4.7 Article

Flotation separation of chalcopyrite from galena by sodium humate and ammonium persulfate

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S1003-6326(16)64113-4

关键词

chalcopyrite; galena; sodium humate; sodium persulfate; flotation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51274255]
  2. Co-innovation Center for Clean and Efficient Utilization of Strategic Metal Mineral Resources, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The flotabilities of chalcopyrite and galena with sodium humate (HA) and ammonium persulfate (APS) as the depressant were studied by flotation test, adsorption measurement and infrared spectroscopic analysis. Single mineral flotation test shows that the slurry oxidation environment and the proper oxidation of galena surface are prerequisites for the depression of galena by sodium humate. The closed-circuit flotation test of copper/lead bulk concentrate shows that the grade and recovery of Cu reach 30.47% and 89.16% respectively and those of Pb reach 2.06% and1.58% respectively in copper concentrate, and the grade and recovery of Pb reach 50.34% and 98.42% and those of Cu reach 1.45% and 10.84% respectively in lead concentrate with HA and APS. The selective depression effect of HA and APS is more obvious than that of potassium dichromate. The results of FTIR analysis and adsorption measurements indicate that the adsorption of sodium humate on the fresh surface of galena is negligible, while after oxidation, sodium humate can be chemically adsorbed on the surface of galena. According to the theory of solubility product, the sodium humate can display the oxidation product PbSO4, after then, adsorb on the surface of lead chemically to produce inhibitory effect. Thus, it can be seen that the combination of HA and APS is an efficient non-toxic reagent to achieve cleaning separation copper/lead bulk concentrate by flotation. The combination of HA and APS is an efficient non-toxic reagent to achieve cleaning for copper/lead bulk concentrate by flotation.

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