date no reliable
method exists to quantify the benefits of installation at
the design phase, and the installation of the device is
based upon pilot scale testing or through plant trials.
Optimisation of the circuit has only been achieved
after installation, which confines it to the selected
configuration.
Attempts to develop reliable mathematical models of
this unit has been difficult due to:
(a) The description of particle/particle interactions is
complex.
(b) The conical shape of the bowl results in variations
in G-force experienced by the particles within each
ring which acts as a concentrate chamber.
(c) The effect of fluid drag on the particles due to the
fluidising water which in turn is affected by particle
shape and viscosity effects.
This paper describes an attempt to develop a model
for the KC based on a mechanistic approach by consid-
ering the effects of the dominant forces acting on the
particles.
2. Previous work
The KC is a relatively new concentrating device
which has only been commercially available since
1980. Since then its use has been well documented, usu-
ally in the form of a case study pertaining to particular
operations but descriptions of the mechanisms involved
or the theoretical considerations have been limited.
Laplante (2000) has devised a method to evaluate the
feasibility of employing a gravity gold circuit based on
the Gravity Recoverable Gold (GRG) content. This
method uses a 3.5 in. KC to determine the amount of gold
present that is susceptible to concentrating in the device.
The operating conditions of the unit for the test were stip-
ulated by Laplante et al. (1996). The amount of GRG in
an ore is determined as the gold recovered by processing a
sample of milled material in 3 stages using a 3.5 in. KC
under stipulated operating conditions. Stage 1 involves
processing 100% passing 850 lm of the ore sample. Stage
2 involves processing 45–60% passing 75 lm, with part of
the tailing from stage 1 as feed, typically 27 kg. The third
and final stage involves processing of 80% passing 75 lm,
using most of stage two tails as feed, typically 24 kg.
While the GRG content may be considered an upper limit
or the maximum recovery possible, it does not take into
account the inefficiencies of the large plant scale devices,
thereby reporting higher recoveries than practically pos-
sible in industrial units.
Laplante et al. (1996) investigated the effect of feed
rate, density and size, and fluidisation water flowrate,
on the recovery of gold in a 3.5 in. laboratory KC. They
reported that recovery decreases with increasing feed
rate above 0.7 kg/min, the effect more pronounced for
a gangue density of 4 g/cm. The effect of fluidisation
water pressure was found to be minimal, with maximum
gold recovery attained at 33 kPa. It has also been re-
ported by Laplante, (1995) that the optimum pressure
of fluidising water is a function of the feed size distribu-
tion and the density of the material fed.
It is noticeable in the figures of Laplante et al. (1996)
that the gold recovery decreased for fine sizes and also at
around 300 lm sizes. It can also be seen that the recov-
ery varies with the fluidising water for different feed
sizes. It is interesting to note in their work that the gold
recovery is clearly dependent on the feed gold grade.
Woodcock, (1994) has shown that the removal of the
coarse fraction from the feed can enhance the recovery
of fine gold. Laplante et al. (1996) also noted that the
recovery of flakey gold was different to that of spherical
gold. However, the fine gold particles were predomi-
nantly spherical in shape while the larger particles were
flaky and thus the difference in recovery cannot be
attributed exclusively to shape alone. Walsh and Kelly
(1993) reported flaky gold as having a smaller apparent
size than sieve measurements indicate, based on their
settling behaviour.
The use of recovery as a predictor of KC perform-
ance is limiting. Recovery is related to the amount of
mineral recovered in the concentrate and the amount
of the mineral in the feed. The KC operates in a batch
mode, hence at some point the concentrate chambers
in the bowl would reach full capacity. Incoming mineral
particles will then bounces off the concentrate bed and
leave the unit, thereby decreasing the recovery. If the
recovery is to be used as a predictor it is important
not to overfeed the KC. The fact that the Knelson con-
centrator bowl is of a fixed capacity does limit the
 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17
amount of gold collected which has implications on the
cycle time in batch plant operations.
3. Theoretical development
It can be observed that when a particle enters the
bowl of the KC it gets suspended in the water and tra-
verses the bowl in a helical motion prior to exiting the
bowl if it is not trapped within the rings. As the bowl ro-
tates at an angular velocity of x (rad/s) about its central
axis, the contents within the bowl (i.e. water and solid
particles) also rotate in the same direction. For the par-
ticles to move in a circular path requires a centripetal
force (Fc), given by
F c ¼ mrx2 ð1Þ
where m is the mass of the particle and r is the radius of
the trajectory.
The solid particles, being heavier than water will also
move outwards relative to the water and towards the
bowl periphery and encounters the fluidising water that
enters through the orifices in the bowl periphery. Hence
the solid particles would experience a fluid drag force Fd,
given by
1
F d ¼ C d
A
qf  V 2f ð2Þ
2
where Cd is the drag coefficient, qf is the fluid density, Vf
is the fluid velocity relative to the solid particle and A is
the cross sectional area of the particle.
In addition, a particle moving towards the periphery
would encounter particles already in the established par-
ticle bed and experiences a particle/particle interaction
force, commonly known as the Bagnold force. Bagnold
(1954) showed that when a particle bed is subjected to a
shear stress, dilation of the bed occurs which generates a
dispersive pressure. This principle can be used to explain
similar phenomena in the KC. The particle bed formed
in the concentrate chamber, undergoes shearing due to
the rotation of the bowl causing the particle bed to di-
late. Consequently, a dispersive pressure acts on the par-
ticles in the bed, resulting in a force Fb acting on the
Fig. 2. Forces on a particle within a Knelson concentrator.
11
mineral particle in a direction towards the centre. This
BagnoldÕs force is dependent on the velocity gradient
in the radial direction, particle diameter and density,
and the solid concentration.
 2
dV
Fb / ; d 2 ; qp ; C ð3Þ
dy
where ðdVdy
Þ is the shear rate, d is the particle diameter, qp
is the particle density and C is the concentration of sol-
ids expressed as a linear concentration.
Considering that the outer edge of the particle bed ro-
tates at the speed of the bowl, the shear rate can be as-
sumed to be proportional to the tangential velocity of
the bowl at the outer radius. Also, since the thickness
of the particle bed formed within the rings of the bowl
is relatively constant the effect of concentration may
be considered constant. It can readily be shown that
the shearing process occurring within the KC, would
be in the inertial regime as described by Bagnold
(1954) which is proportional to the following factors:
F b / x2 ; d 2 ; qp ð4Þ
For a particle to remain within the concentrate chamber,
the required centripetal force must be provided by the
drag and Bagnold forces (see Fig. 2). Thus:
Fc ¼ Fb þ Fd ð5Þ
Any disturbance to this dynamic equilibrium would
have either of two effects on the deportment of the min-
eral particle:
• The particle will move into the concentrate chamber
and be retained, or
• The particle will move out of the concentrate cham-
ber and get carried up by the upward flow into the
tailings stream.
Since both Fc and Fb are strongly related to x, their
combined effect may be represented by a net force F c . It
may therefore be postulated that the probability of a par-
ticle being retained within the concentrate chamber must
be dependent on the relative extents of this net force and
12 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17
the fluid drag force. Hence, a criterion, X, that predict the
particle retention may be proposed as a ratio of Fd to F c .
Fd
X ¼ ð6Þ
F c
The magnitude of the drag force will depend on the flu-
idisation water flowrate, and the particle size while the
magnitude of the net force, F c , will vary with rotational
speed, particle size and density. A high value of X indi-
cates a higher fluid drag force due to fluidizing water
which would push the particle out of the concentrate
chamber. A lower value indicates that the net centripetal
force required for a particle to orbit a circular path is not
supplied by the drag force and therefore the particle
would travel towards the outer periphery of the bowl
and be retained in the concentrating chamber.
Experimental work was undertaken using synthetic
materials to study the effect this parameter X has in
determining the recovery of material in a KC.
4. Experimentation
4.1. Procedure
The recovery of material of different sizes and densities
in a 3 in. laboratory Knelson concentrator were deter-
mined at different fluidisation water flowrates and rota-
tional speeds. Test work was carried out by feeding each
material individually and then as size and density mixtures.
Runs with Uniform Material: Silica sand and Magnet-
ite were sieved into narrow size intervals of 180 +
53 lm, 355 + 180 lm, 500 + 355lm, 710 +500 lm
and 850 + 710 lm. 800 g of material of each size were
used for each run. Each size was processed at five rota-
tion speeds, namely, 616, 1064, 1537, 1876, 2171 rpm.
Six different fluidisation water flowrates ranging from
(0–20 L/min) at each fixed rotation speed, with an aver-
age feedrate of 200 g/min. The fluidisation water flow-
Fig. 3. Cross sectional view of a 3.5 in. KC.
rates were maintained constant throughout each run.
At the end of each run, the amount of material retained
in the concentrate chamber was determined.
Runs with size mixtures: Silica of size 180 + 53 lm,
500 + 355 lm and 850 + 710 lm were combined in
equivalent amounts to produce an 800 g feed sample.
The mixture was processed at 2171 rpm for a fluidisation
water flowrate of 7.30 L/min, and at 1064 rpm for 4.5
and 12.5 L/min respectively at a feed rate of 200 g/min.
Once processed the material retained in the concentrate
chamber was collected, dried and then weighed. The
material was then sieved to determine the amount of
material in each size fraction.
Runs with density mixtures: Each mixture was pre-
pared by combining Silica of size 180 + 53 lm with
Magnetite of the same size to give 800 g, at different
magnetite compositions of 5% and 20% Magnetite by
weight. The 20% mixture was processed at rotation
speeds of 616, 1537 and 2171 rpm respectively. Three flu-
idisation water flowrates were used for each rotation
speed in the range of 0–15 L/min. The material was fed
at a rate of 200 g/min. The 5% mixture was processed
at rotation speeds of 616 and 2171 rpm with fluidising
water flowrates of 11.5 and 6.8 respectively. Also runs
were conducted using the same mixture at a speed of
1537 rpm at two water flowrates of 4 and 10 L/min.
The material was fed at a rate of 200 g/min. Once
processing was complete the mixtures collected in the
concentrate chamber were weighed, dried and magnetic
separation used to determine the magnetite content.
5. Results and discussion
5.1. Experiments with uniform size and density particles
Initial experiments were conducted on a 3 in. labora-
tory Knelson concentrator (see Fig. 3) by feeding differ-
 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17 13

ent amounts of closely sized silica sand in a batch mode. 25

It was observed that, for a given fluidising water flow 20
rate, the amount of sand collected in the concentrate

chamber progressively increased with the amount fed
and reached a constant value when the amount fed
was in excess of 800 g indicating that the concentrating
chamber has been filled to capacity. All subsequent tests
were carried out with feed amounts in excess of 1 kg, fed
at a uniform rate. It was noted during the experiments
that the pressure of the fluidising water at a point just
before it entered the bowl increased slightly with increas-
ing bowl rotational speeds. However, its effect on the
flowrate was not significant and was kept constant
throughout each run.
Material of uniform size and density was processed in
the KC at several speeds of bowl rotation (N) and fluidi-
sation water flowrates (Q). At the end of each run, the vol-
ume of material collected in the concentrate chamber was
determined. Fig. 4 shows a typical plot of volume of silica
sand collected in the concentrating chamber vs fluidizing
water flowrate at different bowl rotating speeds. Fig. 5 is
similar to Fig. 4 but for different particle size. The re-
ported size refers to the geometric mean size of the narrow
size interval. Fig. 6 is for run with magnetite particles.
It can be seen from Figs. 4 and 5 that two regimes ap-
pear evident in the amounts collected. For low fluidisa-
tion water flowrates the volume of material collected
remains constant. At higher flowrates the volume recov-
ered tends to decrease. This implies that when the drag
40
35
30
V (cm3)
V (cm3)
15
1064 RPM
10
5
0
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 0.0002 0.00025
Q (m3/s)
Fig. 6. Volume of magnetite collected (V) vs fluidisation water
flowrate (Q) for 97 lm magnetite particles.
force caused by the fluidisation water exceeds that re-
quired to maintain the centripetal force, the particles
get pushed out of the concentrating chamber. However,
larger or denser particles require a larger centripetal
force and thus are retained in the chamber while the
lighter and finer particles depart.
This situation can be compared to that exist in a flu-
idised bed (Geankoplis, 2003). When a fluid flows at low
flowrates vertically through a loosely packed bed of par-
ticles, the bed volume remains constant as long as the
fluid drag force is unable to support the weight of the
particles. As the fluid flow increases, the bed gets fluid-
ised and expands thereby increasing the bed voidage.
The conditions prevailing in the concentrating chamber
of a KC may be considered to be similar to that of a flu-
idised bed albeit in a horizontal direction. When the
fluid drag force is insufficient to provide the net centrip-
etal force required particles form a packed bed and
when it exceeds the net centripetal force the bed gets flu-
idised and expands, thereby moving some particles out
of the concentrating chamber resulting in reduced parti-

616 RPM
25
1064 RPM cle retention.
20 The parameter X, discussed above, is an indicator of
15 the relative strengths of the net centrifugal force and the
10 fluid drag. The data presented in Figs. 4–6 have been
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004
combined and replotted against X in Fig. 7. This figure
3
Q (m /s) clearly shows the two regions discussed above. The va-
Fig. 4. Volume collected (V) vs fluidisation water flowrate (Q) for
lue of X when the transition occurs is in the vicinity of
595 lm silica feed. 0.00002 and is denoted by X*. The trend in the data is
similar for all data sets with little variations in the values
of X*.
35
30 5.2. Modelling
25 1537 RPM
V (cm 3)

20 616 RPM
15 1064 RPM
A Weibull distribution as described by Fig. 7 was fit-
10 1876 rpm ted to the data using a least squares approach, the model
5 parameters V0, X* and n were evaluated for each data
0
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004
set covering a range of particle sizes, two densities and
a range of rotational speeds.
Q (m 3/s)
  n 
X
Fig. 5. Volume of silica collected (V) vs fluidisation water flowrate (Q) V ¼ V 0 exp   ð7Þ
for 253 lm particles. X
14 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17

100

595 um Silica
10 253 um Silica

V( cm3)
97 um Magnetite
421 Um Silica
777 um Silica

1 97 um Silica

0.1
0.0000001 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001
X

Fig. 7. Volume of material collected (V) vs retention parameter (X).

where V is volume collected (cm3) V0 is max volume of
material the KC chamber can accommodate under a
given set operating conditions (cm3), X* is the critical
value of X at the transition between the two regions
and n is the exponent.
The variations in the model parameters with operat-
ing variables such as particle size, fluidizing water and
rotational speed was established through least square
regressions and are listed below along with their respec-
tive R2 values which indicate the goodness of fit.
V 0 ¼ 4:3
103 qd  2:15q þ 31:23
n ¼ 3:25 þ 4:55
102 x  0:8q þ 5:84
105 d 2
 2:1
104 x2 ðR2 ¼ 0:92Þ
tested in the X* regression showed significant t values at
5% level indicating the large influence the operating
variables and the particle properties have on this
parameter.
Using Eqs. (8a)–(8c) to calculate the model parame-
ters, the volume of material retained under a wide range
of operating conditions was calculated from Eq. (7). The
accuracy of the model may be inferred graphically from
Fig. 8 by comparing the observed vs calculated values. A
majority of the data points lie within the 10% error mar-
gins, indicating the model fits the data adequately. How-
ðR2 ¼ 0:98Þ ð8aÞ ever, in order to widen the range of applicability of this
model, it needs to be refined using more experimental
data that covers a wider range of the variables, particle
ð8bÞ densities and the larger size classes in particular.

X  ¼ 9:3
105  6
107 x  5:1
106 q 5.3. Experiments with mixtures of particles of different
2
 49d þ 1:6
10 x9 2 2
ðR ¼ 0:99Þ ð8cÞ sizes

While the regression for n accounted for much of the
small variations, it may be considered a constant as
none of the operating variables in the regression shows
a statistically significant effect. The model parameter
V0 which is the maximum volume of material capable
of being retained under a given set of conditions is
dependent predominantly on particle density and the
interactive effect between density and size. All variables
When a feed to the KC consists of a mixture of parti-
cles of different sizes and densities, each material of a gi-
ven size and density would compete against the others to
remain within the concentrating chamber. The initial
work on mixtures was conducted with mixtures of mate-
rial of same density but of different sizes to determine the
relative extents of each particle size collected. Mixtures of
Silica comprising 3 sizes were fed in equal amounts into

50
3
Calculated Volume cm

40
595 um Silica
253 um Silica
30
97 um Magnetite
421 um Silica
20
777 um Silica
97 um Silica
10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Observed Volume cm 3

Fig. 8. Calculated volume vs observed volume.

 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17 15

100 It can be seen that the transition from constant volume

recovery occurs for both pure and mixed Silica feed at an
97 um X value in the vicinity of 0.00002. When X < X* for a gi-
V (cm 3)

10 421 um ven material, the amount collected reaches a constant va-

1E-06 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01
X
Fig. 9. Volume recovered (V) vs X for size mixture containing silica of
3 sizes.
the KC for a range of operating variables. Fig. 9 shows a
plot of the amount of material collected vs X.
It can be seen from Fig. 9 that the volume of larger
particles collected is higher than that of smaller parti-
cles. As expected, their X values are less than the respec-
tive critical values given by X*. This implies that the bed
formed of larger particles remain non-fluidised while
that of small particles is in a fluidised state. A similar
pattern of behaviour was found by Laplante et al.
(1990), who suggested the initial packing of the bed oc-
curred for coarser material that remained non-fluidised
for the duration of the operating cycle.
The amount of silica sand of each size class recovered
in a mixture experiment to that recovered when each size
is processed individually is shown in Fig. 10.
777 um lue (V0) as a result of the bed not being fluidised. This
constant value is lower in mixtures than that when fed
1 individually. Fig. 11 shows the variation of the constant
0.1 1
value under non-fluidised conditions, V0 with the compo-
sition of the given material in the mixture. Their relation-
ship may be described by an equation of the form:
ðV 0 Þmixture ¼ ðV 0 Þindividual :fi ð9Þ
where fi is the volume fraction of the given material in
the mixture.
5.4. Experiments with mixtures of particles of different
density:
Fig. 12 shows the data from silica/magnetite mixtures
each of average diameter 97 lm at two feed composi-
tions. The data covers for fluidisation water flowrates
ranging from 4.5 to 12 L/min and two speeds of rota-
tion, 1064 and 2171 rpm.
It shows the same trend shown in Fig. 10 for size mix-
tures. The higher the proportion of a given mineral in
the mixture, it results in a greater amount being recov-
ered. The maximum amounts recovered from non-fluid-
ised beds estimated from Fig. 12 is plotted in Fig. 13

100

97 um mix
10 421 um mix
V (cm 3)

777 um mix
97 um ind
1 421 um ind
777 um ind

0.1
1E-07 1E-06 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
X

Fig. 10. Volume collected (V) vs X for silica size mixtures and individual feed.

40
35
30
25
V0 (cm )
3

20 97 um, 2171 RPM @ 7.30 L/min

421 um, 2171 RPM @ 7.30 L/min
15
777 um, 2171 RPM @ 7.3 L/min
10 421 um, 1064 RPM @ 12.5 L/min
5 421 um, 1064 RPM @ 4.5 L/min
777 um, 1064 RPM @ 4.5 L/min
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
f

Fig. 11. Max volume silica recovery (V0) vs volume fraction in feed (f).
16 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17

100.0 mixture with other minerals, can be calculated by mod-

ifying Eq. (7) to account for the mixture composition, by
  n 
10.0 Silica 80% Xi
V i ¼ V 0i :fi : exp   ð10Þ
V (cm3)

Silica 95%
Xi
Magnetite 20%
1.0 Magnetite 5% where fi is the volume fraction of the given mineral in
1E-06 1E-05 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
the feed material.
0.1 Using Eq. (10), the volume recoveries of minerals in
X size and density mixtures was determined for a range
of operating conditions in a 3 in. KC. The accuracy of
Fig. 12. Volume (V) of material collected vs X for silica and magnetite the model is shown in Fig. 14. While the model predicts
mixtures of size 97 lm.
the trends well, additional testwork is required to cover
a larger range of particle size and density, and operating
conditions in order to improve its wider applicability.
35
30 5.6. Plant data
25
V (cm3)

20
15
10
5 formance, but may not reflect processing of gold ores
0 in a KC on an industrial scale. However to relate the
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
f
Fig. 13. Max volume recovery (V) vs volume fraction in the feed (f) for
silica and magnetite mixtures.
against volume fraction in feed for both silica and mag-
netite. This figure too confirms the trend shown in Fig.
11 and the validity of Eq. (9).
5.5. Modelling of mixture data
Evidence in Figs. 11 and 13 indicate that the recovery
of a given material when fed individually and in a mix-
ture under non-fluidised conditions, is proportional to
the volume fraction of that mineral in the feed. Figs.
10 and 12 show that the onset of bed fluidisation for a
given mineral occurs at the same value of X irrespective
of it being fed in a mixture or individually. Thus, the
amount recovered of a mineral Vi, when it is fed as a
Volume Recovery Calculated (cm3)
Silica
Processing of synthetic mixtures using a 3.5 in. KC
Magnetite
indicates the important variables that influence its per-
0.8 1 1.2
performance of the laboratory scale apparatus to an
industrial sized KC, data from a 30 in. plant KC was
gathered and the volume recovery of gold, sulphides
and gangue were determined as a function of the X
parameter.
The data in Fig. 15 were obtained from a 30 in. KC
fed at 40 t/with a fluidisation water flowrate of 17 m3/h,
and a speed of rotation of 443 rpm and a cycle time of
15 min. The X values for the three minerals under these
operating conditions range from about 0.0005–0.01,
about two orders of magnitude higher than those in a
3 in. KC. The fluidisation water flowrate is much higher
in the industrial sized KC giving rise to a higher drag
force. The increased bowl diameter and comparable
speeds of rotation gives rise to a higher G force on the
mineral particles. As expected, the value of X increases
as a function of the fluidisation water flowrate and the
recoveries decrease accordingly. Further studies on
industrial units are planned for the near future. It must
be noted that the criterion X may be used as a scale up

30

25

20
Silica density mixture
Magnetite density mixture
15
Silica 97 um size mixture
Silica 421 um size mixture
10
Silica 777 um size mixture
5 Magnetite Size and Density Test
Silica Size and Density Tests
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Volume Recovery Observed (cm3)

Fig. 14. Volume recovery calculated vs volume recovery observed for size and density mixture.
 T. Coulter, G.K.N. Subasinghe / Minerals Engineering 18 (2005) 9–17
Volume Collected (cm3)
0.0001 0.001 0.01
X
Fig. 15. Volume collected vs X for a 30 2. KC.
factor as it takes into account operating variables such
as rotational speed and fluidising water as well as parti-
cle properties and machine dimensions.
5.7. Implications for design and operation of gravity gold
circuits
The proposed mathematical model is capable of pre-
dicting the volume recovery of minerals in a laboratory
KC as evidenced by the data presented above and may
be refined to predict the performance of an industrial
unit. The model indicates that the operating parameters
such as the fluidisation water flowrate could be chosen
such that the gold particles are in the non-fluidised re-
gime while the gangue particles are in a fluidised state.
Given the composition of an ore in terms of the size
and density of its component minerals, such as gold, sul-
phide and gangue content, it would be possible to calcu-
late the operating conditions for an industrial unit that
would optimise the gold recovery. Once the operating
conditions for optimal recovery of gold have been deter-
mined, the cycle time may be chosen so that the maxi-
mum amount of gold the unit can recover is achieved
but not overloaded which would result in a loss of
recovery.
17
6. Conclusions
10000
1000
100 Gold
By identifying a criterion that indicates the state of
10 Sulphides fluidisation in the bowl of a Knelson concentrator under
1 Gangue different feed and operating parameters, a preliminary
0.1 mathematical model has been developed to predict its
0.01 performance.
0.1 1
References
Bagnold, R., 1954. Experiments on gravity—free dispersion of large
solid spheres in a newtonian fluid under shear. Proc. Royal Soc.,
London, Ser. A. 225, 49–63.
Banisi, S., Laplante, A.R., Marois, J., 1991. A Study of the Behaviour
of Gold in Industrial and Laboratory Grinding, CIM Bulletin, pp
72-78, Nov 1991.
Burt, R, 1999. The role of gravity concentration in modern processing
plants. Minerals Eng. 12 (11), 1291–1300.
Geankoplis, C.J., 2003. Flow in packed and fluidised beds, Chapters
3.1C and 3.1D. In: Transport Processes and Separation Process
Principles. pp. 125–136.
Harris, D., 1984. The Knelson concentrator—applications in Aus-
tralia, AUSIMM (Perth and Kalgoorlie), Regional Conference on
‘‘Gold—Mining, Metallurgy and Geology’’, October 1984.
Laplante, A.R., 2000. Testing requirements and insight for gravity
gold circuit design. Presented at Randol Gold and Silver Forum,
Vancouver.
Laplante, A.R., Putz, A., Huang, L., Vincent, F., 1994. Practical
considerations in the operations of gravity gold circuit. Presented
at the Annual Canadian Mineral Processors Conference, Ottawa,
January 1994.
Laplante, A.R., Shu, Y., Marois, J., 1996. Experimental characterisa-
tion of a laboratory centrifugal separator. Canadian Metallurgical
Quarterly 35 (1), 23–29.
Laplante, A.R., Woodcock, F., Noaparast, M., 1990. Predicting gold
recovery by gravity. Presented at the Annual SME meeting,
Albuquerque, N.M, Feb 1990.
Silva, M., 1987. Placer Gold Recovery Methods. vol. 23. Colorado
School of Mines. (Special Publications).
Walsh, D., Kelly, E.G., 1993. Technical note nominal diameters of
gold particles. Minerals Engineering 6 (2), 193–198.