Impact of Recirculating Mining Process Water on the Flotation Performance of a Sedimentary Phosphate Ore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water is one of the scarce resources in the world and the mining industry like many other sectors is expected to discretionally utilise this resource sustainably. It was on the premise of adding to the body of knowledge related to water sustainability and flotation performance that an investigation was prompted to evaluate the impact of recirculating mining process water on the flotation performance of a sedimentary phosphate ore. A series of flotation locked cycle tests were conducted with the objective to simulate recycling process water, which by default modifies the water chemistry and influences flotation performance. The laboratory flotation results showed that recycling process water in the laboratory scale did not show significantly noticeable influence on P2O5 grade and recovery performance. A saleable product of 33.27% P2O5 grade at reasonable average recovery of 65% was achievable. Water analyses revealed that there was an increase in total dissolved solids [452 to 846mg/L], electrical conductivity [662 m/cm to 1025 m/cm], CaCO3 [146 to 304mg/L], sodium [57.7 to 76.6mg/L], chloride [100.7 to 109.7mg/L] and magnesium [10.4 to12.6mg/L] after circulating the process water for 15 cycles. The results achieved however confirmed the importance of water quality and understanding process water chemistry in flotation processes. The compounding salts and inorganic elements in the water necessitate the need for water clarifiers for process water prior to being recycled to the flotation process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".