4.7 Article

An experimental investigation of the fluid accessibility of preconditioned sulphide copper ores

期刊

MINERALS ENGINEERING
卷 200, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mineng.2023.108142

关键词

Fragment conditioning; Preconditioning blasting; Laboratory experiments; Blast induced microfractures; Fluid accessibility; Primary copper ore

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Copper is crucial for transitioning to a low-carbon economy and energy-efficient technologies. This paper presents results from controlled blasting tests that show how stress-induced damage can increase fluid penetration depth in copper ore samples, potentially improving the efficiency of copper extraction.
Copper is crucial for a transition to a low-carbon economy and for energy-efficient technologies. In nature, can be mostly found in minerals as combination with iron and sulphide and its conversion into pure copper metal is frequently produced through comminution and concentration techniques. The use of hydrometallurgical methods has been successfully applied in the treatment of oxides and secondary sulphides, but its industrial applicability to primary ores has been very limited. The accessibility of the minerals is a key factor for their recovery through leaching, with surface grains being the most easily leached. This paper presents results from controlled blasting tests to investigate the effect of stress-induced damage on fluid penetration into copper ore samples. The results show that preconditioning by energetic loading can extend the Fluid Penetration depth by an average of 1.09 mm and up to 7 mm, compared to the 0.56 mm average of samples without conditioning. The experiments demonstrate that stress-induced fractures create extended fluid pathways, increasing the number of grains that can be potentially dissolved, and the presence of statistical outliers in the analysis shows that these induced microfractures can have a significant impact on fluid accessibility.

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