NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

24-MMP-A3 Mineral Processing · May 2018

Question 1 of 6: Highland Valley Copper — Metallurgical Balance

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

EGBC National Exam — Mining and Mineral Processing Engineering, 09-MMP-A3 Mineral Processing, 2018-May. 3 hours duration, closed book; only an approved Casio or Sharp calculator permitted. Six questions constitute a complete exam paper (100 marks total).

Reference texts: Wills & Finch, Wills' Mineral Processing Technology, 8th ed. (metallurgical balances, recovery/enrichment ratio and separation efficiency – Ch. 1 & 12; comminution, crushers and mills – Ch. 6; gravity concentration – Ch. 10; magnetic and electrostatic separation, heavy-mineral-sand flowsheets – Ch. 13; froth flotation, cells and reagents – Ch. 12; classification, hydrocyclones and partition curves – Ch. 9; solid-liquid separation and tailings dams – Ch. 15 & 17); Taggart, Handbook of Mineral Dressing (heavy-liquid density calculations, classical two-product formulas).

Question 1: Highland Valley Copper — Metallurgical Balance (24 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given.

Highland Valley Copper — stream assays
Stream% Cu
Feed, $f$0.388
Concentrate, $c$41.4
Tailings, $t$0.033

Value mineral: bornite, $\text{Cu}_5\text{FeS}_4$. Atomic masses: Cu 63.5, Fe 55.8, S 32.0 g/mol.

Approach. All six parts follow from the classical two-product (feed = concentrate + tailings) mass and metal balance built on the three assays; the yield of concentrate to feed, $Y=C/F$, is the pivot value that (2)–(4) and (6) all build on.

1(1) — Enrichment ratio (3 marks)

  1. Ratio of concentrate to feed grade. $$ER=\frac{c}{f}=\frac{41.4}{0.388}=\boxed{106.7}$$

1(2)/1(3) — Concentration ratio and weight % concentrate produced (6 marks)

  1. Two-product yield. The mass fraction of feed reporting to concentrate is fixed by the three assays: $$Y=\frac{C}{F}=\frac{f-t}{c-t}=\frac{0.388-0.033}{41.4-0.033}=\frac{0.355}{41.367}=0.008582$$ so the weight % of Cu concentrate produced is $\boxed{0.858\%}$ of the feed mass.
  2. Concentration ratio. $K=F/C$ is the reciprocal of the yield: $$K=\frac{1}{Y}=\frac{1}{0.008582}=\boxed{116.5}$$

1(4) — Copper recovery into the concentrate (3 marks)

  1. Metal-balance recovery. $$R=\frac{Cc}{Ff}=Y\cdot\frac{c}{f}=\frac{c(f-t)}{f(c-t)}\times100=\frac{41.4\times0.355}{0.388\times41.367}\times100=\boxed{91.57\%}$$

1(5) — Bornite content of the concentrate (6 marks)

  1. Molar mass and Cu fraction of bornite. $$M_{\text{Cu}_5\text{FeS}_4}=5(63.5)+55.8+4(32.0)=317.5+55.8+128.0=501.3\ \text{g/mol}$$ $$\%\text{Cu in bornite}=\frac{5\times63.5}{501.3}\times100=\frac{317.5}{501.3}\times100=63.33\%$$
  2. Bornite content of the concentrate. Since Cu is assumed to be present only as bornite, the concentrate's bulk Cu assay divided by bornite's own Cu assay gives the mineral fraction: $$\%\text{bornite}=\frac{c}{63.33}\times100=\frac{41.4}{63.33}\times100=\boxed{65.4\%}$$

The remaining ≈35% of the concentrate mass is gangue reporting with the floated bornite – a normal figure for a real (imperfectly selective) copper flotation concentrate.

1(6) — Separation efficiency (6 marks)

  1. Recovery of gangue mineral into the concentrate. Separation efficiency is a MINERAL balance, so "gangue" is everything that is not bornite (bornite's own Fe and S belong to the value mineral). With $m=63.34\%$ Cu in pure bornite from 1(5), the feed carries $0.388/63.34\times100=0.613\%$ bornite, i.e. $99.387\%$ gangue, and the concentrate carries $100-65.37=34.63\%$ gangue: $$R_{g}=Y\cdot\frac{100-\%\text{bornite}_c}{100-\%\text{bornite}_f}\times100=0.008582\times\frac{34.63}{99.387}\times100=0.299\%$$
  2. Schuhmann separation efficiency. $SE$ is the recovery of the valuable mineral less the recovery of gangue mineral into the same product (every Cu atom is in bornite, so bornite recovery equals Cu recovery): $$SE=R_{m}-R_{g}=91.57-0.30=\boxed{91.3\%}$$ Cross-check with Wills' closed form: $SE=\dfrac{100\,m\,Y\,(c-f)}{(m-f)\,f}=\dfrac{100(63.34)(0.008582)(41.012)}{(62.95)(0.388)}=91.27\%$.

Check. "Separation efficiency" is taken in the Schuhmann sense used by Wills (recovery of valuable mineral minus recovery of gangue mineral into the concentrate), which is why part (5) asks for the bornite content first. Treating all non-Cu mass as gangue (an elemental split, $R_g=0.505\%$) would instead give $SE=91.1\%$ – slightly low, because it wrongly counts bornite's own iron and sulphur as gangue.

Question 1 — summary
PartResult
(1) Enrichment ratio106.7
(2) Concentration ratio116.5
(3) Weight % Cu concentrate produced0.858%
(4) Copper recovery to concentrate91.57%
(5) Bornite content of concentrate65.4%
(6) Separation efficiency91.3%
← Paper overview