4.5 Article

Low-Grade Phosphate Tailings Beneficiation via Organic Acid Leaching: Process Optimization and Kinetic Studies

期刊

MINERALS
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/min11050492

关键词

phosphate washing sludges; beneficiation; ball milling; organic acid leaching; Taguchi L-9 design; desirability function; ANCOVA; leaching kinetics; kinetic models

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigated the beneficiation of rejected phosphate washing sludges (Ps) using acid leaching methods. By optimizing the milling parameters and experimental conditions, the P2O5 grade was increased to 30.7%, with the type of organic acid having a significant influence on the leaching process.
In this paper, the beneficiation of rejected phosphate washing sludges (Ps) was investigated using acid leaching methods. Chemical analysis showed that these sludges are a low-grade ore (15.84% P2O5). The optimum milling parameters have helped to increase the P2O5 grade to 18.51%. Then, the effects of three different organic acids (acetic, lactic, and citric acid), acid concentrations, reaction temperatures, reaction times, and solid concentrations on the beneficiation of P2O5 were evaluated. Single-factor experiments indicate that with the optimal conditions: leaching for 60 min with an acetic acid concentration of 7%, a solid concentration of 25%, and a temperature of 40 degrees C, Ps could reach 30.1% P2O5 with a CaO/P2O5 ratio of 0.58. Taguchi experimental design, Pareto plot, desirability function, and Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) showed that the acid type has the most significant impact on the leaching and the optimized leaching conditions: 7% of acetic acid, a solid concentration of 30%, a reaction time of 100 min, and a temperature of 40 degrees C, helped to produce a Ps with 30.7% P2O5. The kinetic study showed that the leaching process was controlled by a chemical reaction, with an activation energy of 48.9 kJ/Mol, which confirms the chemical reaction's control of the process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据