4.7 Article

A simulation-based stereological correction method for assessment of volumetric liberation and surface exposure of ore particles

期刊

MINERALS ENGINEERING
卷 176, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mineng.2021.107327

关键词

Liberation; Surface exposure; Stereological bias; Stereological correction; Numerical simulation

资金

  1. Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A simulation-based stereological correction method was developed to accurately estimate 3D composition distribution from measurable 2D composition distributions, with notable features including the requirement of relatively small input data and rapid analysis. Experimental validation showed high estimation accuracy for various types of particles, making it suitable for post analysis of SEM/EDX-based particle sectional liberation analysis.
In assessment of the volumetric liberation and surface exposure of ore particles, two-dimensional (2D) analysis, such as the widely used scanning electron microscope and energy dispersive X-ray (SEM/EDX)-based analysis, results in stereological bias with respect to the three-dimensional (3D) reality. Thus, a simulation-based stereological correction method for accurate assessment of volumetric liberation and surface exposure was developed. The method utilizes a pre-established database of numerically simulated binary particles to estimate 3D composition (or exposure) distributions only from measurable 2D composition (or exposure) distributions. Among the notable features of the method are the relatively small amount of 2D-distribution input data required, and the rapidity of the analysis. Experimental validation, and ex-post analysis of previously published research results, showed high estimation accuracy for various types of particles (including actual ore samples) examined in previous studies. In addition, the method is suitable for post analysis of SEM/EDX-based particle sectional liberation analysis.

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

4.7
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