4.3 Article

Feasibility study of iron mineral separation from red mud by high gradient superconducting magnetic separation

Journal

PHYSICA C-SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND ITS APPLICATIONS
Volume 471, Issue 3-4, Pages 91-96

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.physc.2010.12.003

Keywords

Red mud; Iron separation; High gradient; Superconducting magnet

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science & Technology of China [2008AA06A409-3]
  2. Public Industry Research for National Environmental Protection [200709037]
  3. National Science and Technology Support Program of China [2006BADO1B02-02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The disposal of bayer red mud tailings now seriously threats the environment safety. Reduction and recycling of red mud is now an urgent work in aluminum industry. High gradient superconducting magnetic separation (HGSMS) system was applied to separate the extreme fine RM particles (<100 mu m) into high iron content part and low iron content part. Two sorts of RM were fed in the HGSMS. The iron oxide contents in concentrates were about 65% and 45% when RM 1# and RM 2# were fed respectively. Meanwhile, the residues contained 52.0% or 14.1% iron oxide in residues after eight separation stages when RM 1# and RM 2# were fed respectively. The mass recovery of iron concentrates was about 10% after once separation process regardless of RM 1# or RM 2# was fed. Extreme fine particles (<10 mu m) could be captured in the HGSMS. Intergrowth of Fe and other elements is disadvantages for iron mineral separation from RM by HGSMS. Some improvement should be studied to enhance the efficiency of iron separation. It is possible for HGSMS to separate RM into high iron content part and low iron content part, the former part could be used in iron-making furnace and the later part could be recycling to sintering process for alumina production or used as construction material. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available