Iranian Journal of Materials Science & Engineering Vol. 17, No.

1, March 2020

RESEARCH PAPER

Investigating the First-Order Flotation Kinetics Models for Iranian

Gilsonite
A. Bahrami, F. Kazemi* and J. Abdolahi Sharif
* fatemeh.kazemi70@[Link]
Received: May 2019 Revised: August 2019 Accepted: December 2019

Department of Mining Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.

DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 

Abstract: Kinetic models are the most important instruments to predict and evaluate the performance of flotation cir-
cuits. To determine the kinetic order and rate of flotation of a gilsonite sample, flotation experiments were carried out
in both rougher and cleaner stages. Experiments conducted using the combinations of petroleum-MIBC, gas oil-pine
oil, and one test without any collector and frother. Five first-order kinetic models were applied to the data obtained
from the flotation tests by using the Matrix Laboratory software. Statistical analysis showed that the classic first-or-
der model perfectly matched the rougher and cleaner results performed using the petroleum-MIBC combination. The
kinetic constants (k) were calculated as 0.04 (s-1) and 0.01 (s-1) for the rougher and cleaner, respectively. Rougher and
cleaner
Thetestsflotation
without collector
operation and frother
and alsoassociated
matched withkinetics
the modified gas/solid adsorption and arerectangular models
The
with the flotation
k values operation
of 0.05 and(sits
(s-1), and 0.01 its
-1 The
The flotation
associated
flotation
), respectively. kinetics
The
and
operation
operation thermodynamics
and
and its
and between
relationship associated
thermodynamics
its associated
flotation rate are
arbitrary
kinetics
kinetics
arbitrary
constant, and
and
maximum
phenomena.
phenomena. The
thermodynamics
The ar
thermodynamics ar
number
combustible
number of particles
recovery, and particle
of particles that permanently
sizepermanently
that were also number adhere
studied.
number of to the
particles
The particles
adhere
of results
to theshowedbubble
that
thatthat
bubble surface,
permanently
the cause
maximumcause
permanently
surface, adhere the
flotation
adhere recovery
torecovery
the bubble
combustible
theto the to
bubble be
to be time-
surface,
surface, caus
time- caus
dependent.
recovery
dependent. Since
and flotation rate the
Since wereflotation
the flotation process
obtained with an
process is
is theoretically
intermediate
dependent.
dependent. particle
Since
theoretically
Since theconsidered
size both in the
flotation
theflotation
considered
flotation as aa time-rate
asrougher
process
process isand
is recovery
cleaner
theoretically
time-rate
theoretically
recovery process,
process, flotation
flotation
considered
considered as
as aa time-ra
flotation
time-ra
processes. The combustible
kinetics can be recovery and
described flotation
using the rate in the rougher
mathematical models processincorporate
which were higher thanboth that
the inrecovery
the and rate
kinetics
cleaner flotationcan be described using the
process.
kinetics
kinetics can
mathematical be described
can be described
models which using the mathematical
using incorporate
the mathematical both the models
models which
recovery
which incorporat
andincorporat
rate
functions
functions [1, [1, 2]. 2]. Various
Various kinetic kinetic models functions
models
functions are suggested
[1,
are [1, 2]. Various
suggested
2]. to
to explain
Various explainkineticflotation
kinetic models recovery
flotation
models are suggested
recovery
are from
suggested
from to different
to explainaspects.
different
explain flotation rec
aspects.
flotation rec
Therefore,
Keywords: Flotation, the models
Kinetics
Therefore, the models are complementary are
models, complementary
Gilsonite, Collector,
Therefore,
Therefore, to each
Frother.
the
to the
eachmodels other.
models
other. are The
are initial
complementary
Thecomplementary batch
initial batch flotation flotation
to each model
to eachmodelother.
[Link] was
The reported
initial
Thereported by
batch
initial batch by floflo
Garcia-Zuniga [3].
Garcia-Zuniga [3]. In this work, the In this work, the differential
Garcia-Zuniga
Garcia-Zuniga
differential equation equation
[3]. In
[3]. In this was
this
waswork, work,applied
applied the to
the to the
differential
differential kinetics
the kinetics of
equation
equation chemical
of chemical was reaction
applied
was applied
reaction to
to the
the
to describe the process
to describe the process of batch flotation. of batch flotation.
to describe
to describe The
The thegeneral
the
general process
process form
form ofof
of of
batch
batch the
the model model
flotation.
flotation. can
canThe be
The written
generalas:
be written
general as:
form of
form of the
the model
model cancan
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

1. INTRODUCTION ter [4] for the experimental and industrial data in

𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) = −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 which
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) C is the𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛concentration of particles, t is time,
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)
The flotation operation and
= its
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 associated kinet- = −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
= −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑rate
𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 1
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸.or-
1
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 k 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
is flotation constant, and n is the kinetic
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
ics and thermodynamics are arbitrary phenomena. 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
der. Imaizumi and Inoue [5] put forward a new
The number of particles that permanently adhere flotation model in which the flotation ratedata
isthe
a con-
to the bubble
The
The above
above equation
equation
surface, cause
was
was the
suggested
suggested
recovery
by
The
The
byto
Arbiter
above
Arbiter
above
be
[4]
[4] for
equation
equation for the
thewas
was experimental
suggested
suggested by
experimental and
by
and industrial
Arbiter
Arbiter
industrial[4]
[4] for
for
datathein which C
which
inexperimental
experimental C is
is theand
and ind
the ind
concentration of particles, t is time, k is
concentration tinuous
flotation of ratedistribution
constant,
particles, t is of
and
time,the
n kflotation
is isthe rates
kinetic
flotation of hetero-
order.
rate Imaizumi
constant, and and
n is the
time-dependent. concentration Since of flotation tprocess
theparticles, is time, iskthe-
concentration
is flotation
geneous of rate particles,
constant,
materials t isinand time,
the ncell.
kisisthe flotation
kinetic rate
order. constant,
Imaizumi andand n is the
Inoue
Inoue [5]
[5] put
put forward
forward aa new
new flotation
Inoue
flotation
Inoue model
[5]
model
[5] in
put
put
in which
forward
forward
which the
the a
a flotation
new
new
flotation flotation
flotation rate
rate is
model
is
modelaaLynch et al.
continuous
in which
continuous
in which
showed
distribution
the
distribution
the flotation
flotation of
of the
rate
rate
the is
is aa cc
oretically considered as a time-rate recovery pro- that some of the kinetic models did not fit well with
flotation rates
rates of heterogeneous materials flotation inrates
the cell. Lynch
Lynch et al.
al. (1981) showed that
[Link] of [Link]
cess, flotation flotation kinetics ofcanheterogeneous
be described using materials
flotation the inrates the of
the of
cell. heterogeneous
heterogeneous
experimental etdata materials
(1981)
materials
as someshowed ofin the
inthe cell.
theminerals
that Lynch
some
Lynchfloat of et
theal. (1981)
(1981) sho
kinetic sho
mathematical models
modelsmodels did not
did notwhich fit well
fit well with
incorporate the
with the experimentalexperimental
models
both
models the did data
did faster
not
not
datafit as
fitas some
well
well
some with
with of
of the
the
the
the minerals
experimental
minerals
experimental float
float faster
data
data
fasteras
as than
some
than
some the
of
the
of others
the
others
the [6].
minerals
minerals
[6]. fl
fl
than the others [6]. By integrating Eq. 1, the
its associated
The flotation
kinetics
recoveryByoperation
and
By and thermodynamics
and
integrating its
rate functions associated
Eq. 1, are
the kinetics
arbitrary
first-order and
By phenomena.
kinetic thermodynamics
integrating equation The
Eq. can
1, are
be
the arbitrary
written
first-order as: phenomena.
kinetic equation The can be written as:
integrating Eq. 1,[1, the2].first-order
VariousBy kinetic
kinetic
integrating first-order
equation [Link] 1, the kinetic
be first-order
written equationas: kineticcan be writtencan
equation as: be written as:
ermanently
numberadhere
of models
particles
to the arethat
bubble
suggested permanently
surface,to explain cause
adhere thetorecovery
flotation the bubble
recovery to besurface,time- cause the recovery to be time-
n process
dependent.
is theoretically
Sincedifferent
from theconsidered
flotation [Link]
as a time-rate is theoretically recovery
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 considered
process,
are flotation as a time-rate recovery process, flotation 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 2
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)Therefore,
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) =
= 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(0)𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 the models −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(0)𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) = = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(0)𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(0)𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 2
ing the
kinetics
mathematical
cancomplementary
be described
models which using incorporate
the mathematical
to each other. The initial batch flo- both the
models
recovery which and incorporate
rate both the recovery and rate
etic models
functions tation
are [1,
suggested model
2]. VariousTherefore, was
to explainkineticreportedmodelsbyare
flotation Garcia-Zuniga
recovery suggested from to [3].
different
explain aspects.
flotation
Therefore, recovery the from
recovery different
ofmineral aspects.
the valuable mineral
Therefore, the the recovery
recovery of of thethe valuable Therefore,
valuable
Therefore, mineral
mineral theis
the calculated
isrecovery
recovery
calculated of using
of the
the valuable
using the
the following
valuable followingmineralequation:
is
is calculated
calculated using
equation: using the the followi
followi
mplementary
Therefore, In
to the this
eachmodels work,
other. are the differential
Thecomplementary
initial batch flotation equation
to eachmodel was applied
[Link] Thereported is calculated
initial batch using
by flotation model was reported bythe following equation:
ork, the
Garcia-Zunigato the
differential kinetics
equation
[3]. In this was ofwork,
chemical
applied the to reaction
differential
the𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒kinetics to equation
describe
of chemical the
was applied
reaction =to11the− 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒kinetics of chemical reaction 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 3
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) = =The 1
1− 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 form of the 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)
−general 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) = −
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 3
ch flotation.
to describe process
Thethe general of
process batch
form of of flotation.
batch
the flotation.
model canThe be written
general as: form of the model can be written as:
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

model can be written as:

According
According to to Eq. Eq. 3, 3, recovery
recovery is is an exponential
anAccording
According
exponential to
to Eq. function
Eq.
function
According3, of
of totime.
3, recovery
recovery [Link]
time. is Negative
3,an exponential
Negative
anrecovery
exponential exponential
is anfunction
exponential
function functions
functions
exponential of [Link]
of time. Negative
Negative ee
become
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) zero at𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 infinity, so the concentration of particles in the kinetic equation never reaches zero, and the
=zero−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑at infinity, so the concentration zero
zero at
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸.at
of infinity,
function
1 infinity,
particles so
in of
so the
thetime.
the concentration
concentration
kinetic Negativeequation of
of particles
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸.exponential
1 particles
never reachesin the
in thezero,
functions kinetic
kinetic equation
andequation
the
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 recovery approaches maximum value. recovery This value
approaches
become is calledmaximum
zero infinite
at recovery,
value.
infinity, so This
the and by
value incorporating
is called
concentration infinite
of it in Eq.
recovery, aa
recovery approaches maximum value. recovery This approaches
value is called maximum infinitevalue. recovery, Thisand value
by isincorporating
called infinite it in
recovery,
Eq.
The 3, it
above changes equation to [Link] 4. suggested by3, Arbi-
it changes particles
to Eq. 4. in the kinetic equation never reaches zero,
gestedThe
by Arbiter [4] for 3,
above equation the itexperimental
was changes
suggested to Eq. byand4. industrial
Arbiter [4] for 3,
data itexperimental
thein changes
which CtoisEq. the
and4. industrial data in which C is the
is time, k is flotation
concentration of rate
particles, t is time,
constant, and n kisisthe flotation
kinetic rate
order.
constant,
Imaizumiandand n is the kinetic order. Imaizumi and
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ �1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 � −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 4
theis∞ a continuous distribution of the 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 4 11
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 �1 − � 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 =
= 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ �1
�1 −
− 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 �
�
flotation
Inouemodel
[5] put
in forward
which the a new
flotation
flotation
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 rate ismodel
∞ a continuous
in which distribution the flotationof 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 rate
ous materials
flotation in
rates
the ofcell.
heterogeneous
Lynch et al. materials(1981) showed in the that [Link] [Link]
(1981) showed that some of the kinetic
the experimental
models did not datafitaswell
some
Eq. with
4 ofcalled
is the minerals
experimental
standard float
or data faster
classic asEq.
than
some the
of
flotation others
the minerals
equation [6]. floatisfaster
which the than the others [6]. which is the
Eq. 4 is called standard or classicEq. 44 is
is called
flotation called
equation standard
standardwhichor the most
orisclassic
classic most common
flotation
flotation
common and
and appropriate
equation
equation appropriate
which is the kinetic
most
most com
kinetic com
-order
Bykinetic
integrating
equation
Eq. can
1, the
be first-order
model written
[7]. A as: kinetic
great equation
number of can be
flotation written
model [7].models
[7]. A greatas: have
great been
number proposed
of flotation to
flotationinvestigate the
models have
have flotation
been kinetic
proposed to inv
inv
model [7]. A great number of flotation model models
A have number
been proposed
of to investigate
models the been
flotationproposed
kineticto
 Therefore,
e valuable theisrecovery
mineral of
calculated theflotation
using
The valuable mineralequation:
the following
operationisand
calculated using thekinetics
its associated following
andequation:
thermodynamics are arbitrary phenomena. The
number of particles that permanently adhere to the bubble surface, cause the recovery to be time-
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) = 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒dependent. Since the flotation process
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 3 is theoretically considered 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸.
as a3time-rate recovery process, flotation
A. Bahrami, et. al
kinetics can be described using the mathematical models which incorporate both the recovery and rate
y is anAccording to Eq.
exponential functions
3, recovery
function of an[1,exponential
2]. Various
[Link] Negative kinetic
function
exponential models are
of [Link]
functions suggested
Negative to explainfunctions
exponential flotation recovery
become from different aspects.
zero at
centration of infinity,
particles so
in the Therefore,
the concentrationthe
kinetic equation models are
of particles complementary
in thezero,
never reaches kinetic to each
andequation
the other.
never reaches zero, and the model was reported by
The initial batch flotation
and the recovery approaches [3].
Garcia-Zuniga maximum
In thisvalue.
work,This ing the first-order
the differential kinetic
equation was equation.
applied Kinetic models
to the
recovery
m value. This approaches
value maximum
valueisiscalled
called infinite
infinitevalue. This(R∞),
recovery,
recovery value
and by is
and called infinite
incorporating
by incor- itcanrecovery,
in Eq.
be used and
to by incorporating
characterize the it inkinetics
flotation
of chemical reaction
[Link].
to describe the process of batch flotation. The general form of the model can be written as:
3, it changesporating
to Eq. 4.
it in Eq. 3, it changes to Eq. 4. The flotation rate constant f (k) is a function of both
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) the size and hydrophobicity of particles. Though
−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
� 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ �1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 � = −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 4 the more commonly used 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸.distributions
4 are Delta𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 1
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
function as well as rectangular, Kelsall and Gamma
Eq. 4 is The called standard or classic
above equation was suggested by Arbiter flotation models, [4]there
for the is experimental
no agreementand in the literature
industrial dataonin which C is the
Eq. 4 is called
lassic flotation equation standard
equation which which or classic
the most
is the
concentration flotation
mostcommon common
of equation
particles, andtappropri-
and is which
appropriate
time, k isthe is the most
kinetic common
distribution
flotation and appropriate
function which
rate constant, and n is betterkinetic
characterize
the kinetic order. Imaizumi and
model [7].
of flotation ate
modelsA great kinetic model
have number
been [7].
of
proposed A great
flotation to number
models
investigate of
have flotation
the been
flotation
Inoue [5] put forward a new flotation model in which the flotation rate is a continuous the
proposed floatability
kinetic to distribution
investigate the [14].
flotation It is clear
kinetic that var-
distribution of the
ls have behavior models
[8, 6]. been
conveniently have been
Thesedefined
models
flotation proposed
inhaveratesconveniently
three to
categories:
of investigate
heterogeneous the
beenempirical
(1) flo-
defined
materials ious
in flotation
three
models,
in the categories: models
cell. Lynch (1) have
empirical
et al. been developed
(1981) showed models, that the
on some of the kinetic
d (3) (2) kinetic tation[6].
probabilistic
models kinetic
models, behavior
Thismodels and (3)
paper did
will[8,
kinetic
not 6].fitThese
consider models
wellonly models
with [6]. the This
conventional have paperbasis
experimental willof
kinetic theasprocesses
consider
data some and
the sub-processes
onlyofconventional
minerals kinetic float occurring
faster than the others [6].
models. conveniently been defined in three categories:
By integrating Eq. 1, the first-order kinetic equation can be written as: (1) in flotation. Various approaches have been adopted
empirical models, (2) probabilistic models, and (3) to quantify the process. Flotation models based on
kinetic models [6]. This 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) paper=will consider
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶(0)𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 only kinetics have prevailed over almost all the flotation𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 2
conventional kinetic models. conditions regardless of the ore type and ore char-
ble 1. List of the common kinetic
The kinetic Table
models
study [Link]
[5,
the of the common
7,flotation
9-11] process kinetic in- models [5, 7,as
acteristics 9-11]
well asusing
flotation cell configurations.
Therefore, the recovery of the valuable mineral is calculated the following equation:
Series cludes all the parameters affecting the concentrate It may be concluded that the classical first-order
Model Model Equation−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 can be Equation
numberproduction rate. Concentrate 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡) =production 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 kinetic model is comparatively a better model and𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 3
defined in differentClassic
ways,
first order
but in mineral process- can be utilized to optimize the flotation process as
c first order model1 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ (1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘model
) 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ (1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 )
ing, it is introduced as recovery versus
According to Eq. 3, recovery is an exponential function of time [7]. it is applicable to both batch
time. Negativeand continuous
exponential flota-
functions become
By combining the separation time with recovery, tion processes
zero at infinity, so the concentration of particles in the kinetic equation never reaches zero, and the with a high confidence level [15].
two major 2 kinetic curves are produced which 2 are This Thevaluefirst-order models can be usedand to bydescribe
recovery approaches maximum value. is called infinite recovery, incorporating it in Eq.
called process and kinetic
3, it changes to Eq. 4. curves [12, 13]. To ob- most mineral flotation processes, while there is
tain the flotation kinetic constant and its influence also evidence that the non-integral-order equation
on the flotation circuits, a lot of studies have −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 been is capable of representing the kinetic characteris-
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ �1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 � 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸. 4
conducted. Drzymala et al.𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 carried out a laborato- tics of the batch flotation process [16]. Guanghua et
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

ry-scale research on the flotation of different ma- al. proposed a new kinetic model and compared it
terials and produced Eq. 4 is some called graphs standard to orpresent
classicthe withequation
flotation four common which kinetic
is themodels most common[17]. The and kinetic
appropriate kinetic
results of themodel separation [7]. process
A great [13]. number The of separa-
flotationmodel models evaluation
have been showed
proposed that the author’s model
to investigate the flotation kinetic
tion diagramsbehavior included[8, two 6].dimensional
These models withhave two conveniently entirely fitted been thedefined
experimental
in three data. Albijanic(1)
categories: et al.
empirical models,
parameters, one (2) of them is themodels,
probabilistic flotationand time (3)and kineticfocused modelson[6]. the This
potential
paper application
will consider of kinetic
onlymod-conventional kinetic
the other is [Link]. Based on the results of this els to variable pulp chemical conditions [18]. The
research, the kinetic constant is derived by integrat- flotation tests were performed on a wide range of

Table 1. List of the 1.

Table common kinetic
List of models [5, kinetic
the common 7, 9-11] models [5, 7, 9-11]
Series Series Model Model Equation Equation
number number
1 1 Classic
Classic first order first order model
model 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ (1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 )

1 11
2 2 22 Klimpel Klimpel
Klimpel
model
Klimpel model
model
model 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘2
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅= =𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 �1�1 �1
−−− (1(1 (1 1−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
− 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒− −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 )�
𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒−𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
)�)� −𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
2 Klimpel model 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = ∞ 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
∞ �1 −− 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒(1 −
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
∞𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 )�
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
1 1
3 3 33 Fully
Fully
Fully mixed
mixed
mixed reactor
reactor model
model
reactor model 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅= =𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅�1
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 �1−− �−�� 1 �� ��1
3 Fully mixed reactor
Fullymodel 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = ∞
∞�1 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡��
mixed reactor model 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞1�1
∞
1+−
+𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡� ��
+
1 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘1 + 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
4 44 Improved
Improved
Improved gas/solid
gas/solid adsorption
adsorption
gas/solid adsorption model
model
model 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅= 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 =𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅�∞�� 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 � �� 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
4 Improved
4 gas/solid adsorption
Improved model
gas/solid adsorption model𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = ∞ 11𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘1=
+ + +
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
�
∞𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 �
1 + 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
Second-orderSecond-order
Second-order
Second-order model
model withmodel with
with
rectangular
model with rectangular
rectangular
distri-
rectangular 1 11
5 5 55 Second-order model 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅=
with rectangular =∞
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
�1
∞�1 �1
−−− �𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙�𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙�𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙(1 1++
(1
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙(1 + 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)��
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)��
5 distribution
distribution
butiondistributionof
of flotabilityof flotability
flotability
of flotability 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅∞ 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 −
�1
∞𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 �𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)��
(1 + 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡)��
distribution of flotability 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡

12
TheThe
The kinetic
kinetic
kinetic study
study
study of
ofofthethe
the flotation
flotation
flotation process
process
process includes
includes
includes all
allall
the the
the parameters
parameters
parameters affecting
affecting
affectingthethe
the concentrate
concentrate
concentrate production
production
production
The kinetic study of the flotation process includes all the parameters affecting the concentrate productio
rate.
rate. Concentrate
[Link]
Concentrate production
production
production cancan be defined
canbebedefined
defined in different
inindifferent
different ways,
ways,
ways,but but in mineral
butininmineral
mineral processing,
processing,
processing, it is introduced
it itisisintroduced
introduced as
asas
rate. Concentrate production can be defined in different ways, but in mineral processing, it is introduced a
recovery
recovery
recovery versus
versus
versus time
time
time [7].
[7].
[7].ByBy combining
combining thethe separation
separation time
time with
with recovery,
recovery, twotwo major
major kinetic
kinetic curves
curves areare
recovery versus timeBy combining
[7]. the
By combining separation
the separationtime with
time recovery, two
with recovery, major kinetic
two major curves
kinetic are
curves ar
 Iranian Journal of Materials Science & Engineering Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2020

chemical conditions. The results showed that The 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Gamma and Kelsall model slightly better-predicted
flotation recovery than first-order model with Dirac 2.1. Materials
delta function and Rectangular model for both
fixed and variable pulp chemical conditions. The Asphaltite or gilsonite is a natural bitumen which
flotation kinetics models for variable pulp chemical consists of complex organic compounds. Gilsonite
conditions might be beneficial in the optimization is a black mineral-like obsidian which is brittle
of flotation circuits. and is usually found as a brown micronized pow-
Gilsonite is a natural bitumen that consists of der [19]. The sample investigated in this study was
complex organic compounds, and the flotation obtained from Geraveh mine of the Kermanshah
process is one of the methods for concentration of province in Iran. According to the mineralogical
gilsonite. Due to various usage of gilsonite, a few studies, in addition to bitumen, sulfur, non-sulfur,
studies have been done to determine the flotation and shale particles were detected as impurities (Fig.
parameters of gilsonite. The present study is con- 1); Silica, shale, and silt particles were dispersed in
ducted to determine the kinetic order and param- the bitumen background, and fine cracks were filled
eters of the flotation process performed on a gil- with calcite as a secondary mineral. The main tail-
sonite sample obtained from Kermanshah province ing materials in the gilsonite sample were carbonate
in Iran. In addition, the differences in the flotation (calcite and dolomite) and shale compounds, marn,
kinetics of various size fractions in the rougher and sulfates-like gypsum, fine silica, and opac. The ini-
cleaner stages were discussed. Finally, based on tial ash content of the sample was 35%. Results of
the calculated values for the flotation constant and sieve analysis and the related ash content are listed
the infinite recovery, the parameters of the flotation in Fig. 2. Also, Table 2 shows the chemical charac-
processing line were calculated. terization of the gilsonite sample.
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

Fig. 1. Photomicrographs of PPL mode of the gilsonite (Car: Carbonate, Bit: Bitumen) (samples from Kermanshah province)

35

30

25

20
percent

15

10

0
<75 106-75 250-106 500-250 850-500
weight % 28.96 13.1 18.75 30.3 7.26
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

Ash % 20.2 15 18.3 22.3 24.2

Size (μm)

[Link].
2. Ash content
1 1
2. Ash contentofofthe
thegilsonite samplein in
gilsonite sample each
each sizesize fraction
fraction

1. In order to determine the amount of ash in a gilsonite sample, 3-4 g of powdered gilsonite particles were burnt in a furnace at 700 ° C for
90 minutes
Table 2. Typical properties and elemental compositions of the gilsonite sample
Test Result Test method
13
Moisture content, wt% ≤3 ASTM-D3173 2
Fixed carbon, wt% 29 ASTM-D3172 3
Specific gravity 25°c 1.11 ASTM-D3289 4
Color in mass Black -
Color in streak powder Brown -
 A. Bahrami, et. al

Table 2. Typical properties and elemental compositions of the gilsonite sample

Test Result Test method

Moisture content, wt% ≤3 ASTM-D31732
Fixed
2.2. Flotation carbon, wt%
Tests 2.2. Flotation Tests29 ASTM-D31723
Specific gravity 25°c 1.11 ASTM-D32894
Color in mass Black -
The flotation reagents were
Color in streak powder petroleum
The flotation
and gas oil
reagents
as
Browncollectors,
were petroleum
MIBC and
and pine
- gasoil
oilas
asfrothers
collectors,
dissolved
MIBC in and p
tap water. The rougher tests weretap conducted
[Link]
Element The
usingrougher
three reagent
tests were combinations.
conducted usingFirstly,
three
petroleum-MIBC;
reagent combinatio
secondly, gasCarbon,
oil-pinewt%oil; thirdly,
secondly,
test without
gas oil-pine
collector
74 oil;
and thirdly,
[Link]
Thewithout
rougher
ASTM-D52915 collector
tests were
and performed
frother. The
using two pulp densities
Hydrogen, wt%with 10% using
and two
25%pulpsoliddensities
[Link]
7.1 Moreover,
10% and the25%
concentrate
ASTM-D5291 solid contents.
obtained
Moreover,
from thethe c
former was subjected to a cleaner former
Nitrogen, wt% stage. was subjected 0.67 to a cleaner [Link]-D5291
Rougher experiments
Oxygen, wt%were conducted
Rougherusing 4.5 L
experiments
a 3.1Denver
were D12
conducted
flotation
using 4.5 La Denver
cellawith
ASTM-D5291 1800 rpmD12agitation
flotation c
rate. To perform flotation tests, after
Sulphur, wt%
rate. preparing
To perform theflotation
4
feed pulp tests,
withafter
defined
preparing
solid percent,
Loco(s, Analyzer)
the feed apulp
collector
with defined
was
added to the cell and mixed for 2 added min; afterward,
to the cellfrother
and mixed was also min; afterward,
for 2added and mixed frotherfor another 30 [Link]
was also Then and
the air valve was opened and frothing the air wasvalve
donewas 200 s. During
foropened and frothingthe operation,
was donethe forpulp s. During
200 level in thethe
cell
opera
was kept constant by replacing thewas concentrate
kept constantwith tap by replacing
water. the concentrate with tap water.
2.2. Flotation Tests obtained from the tests with 10% solid density, but
In order to compare the kineticsInparameters order to compareof different the granulation
kinetics parametersfractionsofbetweendifferenttwo granulation
flotation'sfrac
no collector and frother were applied. The final
processes of rougher and
The flotation reagents were petroleum and gas cleaner, processes
the operational
of rougher
parameters and cleaner,
of the cleaner
the operational
experiments parameters
were like
of the
rougher.
cleaner e
products of all the experiments were divided into
The cleaner
oil as collectors, MIBC feedandwaspine the concentrate The obtained
oil as frothers cleanersixfeedfrom
partswasthe the
tests
according concentrate
withto 10% obtained
solid density,
the frothing from but
periods. the0-20,
no
tests
collector
with 10% andsolid
frother were applied. The
dissolved in tap water. The rougher tests were con- final products
frother of
were
all the
applied.
experiments The final were
products
20-40, 40-60, 60-80, 80-120, and 120-200 s. divided of into
all the
six experiments
parts accordingwereto divided
the
ducted usingfrothingthreeperiods.
reagent0-20, 20-40, 40-60,
combinations. frothing
60-80,periods.
Firstly, 80-120, 0-20,
and 120-200
Furthermore, 20-40, s. products
all40-60,
the 60-80, 80-120, and 120-200 s.
were subjected
petroleum-MIBC;
Furthermore, secondly,
all thegasproductsoil-pine were
oil;Furthermore,
third-
subjected to
allsieve
to sieve theanalysisproducts
analysis using were
using
850,subjected
850,
500, 500,
250,to106,
250,
sieve106,
andanalysis
75and 75usingmesh850,
ly, test without
sieves, collector
and all the andfractions
frother. The wererougher
sieves,
weighed andmesh
and sieves,
all analyzed
the fractions and all
for their
were theashfractions
weighed
contents.
andwereAfterweighed
analyzedobtaining
for their
theashashcon
tests werecontent,
performed using two pulp densities
the flotation recovery wascontent, with
calculated and analyzed
the according
flotation recovery for their
to the Eq. wasash contents. After obtaining
5. calculated according to the Eq. 5.
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

10% and 25% solid contents. Moreover, the con- the ash content, the flotation recovery was calculat-
centrate obtained from the former was subjected to ed according to the Eq. 5.
a cleaner stage.
Rougher experiments
𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (100 − 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (100 − 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 )
%𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 =were conducted using a %𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = Eq. 5
4.5 L Denver D12 flotation𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (100
cell with−a 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1800
𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 ) rpm 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (100 − 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 )
agitation rate. To perform flotation tests, after
preparing the feed pulp with defined solid per- where, Wc is the concentrate weight, Ac is the ash
where, W
cent, a collector c isadded
was the concentrate
to the cell weight,and where,mixed Wcthe
Ac is is the
ash concentrate
content content
of the concentrateof theweight, andAWf
concentrate
c is the
andand
Afash Wfcontent
are Af of
andfeed
the arethe
theconcentra
feed
weight and the ash content
for 2 min; afterward, frother was also added and of the feed,
weight respectively.
and the ash content of the feed, respectively.
weight and the ash content of the feed, respectively.
mixed for another 30 s. Then the air valve was
opened and frothing was done for 200 s. During 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
the operation, the pulp level in the cell was kept
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
constant by replacing the concentrate with tap 3.1. Determination of the Kinetic Order of the
water. Rougher and Cleaner Tests
In order to compare the kinetics parameters of
different 3.1.
granulation fractions
Determination of the between
Kinetictwo Order flota-
3.1. Determination
of the RougherThereofand arethetwo Cleaner
Kineticways to specify
Order
Tests of the the flotation
Rougher andki-
Cleaner Tests
tion’s processes of rougher and cleaner, the opera- netic: (1) obtaining the graph of linear kinetic equa-
tional parameters of the cleaner experiments were tions and (2) investigating the dependence of con-
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

like rougher. The cleaner feed was

There are two ways to specify theThere the concentrate flotation centration
are kinetic:
two ways (1)to on the initial
obtaining
specify theconcentration
the flotation
graph ofkinetic: value
linear (1)[20].
kinetic
obtaining
equationsthe and
graph o
(2) investigating the dependence of (2)concentration
investigatingon thethe dependence
initial concentration
of concentration
value [20].
on the initial concentration
TheMethod
2. Standard Test recovery diagrams
for Moisture of the Sample
in the Analysis rougher The recovery
experiments
of Coal and Cokediagrams using of different
the rougherpulp densities,
experiments collectors,
using different
and frothers
pulp den
3. Standard Practice for Proximate Analysis of Coal and Coke
are presented in table 3. According are presented
to these graphs,
in table
4. Standard Test Method for Density of Semi-Solid and Solid Asphalt Materials (Nickel Crucible Method) achieving
3. According 50% to
recovery
these graphs,
in the petroleum-MIBC
achieving 50% reco
5. Standard Test Methods for Instrumental Determination
experiments for both 10 and 25% experiments of Carbon, Hydrogen,
pulp densitiesfor and
was Nitrogen
both2010 s. Also,
in Petroleum
and 25% a 50% Products and
pulprecovery Lubricants
densitiesinwas 20 s. Also,
the absence of collector
a 50% recov
and frother was obtained in 20 s. and Also, frother
the halfwastime obtained
in the in gas s. Also,oil
20oil-pine thetest
halffortime
the in
pulp
thesamples
gas oil-pine
with oil
14
10 and 25% solid content were 10 10andand25 25%s, respectively.
solid contentConsidering were 10 andthe s, respectively.
25results, the petroleum-MIBC
Considering the

6 6
 Iranian Journal of Materials Science & Engineering Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2020

The recovery diagrams of the rougher exper- reactor model, improved gas/solid adsorption mod-
iments using different pulp densities, collectors, el, and rectangular distribution models, the results
and frothers are presented in table 3. According to of the petroleum-MIBC and in the absence of col-
these graphs, achieving 50% recovery in the pe- lector and frother tests at the rougher stage were
troleum-MIBC experiments for both 10 and 25% fitted to the models and the associated parameters
pulp densities was 20 s. Also, a 50% recovery in were calculated. Fig. 3 indicates that the results of
the absence of collector and frother was obtained the petroleum-MIBC experiment perfectly fit the
in 20 s. Also, the half time in the gas oil-pine oil classic model and the results obtained in the ab-
test for the pulp samples with 10 and 25% solid sence of collector and frother match the modified
content were 10 and 25 s, respectively. Consid- gas/solid adsorption model. The calculated param-
ering the results, the petroleum-MIBC test is first eters are presented in Table 4.
order but the gas oil-pine oil test is not. In the next It is mentioned that in fitting the kinetics mod-
section, the kinetic parameters of the gilsonite flo- els, firstly kinetics parameters (R and k) were deter-
tation are derived. mined by the model fit to experimental data using
Considering the classic, Klimpel, fully mixed mathematical software [21].

Table 3. Rougher experiments using petroleum-MIBC, gas oil-pine oil, and in the test absence
of collector and frother with 10 and 25 % pulp densities

Recovery of Tests 20 (s) 40 (s) 60 (s) 80 (s)

10 % pulp density 50 67.35 72.47 77.89
Petroleum - MIBC
25 % pulp density 50 94.98 95.96 98.25
Absence of collector 10 % pulp density 56 67.35 72.47 75.50
and frother 25 % pulp density 56 91.58 94.72 95.96
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

10 % pulp density 63.05 77.41 84.03 86.05

Gas oil – Pine oil
25 % pulp density 38.14 75.87 90.35 94.28
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

Fig. 3. Fitness of the kinetic models to (A) petroleum-MIBC and (B) absence of collector and frother flotation tests

15
 A. Bahrami, et. al

Table 4. Results of the nonlinear regression of the rougher data using first order kinetic models

Models 1 2 3 4 5
R ∞ (%) 80.89 71.78 87.77 91.16 72.51
Test with Oil collector
k (s-1) 0.04 0.09 15.37 0.06 0.15
and MIBC frother
R2 0.99 0.58 0.56 0.42 0.65
R ∞ (%) 86.69 71.85 86.36 82.76 84.64
Test in the absence of
k (s-1) 0.05 0.13 11.50 0.08 0.21
collector and frother
R2 0.81 0.63 0.73 0.99 0.68

The obtained curves indicate that the kinetic kinetic of the petroleum-MIBC test at the cleaner
of the oil-MIBC experiment has high compliance stage also obeys the classic model. Nevertheless,
with the classic first-order model. Nevertheless, the the outcomes of the tests conducted in the absence
outcomes of the control test correlate with the im- of collector and frother in the cleaner stage correlate
proved gas/solid adsorption model. In the rougher with the rectangular distribution model. The kinetic
flotation experiments using the petroleum-MIBC constants and final recovery of the cleaner tests are
combination, the kinetic constant is 0.04 (s-1), 0.01 (s-1) and 90.8% for the petroleum-MIBC, and
the retention time is 200 s, and the recovery is 0.02 (s-1) and 76.63% for the test carried out in the
80.89%. These parameters obtained as 0.08 (%), absence of collector and frother, respectively. The
and 82.76%, respectively, for the test performed in values of the kinetic parameters related to each ki-
the absence of collector and frother. According to netic model are presented in table 5.
table 4, the final recoveries of the petroleum-MIBC Comparison of tables 4 and 5 shows that the in-
test in all of the models are higher than test in the finite recovery and flotation constant values in the
absence of collector and frother. Moreover, the ash cleaner process are less than the rougher process. In
content of the flotation concentrates was 24.56 %, the rougher process, the percentage of solid pulp is
and 26.41%, respectively. So, to attain a gilsonite higher than the cleaner process, also the amount of
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

product with lower ash content, the combination of clay and fine-grained impurities in the pulp of rougher
petroleum-MIBC is proposed for the flotation tests. is higher, which is due to the phenomenon of entrain-
Fig. 4 illustrates the fitting of first-order kinet- ment. Some of them are transferred to the froth zone
ic models on the recovery-time data of the cleaner and enter with the concentrate obtains from the flota-
experiments. The obtained curves indicate that the tion cell. During the cleaner process, due to the low
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

Fig. 4. Fitness of the kinetic models to (a) petroleum-MIBC and (b) absence of collector and frother flotation tests

16
 Iranian Journal of Materials Science & Engineering Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2020

Table 5. Results of the nonlinear regression of the cleaner data using first order kinetic models

Models 1 2 3 4 5
R∞
90.8 73.5 90.08 90.08 72.66
Test with Oil collector (%)
and MIBC frother k (s-1) 0.01 0.03 58.32 0.01 0.03
R2 0.99 0.45 0.41 0.41 0.49
R∞
90.1 80.26 80.26 90.01 76.63
Test in the absence of (%)
collector and frother k (s-1) 0.01 0.02 70.84 0.01 0.02
R2 0.20 0.09 0.37 0.20 0.99

density of pulp, the entrainment of clay particles has tion in the defined time intervals was matched with
significantly decreased. Grade of the cumulative con- five first-order kinetic models, and the final results
centrate (concentrate produced at 0 to 200 seconds) are presented in Fig. 5. Furthermore, the amount
gained in the rougher and cleaner stages using oil- of the flotation constant, infinite recovery, and cor-
MIBC experiments are 75.44% and 80.8%, respec- relation coefficient of each model are calculated
tively. Also, these values for the test without collector and presented in table 7. The maximum recovery
and frother are 73.59% and 76.68%, respectively. of all the models increases by decreasing the par-
ticle size. This trend continues to the -250+106
3.2. Effect of Particle Size on the Flotation Kinetic µm fraction, then decreases for -106+75 µm and
elevates again for the -75 µm size fraction. These
3.2.1 Rougher Stage results indicates that the maximum flotation rate
constant was also obtained using an intermediate
The recovery-time graphs of the flotation exper- particle size. The results were consistent with those
iments using different size fractions are depicted in of previous studies [22, 23-2].
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

table 6. As time passes, the recovery increases and It is well known that particle size is an import-
then approaches a constant value. The highest re- ant parameter in the flotation process, and the effi-
covery is achieved in -250+106 µm fraction that ciency of the froth flotation is typically limited to a
indicates the maximum recovery is obtained for the relatively narrow particle size range [25, 26]. How-
particles with a medium size. Similar results were ever, out of this range, the recovery drops signifi-
reported for the coal flotation [22, 23-2]. cantly, whether it is at the fine or the coarse end of
Flotation is a physicochemical process that trans- the size spectrum [27]. The low combustible recov-
fers hydrophobic particles to the froth phase using air ery of fine particles is mainly because of the poor
bubbles. The process is performed in three phases in- collision and attachment between the fine particles
cluding particle-bubble collision, attachment, and sta- and air bubbles, whereas the poor combustible re-
bility [2, 24-23]. Clearly, the particle size is one of the covery of coarse particles is primarily due to the
most important factors that affect flotation efficiency. high probability of detachment of the coarse parti-
The flotation recovery of each particle size frac- cles from the air bubbles [24, 28-27].

Table 6. Effect of particle size on recovery in the rougher flotation stage using petroleum-MIBC

Size 20 (s) 40 (s) 60 (s) 80 (s) 120 (s) 200 (s)

-850 , +500 10.32 13.77 15.23 16.01 16.38 17.02
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

-500 , +250 11.98 15.4 16.78 17.55 18 18.57

-250 , +106 15.36 19.71 21.44 22.62 23.09 23.55
-106 , +75 3.78 4.88 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3
<75 7.27 10.37 12.34 14.08 15.12 16.19

17
 A. Bahrami, et. al
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

Fig. 5. Fitting the first order kinetic model on the data derived from different size fractions in rougher flotation
(A) -850+500, (B) -500+250, (C) -250+106, (D) -106+75, (E) <75 µm

18
 Iranian Journal of Materials Science & Engineering Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2020

Table 7. Results of the non-linear regression of the rougher data using first order kinetic models

Models 1 2 3 4 5
R ∞ (%) 16.54 25.50 25.50 18.59 19.57
-850+500 µm k (s-1) 0.05 0.11 12.63 0.07 0.19
R2
0.73 0.47 0.47 0.76 0.99
R ∞ (%) 18.01 19.45 20.03 20.03 20.96
-500+250 µm k (s )-1
0.05 0.11 12.63 0.07 0.19
R2
0.76 0.61 0.68 0.58 0.69
R ∞ (%) 23.03 24.84 25.55 25.55 26.72
-250+106 µm k (s )-1
0.05 0.12 12.40 0.08 0.20
R2 0.77 0.60 0.60 0.80 0.99
R ∞ (%) 5.33 5.68 5.77 5.77 5.96
-106+75 µm k (s )-1
0.06 0.16 8.86 0.11 0.30
R2
0.99 0.65 0.80 0.76 0.74
R ∞ (%) 15.92 17.72 19.07 19.07 20.78
<75 µm k (s )-1
0.02 0.05 32.16 0.03 0.06
R2
0.49 0.01 0.06 0.52 0.99

3.2.2 Cleaner Stage Each size fraction in the cleaner stage correlates
with a different kinetic model, and in contrast to
Table 8 shows the recovery-time curves of the the rougher tests, the recovery declines with the
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

cleaner flotation stage using different particle size particle size. This trend continues till -106+75 µm
fractions. Overall, the variation of the flotation fraction and then become ascending.
recovery for different size fractions in the clean- The results suggested that the increases in flota-
er stage is similar to the rougher. The maximum tion rates of coarse and fine particle size fractions
recoveries belong to the -250+106 µm fraction were especially more obvious than those of the in-
size, and -500+250 µm fraction size portions, re- termediate particle size fractions. It also indicates
spectively that are similar to the rougher stage. The that the floatability and flotation of gilsonite parti-
results of the multivariable nonlinear regression on cles are determined by many factors, such as coal
the cleaner flotation of the applied size fractions are surface properties, particle size, pulp density, and
presented in Fig. 6 and table 9. agent concentration [1, 29].

Table 8. Effect of particle size on the recovery of cleaner flotation using petroleum-MIBC

Size 20 (s) 40 (s) 60 (s) 80 (s) 120 (s) 200 (s)

-850 , +500 2.44 5.86 8.96 13.86 18.94 27.59
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

-500 , +250 6.62 12.32 15.32 19.62 22.43 25.06

-250 , +106 14.4 21.67 24.47 26.59 27.94 28.84
-106 , +75 3.35 5.65 5.65 6.05 6.05 6.05
<75 6.11 8.71 10.85 11.95 13.26 14.77

19
 A. Bahrami, et. al
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

Fig. 6. Fitting the first order kinetic model on the data derived from different size fractions in cleaner flotation (A)
-850+500, (B) -500+250, (C) -250+106, (D) -106+75, (E) <75 µm

20
 Iranian Journal of Materials Science & Engineering Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2020

Table 9. Results of the non-linear regression of the cleaner data using first order kinetic models

Models 1 2 3 4 5
R ∞ (%) 12.00 14.23 16.37 16.37 18.56
-850+500 µm k (s-1) 0.002 0.003 78.68 0.001 0.002
R2 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.96
R ∞ (%) 16.50 17.13 18.35 18.35 20.36
-500+250 µm k (s-1) 0.01 0.02 73.98 0.01 0.02
R2 0.99 0.46 0.01 0.02 0.48
R ∞ (%) 21.50 23.48 24.14 24.14 25.53
-250+106 µm k (s-1) 0.03 0.07 22.75 0.04 0.09
R2 0.61 0.01 0.02 0.63 0.99
R ∞ (%) 5.14 5.59 5.60 5.60 5.90
-106+75 µm k (s-1) 0.04 0.10 15.04 0.06 0.16
R2 0.99 0.58 0.54 0.43 0.64
R ∞ (%) 14.43 16.28 17.62 17.62 19.37
<75 µm k (s-1) 0.02 0.04 38.70 0.02 0.05
R2 0.43 0.01 0.01 0.45 0.99

4. CONCLUSION the petroleum-MIBC experiments. Also, regarding

the recovery values and ash contents of the concen-
In this investigation, the difference in flotation trates, rougher and cleaner stages using petroleum
rates of various size fractions of Gilsonite between as collector and MIBC as frother were proposed
rougher and cleaner flotation processes was stud- for the gilsonite flotation. Furthermore, the influ-
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

ied. Five flotation kinetic models were applied in ence of particle size on the recovery and flotation
the fitting process of the flotation data from the rate of the rougher and cleaner tests using petro-
rougher and cleaner flotation tests. The MATLAB leum-MIBC was investigated. In both of the rough-
software was used to estimate the relationship be- er and cleaner experiments, the maximum recovery
tween the flotation rate constant (k), the maximum was associated with the size fractions of -250+106
combustible recovery (R∞), and the particle size µm and -500+250 µm, respectively. In the rougher
based on the nonlinear least-square optimization flotation, the kinetic constant and infinite recovery
method. For these purposes, several flotation ex- increased by decreasing the particle size, while in
periments on a gilsonite sample in different condi- the cleaner stage the infinite recovery decreased till
tions of collector, frother, and pulp densities were the -106+75 µm fraction, and then increased.
studied. According to results, it was concluded that
the rougher flotation using the petroleum-MIBC REFERENCES
combination and without any collector and frother
correlate with the first order kinetic model. Rough- 1. Sripriya, R. P. V. T., Rao, P. V. T. and Choudhury,
er and cleaner data using petroleum-MIBC combi- B. R., “Optimization of operating variables of fine
nation perfectly match the classic first order kinetic coal flotation using a combination of modified flo-
model. The k values of these models were 0.04 (s-1) tation parameters and statistical techniques”. In-
ternational Journal of Mineral Processing,
and 0.01 (s-1). On the other hand, the rougher and
2003, 68, 109-127.
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

cleaner experiments without reagents correlated 2. Zhang, H., Liu, J., Cao, Y. and Wang, Y., “Effects
well with the modified gas/solid adsorption, and of particle size on lignite reverse flotation kinet-
rectangular models with a k value of 0.05 (s-1), and ics in the presence of sodium chloride”. Powder
0.01 (s-1), respectively. In all of the first order kinet- Techno. 2013, 246, 658–663.
ic models, the maximum recoveries were related to 3. Garcia-Zuniga, H., “Flotation recovery is an ex-

21
 A. Bahrami, et. al

ponential function of time. Bulletin Minero de 2015, 78, 66–68.

la Societal National de Minero”, Santiago, Chile 19. Helms, J. R., Kong, X., Salmon, E., Hatcher, P.
1935, 47, 83–6. G., Schmidt-Rohr, K. and Mao, J., “Structural
4. Arbiter, N., “Flotation rates and flotation efficien- characterization of Gilsonite bitumen by advance
cy”, Trans. AIME 1951, 791, 796. nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and ul-
5. Imaizumi, T. and Inoue, T., “Kinetic considera- trahigh resolution mass spectrometry revealing
tions of froth flotation. 6th International Mineral Pyrrolic and aromatic rings substituted with ali-
Processing Congress”, Cannes 1963, 581-593. phatic chains”. j. of organic Geochemistry, Else-
6. Lynch, A. J., Johnson, N. W., Manlapig, EV. and vier, 2012, 44, 21-36.
Thorne, C. G., “Mineral and coal flotation cir� - 20. Vapur, H., Bayat, O. and Uçurum, M., “Coal flo-
cuits, their simulation and control”, Elsevier Sci�- tation optimization using modified flotation pa-
entific Publishing Company, 1981. rameters and combustible recovery in a Jameson
7. Ek, C., “Flotation kinetics. Innovation in flotation cell”. Energy Conversion and management, 2010,
technology”. Canada, 1992, 183-210. 51, 1891-1897.
8. Mao, L. and Yoon, R. H., “Predicting flotation 21. Wolfarm, S., “The mathematical book”. Wolfram
rates using a rate equation derived from first prin- Media, Inc. 2003. 22. Welsby, S. D. D., Vianna, S.
ciples”. International Journal of Mineral Process- M. S. M. and Franzidis, J. P., “Assigning physical
ing, 1997, 51, 171-181. significance to floatability components”. Interna-
9. Klimpel, R. R., “Selection of chemical reagents tional Journal of Mineral Processing, 2010, 97,
for flotation. In: A. L. Mular and R. B. Bhappu 59-67.
(Editors), Mineral Processing Plant Design”. 23. Muganda, S., Zanin, M. and Grano, S. R., “Bench-
AIME, New York, N. Y. 1980, 907-934. marking flotation performance: single minerals”.
10. Klassen, V. I. and Mokrousov, V. A., An Intro- Int. J. Miner. Process, 2011, 98, 182–194.
duction to the Theory of Flotation, Butterworths, 24. Tao, D., “Role of bubble size in flotation of coarse
London, 2nd edition, 1963, 493. and fine particles—a review”. Sep. Sci. Technol,
11. Trahar, W. J. and Warren, L. J., “The floatability 2005, 39, 741–760.
of very fine particles—a review”. Int. J. Miner. 25. Gaudin, A. M., Groh, J. O. and Henderson, H. B.,
Process, 1976, 3, 103–131. “Effect of Particle Size on Flotation”. Tech. Publ.,
12. Jowett, A., “Resolution of flotation recovery 414, American Institute of Mining and Metallur-
[ Downloaded from [Link] on 2025-06-21 ]

curves by a differential plot method”. Trans. Inst. gical Engineering, 1931, 3–23.
Min. Metall, 1974, 85, 263-266. 26. Shahbazi, B., Rezai, B. and Javad Koleini, S. M.,
13. Drzymala, J., Ratajczak, T. and Kowalczuk, P., “Bubble–particle collision and attachment proba-
“Kinetic separation curves based on process rate bility on fine particles flotation. Chem”. Eng. Pro-
considerations”. Physicochemical problems of cess. Process Intensify, 2010, 49, 622–627.
mineral processing, 2017, 53, 983-995. 27. Jameson, G. J., “Advances in fine and coarse par-
14. Nguyen, A. V. and Schulze, H. J., “Colloidal Sci- ticle flotation”. Can. Metall. Q. 2010, 49, 325–
ence of Flotation”. Marcel Dekker, New York 330.
2004, 840. 28. Schubert, H., “On the optimization of hydrody-
15. Gharai. M. and Venugopal, R., “Modeling of namics in fine particle flotation”. Miner. Eng.
Flotation Process—An Overview of Different 2008, 21, 930–936.
Approaches”. Mineral Processing and Extractive 29. Xia, W., Xie, G., Liang, C. and Yang, J., “Flota-
Metallurgy Review, 2016, 37, 120-133. tion behavior of different size fractions of fresh
16. Bu, X., Xie, G., Peng, Y., Ge, L. and Ni. Ch., “Ki- and oxidized coals”. Powder Technol, 2014, 267,
netics of flotation. Order of process, rate constant 80–85.
distribution and ultimate recovery”. Physico-
chemical Problems of Mineral Processing, 2017,
53(1), 342-365.
17. Guanghua, G., Yang, X. and Li, X., “Flotation
characteristics and flotation kinetics of fine wolf-
[ DOI: 10.22068/ijmse.17.1.11 ]

ramite”. Powder Technology, 2017, 305, 377–

381.
18. Albijanic, B., Subasinghe, N. and Park, C. H.,
“Flotation kinetic models for fixed and variable
pulp chemical conditions”. Minerals Engineering,

22

Powered by TCPDF ([Link])