Effect of Surfactants on the Vacuum Filtration in the Dewatering Process from Iron Concentrate Slurry

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 M. Sc. in Mineral Processing, Processing Affairs, Gol Gohar Mining and Industrial Company

2 Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman

Abstract

One of the ore dressing steps in Gol Gohar Mining and Industrial Company is dewatering from slurry containing 60 weight percent of the iron concentrate. At present, this dewatering step is carrying out by a continuous strip filter, which is a kind of vacuum filter. At the present research the role of ionic and non-ionic surface activators in reducing the moisture, content of the iron ore particles, after filtration, has been investigated. Surface activators used were sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), polyethylene glycol 4000 (PEG4000), sodium dodecyl ether sulfate (SLES) and acetyl tri methyl ammonium bromide (CTAB). In this work amount of 30, 45, 60, 75 and 90 g/ton of the mentioned surfactants were added to the slurry. To evaluate effect of each surfactant, in addition to amount of filter cake humidity, other experiments including filtration kinetics, Zeta potential, contact angle measurement, and FTIR analysis on the samples were carried out. The results showed that SDS and SLES anionic surface activators have a significant effect on the reducing cake moisture. The best results obtained at 75 g /ton of the surfactants and the average moisture reduction in filter cake obtained about 2%. On the other hand, polyethylene glycol 4000 had a negligible effect, 0.5%, on the final cake humidity. The results from addition of acetyl tri methyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) showed that using this chemical reagent does not help to the slurry dehumidification.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

 

[1]        Dahlstrom, D. A. (1985). Thickening, filtering, Drying, SEM Mineral Processing Handbook, Vol 1, Section 9, N.L.Weiss group, New York.
[2]        Dahlstrom, D. A., & Emmett, R. C. (1985). Solid liquid Separation, SEM Mineral Processing Handbook, Vol 2, Section 13 (Hydrometallurg), N.L.Weiss group, New York.
[3]        Pears, M. J., & Allen, A. P. (1981). Chemical treatments for optimum filtration performance, proceeding of the Filtech Conference, London, 39-57.
[4]        Krum, W. R. (1995). Cost reduction in slurry dewatering by optimizing addition of chemicals. Aufbereitungs Technik, 36(2), 64-68.
[5]        Schramm, L. L., Stasiukb, E. N., & Marangoni, D. G. (2003). Surfactants and their Applications. Annual Reports Section C (Physical Chemistry), 99: 3-48.
[6]        Koster, R., Burg, B., & Kaiser, M. (1992). Surfactants as dewatering aids for fine grained solid material. Aufbereitungs Technik, 33(5), 267-273.
[7]        Mwaba, C. C. (1991). Surfactant-enhanced dewatering of graphite and hematite suspensions. Minerals Engineering, 4(1), 49-62.
 [8]       Besra, L., Sengupta, D. K., & Roy, S. K. (2003). Influence of surfactants on flocculation and dewatering of kaolin suspensions by cationic polyacrylamide (PAM-C) flocculant. Separation and Purification Technology, 30, 251-264,
[9]        Asmatulu, A. (2008). Improving the dewetability characteristics of hydrophobic fine particles by air bubble entrapments. Powder Technology, 186,
184–188.
[10]      Liu, L., Wu, F., & Tan, W. (2016).Effect of cetyl trimethyl ammoniumbromide on shrinkage cracks in filter cakes during pressure filtration of iron ore concentrate. Powder Technology, 297, 239–246.
[11] Patra, A. S., Makhija, D., Mukherjee, A. K., Tiwari, R., Sahoo, C. R., & Mohanty, B. D. (2016). Improved dewatering of iron ore fines by the use of surfactants. Powder Technology, 287, 43–50.
Iranian Chemical Engineering Journal
Volume 22, Issue 129
November and December 2023
Pages 39-49

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics