Minerals Engineering 24 (2011) 766771

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Minerals Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mineng

Maximum size of oating particles in different otation cells

Przemyslaw B. Kowalczuk a,, Oktay Sahbaz b, Jan Drzymala a
a
b

Wroclaw University of Technology, Wybrzeze Wyspianskiego 27, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland

Dumlupinar University, Department of Mining Engineering, Kutahya, Turkey

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 24 October 2010
Accepted 31 January 2011
Available online 20 February 2011
Keywords:
Flotation
Maximum size of oating particle
Flotation cell constant

a b s t r a c t
Two otation models, particle at the liquidgas interface and particlebubble aggregate, both based on
balance of forces, were used for evaluation of experimental data relating the maximum size of oating
particles dmax and their advancing contact angle. It was noticed, by comparing the experimental and
model data, that for a given otation device and material the maximum size of oating particle dmax
increases with increasing particle hydrophobicity and at the same time the acceleration a, experienced
by the dmax particle at the moment of rupture, decreases with particle hydrophobicity. The acceleration
values change with cell dynamics and type of otation device and are usually not available, therefore
empirical apparent cell constants A, which characterize otation dynamics and relate particle acceleration with advancing contact angle have been proposed instead. The values of A were determined by evaluation of experimental data relating dmax and advancing (detachment) contact angle for constant:
particle density, medium density, surface tension, and otation cell dynamics. Since A depends on particle density, a tentative formula was proposed to link A with density-independent otation cell constant
Ao. The values of Ao for selected otation cells were calculated and presented.
Using quartz as an example, it was shown in the paper that a positive advancing contact angle does not
guarantee otation because a prerequisite for otation is non-zero receding contact angle.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Flotation is used for upgrading of ores and other materials
(waste paper), and is a dynamic process resulting from interaction
of forces acting in the bubbleparticlewater system. The capillary,
gravity, and inertia forces are essential otation factors. A special
role is played by the inertia force because it characterizes the
dynamics of otation and greatly reduces the limit of coarse particle otation. The signicance of the inertia in otation of coarse
particles has been discussed in many papers, for instance by Mitrofanov et al. (1970), Schulze (1982, 1984, 1993), Morris and Matthesius (1988), Rodrigues et al. (2001), Pyke et al. (2003) and
Gontijo et al. (2007) but not much information is available on
the actual values of acceleration experienced by particles during
otation in particular cells. In some papers the acceleration was related to the energy turbulent dissipation e, as dissipation is the rate
of energy introduced (Schulze, 1992; Nguyen, 2003; Pyke et al.,
2003; Gontijo et al., 2007). The goal of this paper is to describe
the maximum size of oatable particle in different devices from
theoretical and experimental perspectives taking into account
essential forces and parameters involved in the process. Such approach can be very useful for predicting otation of coarse particles
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: przemyslaw.kowalczuk@pwr.wroc.pl (P.B. Kowalczuk).
0892-6875/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2011.01.007

and relating the maximum size of oating particle with hydrophobicity, particle density, bubble size, and interfacial tension of the
solution.
2. Forces between particle and gas phase
Flotation can occur when a particle, which is immersed in liquid, attaches to a gas interface or bubble. Particles oat when
the adhesive forces exceed the detachment forces and the coarse
particle limit of otation is determined by equality of the adhesive
and detaching forces. The main forces operating at the moment of
spherical particlegas phase rupture are (Drzymala, 1994b; Nguyen, 2003; Gontijo et al., 2007):
 gravity, Fg
3

F g 1=6pdmax qp

where p = 3.14, dmax denotes the maximum diameter of oating

particle and qp stands for particle density,
 buoyancy, Fb


3

F b 1=8pdmax ql g 2=3 cos

hd
hd
 1=3 cos3
2
2

where ql is the density of liquid, g acceleration due to gravity, and

hd detachment contact angle,

767

P.B. Kowalczuk et al. / Minerals Engineering 24 (2011) 766771

 hydrostatic pressure, Fh
2

F h 1=4pdmax 1  cos hd ql gR

where R is the radius of bubble,

 pressure inside bubble, Fp
2

F p 1=4pdmax 1  cos hd

F c max  F g F b  F a 0

pdmax r sin2 hd =2  1=6pd3max qp g 1=6pd3max ql g  1=6pd3max qp a 0

where r means the surface tension of liquid,

 capillary, F c max

Fc

approach was used for instance by Scheludko et al. (1976) and

Schulze (1993), and recently by Ralston and his co-workers (Gontijo et al., 2007).
For the model of particle at the liquidgas interface the balance
of forces is

max

pdmax r sin hd =2 or F c max

1=2pdmax r1  cos hd

Eq. (8), after rearrangement, provides an expression for the

maximum size of oating particle:

 inertia, Fa

F a ma

where m stands for the particle mass and a for acceleration of particle due to otation dynamics.
There is some dispute regarding the formula for the inertia
force, Fa. For spherical particles Gontijo et al. (2007) used the following expression:
3

F a 1=6pdmax qp a

7a

Schulze (1984) and Pyke et al. (2003) referred to Fa as the vortex

or otation machine acceleration and Gontijo et al. (2007) called it
additional detaching force representing acceleration force provided by a mechanical impeller; Nguyen (2003) and Schulze
(1984) called it acceleration of turbulent eddies, while Brozek
and Surowiak (2007) named it the force of particle motion. Gontijo
et al. (2007) and Schulze (1982) used for the inertia force formula
given in Eq. (7a) treating it as a detachment force incorporating
other forces and effects experienced by particles during otation
in agitated systems. In their formula (Eq. (7a)) the density term
is represented solely by qp.
Another formula for the inertia force
3

F a 1=6pdmax qp  ql a

7b

was used by Nguyen (2003) and Phan et al. (2003), while Koch and
Noworyta (1992) used equation
3

F a 1=6pdmax qp f ql a

7c

where f denotes a constant dependent on the particle shape (0.5 for

spheres). This expression reects the fact that particles in water always move with attached liquid layer.
Forces which are used for calculating the maximum size of particles depend on the model of the process. Usually two models:
particle at the liquidgas interface (so-called particle moving
through the liquid/gas interface or lm otation) (Fig. 1a) and bubbleparticle aggregate (Fig. 1b) are used. The former model takes
into account capillary, gravity, buoyancy, and inertia forces. Such

dmax

s
2
6r sin hd =2

qp  ql g qp a

9
3

In Eqs. (8) and (9) instead of Eq. (2) the term F b 1=6pdmax ql g was
used for the buoyancy force. It means that incomplete immersion of
particle in the liquid was neglected.
Considering otation as a particle attached to a bubble (Fig. 1b)
is more realistic and practical because this model incorporates the
radius of the bubble R, into the equations. For this case the force
balance is

Fc

max

Fb Fh  Fp  Fg  Fa 0

and consists of the excess pressure, gravity, buoyancy, hydrostatic,

capillary and inertia forces, providing the equation:

1=2pdmax r1  cos hd



2=3 coshd =2
3
3
 1=6pdmax qp g  1=8pdmax ql g
1=3 cos3 hd =2
2

 1=4pdmax 1  cos hd r=R  Rql g  1=6pdmax qp a 0

3. Comparing models and experiments

A comparison of model and experimental data relating the maximum size of oating particles and detachment contact angles was
performed utilizing the data and procedure of Gontijo et al. (2007),
which is based on plotting theoretical (Eqs. (9) and (11)) and
experimental values of the maximum size of oating particles dmax
versus either advancing or detachment contact angle hd, for a given
density of particles qp. It was assumed that the experimental
advancing contact angle is equal to the theoretical detachment
contact angle. The advancing (static) and detachment (dynamic)
contact angles depend on the arrangement of the gas/liquid/solid
systems and involved forces. However, since the capillary force is

bubble

R
bubble

d
d
particle

11

Eqs. (9) and (11) were used for testing both models using our
own (otation in a Schott funnel) and literature experimental data
from various sources.

liquid

10

liquid

liquid

particle

Fig. 1. Models of otation, (a) particle at liquidgas interface, (b) particlebubble aggregate.

P.B. Kowalczuk et al. / Minerals Engineering 24 (2011) 766771

the main and dominating gas/liquid/solid adhesion force both angles are similar and the assumption that advancing contact angle
is equal to the detachment contact angle is presently reasonable
and practical and will be used in this work.
The maximum size of oating particles dmax, when the particles
are oated individually in many separated tests and when oated
as a collection of particles, is dened as the size for which the recovery of oating particles is equal to 50% (d[50]). Then, based on probability considerations, dmax = d[50]. It is a good measure of dmax
because at that point the particle has equal chance to oat and to
sink. This was discussed and applied by different authors including
Schulze (1977), Drzymala (1994a, 1999) and Chipfunhu et al.
(2010). Other denitions of dmax, including the size of particles at
which recovery is zero, or 100%, are also used (Sahbaz et al., 2010).
A comparison of the particle at the liquidgas interface model
and empirical data is presented in Fig. 2a and in Fig. 2b for the
model of particlebubble aggregate.
Fig. 2a and b indicate that the difference between the two used
models (dashed lines) is not great. A comparison of the model and
experimental data on maximum size of oating particle dmax and
hydrophobicity (in the form of detachment contact angle hd) indicates that dmax increases with increasing particle hydrophobicity
and, at the same time, the acceleration a, experienced by the dmax
particle at the moment of detachment, decreases with hydrophobicity. This is, most probably, caused by increasing engulfment of
the particle by the bubble. Other parameters, such as increased
resistance to moving larger particles, may also inuence the decrease of particle acceleration at detachment with hydrophobicity.
Since particle acceleration during detachment depends on particle hydrophobicity, a direct application of the equations resulting
from the model for predicting dmax is not possible because the values
of acceleration a, are not known. It appears that instead of acceleration, the dynamics of otation can be characterized by empirical
constants. To calculate the constants, data from Fig. 2 and also our
own results for uorite in a Schott funnel (SF), quartz in a Jameson
cell (JC) (Sahbaz, 2010), different materials in a single bubble Hallimond tube (SH) (Drzymala, 1994a,b) and multibubble (modied)
(MH) Hallimond tube (Drzymala and Gutsche, 1990) were used.
The Schott funnel (SF) technique was previously described by Li
et al. (1993) and the results are presented in Fig. 3. In the tests,
uorite particles were made wet by submerging them in water
for a few minutes before otation. The value of dmax for uorite
was 1.4 mm.
Data on quartz otation in the presence of dodecyl amine (DDA)
in a Jameson cell (Sahbaz, 2010) are presented in Fig. 4. The conditions of otation were: separation tank diameter 20 cm, height

4.0
3.5

a, m/s

particle at liquid-gas interface

100

60

d [50] = dmax =1.4 mm

40

20

0
0

Fig. 3. Results of static reagent-free lm otation of uorite in a Schott funnel (SF).

90 cm, downcomer diameter 2 cm, length 180 cm; nozzle diameter

0.4 cm, downcomer plunging length 40 cm, conditioning tank volume 100 dm3. The maximum size of oating particle dmax = d[50] in
the presence of 200 g/Mg DDA was equal to 0.23 lm and contact
angle 50.
The results of tests performed in a modied multi-bubble Hallimond tube were described in an unpublished source (Drzymala
and Gutsche, 1990). Therefore, a short characteristics of the procedure is necessary. The cell was equipped with a magnetic stirrer
coated with a plastic tubing and Teon tape to avoid grinding
the particles. The velocity of the cylindrical (in cross section) stirrer
was 60100 rpm while its size was 16  6 mm. A sample of solid
was inserted into the Hallimond tube containing 120 cm3 of
103 M KNO3 aqueous solution and stirred for 3 min. The otation
tests were carried out using nitrogen at a ow rate of 25 cm3/min.
The time of otation was 30 min. Pressed silver (qp = 8.98 g/cm3)
and quartz coated with a 1 lm thick layer of silver, produced by
evaporation and deposition of elemental Ag in a vacuum chamber
with a turning table, were tested.

4. Empirical evaluation of relationship between maximum size

of oating particle and hydrophobicity
To relate dmax and hydrophobicity it is useful to plot the maximum size of oating particle versus sin(hd/2) rather than hd. It

4.0
3.5

particle-bubble aggregate

5
10

2.0
MB1

1.5

20
40

MB2

1.0

d max , mm

3.0
SB

2.5

SB

2.5

a, m/s
0

2.0

5
MB1

1.5

120

1.0

500

0.5

10
MB2

20
40
120

0.5
RT

0.0
20

Particle size, mm

3.0

d max , mm

fluorite
Schott funnel (SF)
flotation test

80

Recovery, %

768

30

40

50

60

70

500

RT

80

detachment ( d ) contact angle, deg

90

0.0
20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

detachment ( d ) contact angle, deg

Fig. 2. Comparison of theoretical (dashed lines) and experimental (points and solid lines) values of the maximum size of oating particle as a function of particle
hydrophobicity expressed as experimental (advancing) and theoretical (detachment) contact angle. Data of Gontijo et al. (2007). Methylated quartz, qp = 2650 kg/m3,
r = 72.8 mN/m. SB nearly static bubble otation at the speed of moving bubble 20 lm/s, R = 0.9 mm; MB1 moving bubble at the speed of 20 lm/s, R = 0.5 mm; MB2
moving bubble at the speed of 200 lm/s, R = 0.5 mm; RT Rushton turbine cell (R = 0.35 0.15 mm, DF250 = 20 mg/dm3). For particlebubble aggregate model R = 1.55 mm.

769

P.B. Kowalczuk et al. / Minerals Engineering 24 (2011) 766771

100

B Dmax =100
Quartz/DDA
Jameson cell (JC)

Recovery, %

80

40

v


u
6r
A  100
u

sin hd =2
dmax t
A  141:42 sin hd =2
qp  ql g

d [50]=d max =0.23 mm

20

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

Particle size, mm
Fig. 4. Quartz otation in DDA solutions in Jameson cell (Sahbaz, 2010).

results from the theoretical equation of Scheludko et al. (1976) (Eq.

(9)), in which the detachment contact angle occurs as sin(hd/2). It is
also useful to do the plotting for a constant density of the oated
material. The plots for minerals having density of 2.65 g/cm3 (as
quartz and ilmenite), and 3.2 g/cm3 (as uorite and silicon carbide)
are presented in Fig. 5.
Different mathematical formulas were tried and the best
approximation was achieved with the formula



C sin hd =2A  100
dmax B
A  C sin hd =2

12a

which has one-adjustable parameter A and two constants (B and C).

Such equation was successfully used before for approximation of
otation results plotted as the Fuerstenau separation curve (Drzymala and Ahmed, 2005). Parameter A applied for relating dmax and
hd can be called the apparent otation cell constant, since it is independent of particle hydrophobicity for a given dynamics of the otation device, but still dependent on other parameters such as
particle density. Constants B and C are dened as

100
141:42
sin90=2

12b

Ao

16A  100qp
16  qp

14

where Ao is the otation cell constant (dimensionless). In Eq. (14)

number 16 stands for a constant having dimension of g/cm3. The
values of density-independent otation cell constant Ao, calculated
from Eq. (14) for different cells, along with A values obtained from
Fig. 5a and b, are given in Table 1.
According to Table 1, the order of increasing otation cell
dynamics, and hence decreasing otation cell constant Ao, for the
investigated devices is:

SB; SF < MB1 < SH < MB2 < MH < FC < JC < RT

4.0

3.0

p ~3.2 g/cm

3.0

d max , mm

SH

2.0

SB

1.0

2.0

A ~1000

paraffin
coated
CaF2

CaF2
(SF)

A =135
SiC

1.0

MB1 MB2
FC
MH

RT

CaF2
(SH)

JC
0.0

0.0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

sin ( d /2)

0.5

0.6

0.7

13

Now parameter A, instead of particle acceleration a, characterizes dynamics of otation. Parameter A assumes values from 100
for very turbulent processes to innity (practically to about
1000) for static otation (a = 0 m/s2). A does not depend on the
hydrophobicity of the particle. To a great extent A is constant under
given experimental conditions of a otation device. However, A
values slightly depend on the density of solid. To establish the
inuence of particle density on A, additional calculations were performed using the data for a single bubble Hallimond tube (dmax
Drzymala, 1994a, contact angles Drzymala, 1994b), multi-bubble
Hallimond tube (Drzymala and Gutsche, 1990) and Jameson cell
(Sahbaz, 2010). Experimental data for all other considered in this
work otation devices are also given (Fig. 6).
According to Fig. 6, a tentative and approximate formula relating particle density qp, and apparent otation cell constant A, is:

p = 2.65 g/cm

d max , mm

12c

For a given mineral, Dmax can be calculated from Eq. (9) (particle
at the liquidgas interface model) for density qp of the mineral at
a = 0 m/s2 and detachment contact angle hd, equal to 90 because
then dmax = Dmax. For instance for qp = 2.65 g/cm3 (quartz)
Dmax = 3.673 mm. The nal relation, obtained by substitution Eqs.
(12b) and (12c) into Eq. (12a) is

60

0
0.00

s!,
2
6r sin 90=2
100
qp  ql g

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

sin ( d /2)

Fig. 5. Approximation of experimental dmax and sin(hd/2) data with one-adjustable parameter equation (Eq. (13)) for materials of two different densities.

P.B. Kowalczuk et al. / Minerals Engineering 24 (2011) 766771

170

80

160

Ao =

150

16 A 100 p

60

MB1

140

SH

130

MB2
MH

120

FC

110
100

JC
RT

12

16

20

dry

quartz
Schott funnel (SF)
flotation test

16 p

Recovery, %

apparent cell constant, A , (-)

770

wet

40

d [50] =d max = 0 mm

20

particle density, p , g/cm

Fig. 6. Inuence of solid density on apparent otation cell constant A. Abbreviations

(see Table 1) indicate the type of otation cell.

Particle size, mm
Table 1
Dimensionless apparent cell constant A, for particles with qp = 2.65 g/cm3 and
dimensionless otation cell constant Ao, for different cells and different otation
dynamics.
Flotation machine
Moving bubble (nearly
static otation)
Schott funnel
Moving bubble

SB
SF
MB1
MB2

Single bubble Hallimond

tube
Multi-bubble Hallimond
tube
Flotation cell

SH

Jameson cell

JC

Rushton turbine cell

a

MH
FC

RT

vba = 20 lm/s,
R = 0.9 mm
Static otation
vba = 20 lm/s,
R = 0.5 mm
vba = 200 lm/s,
R = 0.5 mm
Flow rate, 37.5 cm3/
min
Flow rate, 25 cm3/
min
Flow rate, 4.3
(0.4) cm3/min
Air ow rate,
5.98 dm3/min
Pulp ow rate,
13.2 dm3/min
Gas hold-up, 0.39
Flow rate, 4.5 dm3/
min

Ao, ()

A, ()

1179

1000

1179
154

1000
145

128

123

av.
137
122

av.
131
118

112

110

106

105

104

103

vb denotes bubble rising velocity.

The increasing dynamics of otation results in decreasing maximum size of oating particle. It means that for upper limit particle
size under more turbulent hydrodynamic condition, otation
recovery decreases. This was previously observed by Schubert
(1999), Rodrigues et al. (2001), Pyke et al. (2003), and Gontijo
et al. (2007).
5. Advancing (detachment) contact angles versus receding
contact angle and dmax
In this study surface-modied methylated quartz was considered because pristine quartz is non-oatable material providing
only some entrainment in otation experiments. On the other hand
many authors (Gribanova et al., 1988; Janczuk et al., 1986; Lamb
and Furlong, 1982) have claimed that the contact angles for quartz
is between 0 and 54. It is known that not only advancing ha, but
also receding contact angle hr, plays a role in otation. An additional requirement for successful otation is existence of a nonzero receding contact angle. This factor is essential for initiation
of the particlebubble attachment. Our sample of quartz had
hr = 0 and ha = 30 measured both by the sessile drop and captive
bubble methods at pH = 8 while our static otation tests carried
out with quartz in a Schott funnel (Fig. 7), performed similarly to

Fig. 7. Static otation of freshly ground untreated quartz in a Schott funnel. Its
d[50] = dmax is zero. In the wet tests the particles were immersed in water before
measurements.

the test with uorite (Fig. 3), indicted that the recovery of quartz
never reached 50%, so its d[50] was zero, meaning that quartz was
non-oatable. This indicates that the equations for dmax (Eqs. (9)
and (11)), which are based on the advancing contact angle, can
be used only if the receding contact angle of a material is greater
than zero. This opinion agrees with current understanding of otation which is based on three elementary steps: collision, attachment, detachment, and that the attachment depends on the
receding contact angle (Scheludko et al., 1976; Gontijo et al., 2007).
6. Conclusions
The maximum size of oating particles depends on their size,
density, hydrophobicity, dynamics of the process, and other
parameters. A comparison of experimental data and otation models indicates that acceleration a experienced by particles of dmax
size at the moment of detachment, due to process dynamics, decreases with hydrophobicity. It suggests that the models of coarse
particles otation should somehow take this effect into account.
Instead of using acceleration constant a for modeling and relating the maximum size of oating particle dmax and advancing
(detachment) contact angle hd, for constant particle density qp,
medium density ql, surface tension r, and otation cell dynamics,
an empirical apparent otation cell constant A, can be used. It can
be determined by approximation of the experimental data with a
formula such as Eq. (12a). The apparent otation cell constant depends on particle density. Taking into account a tentative relation
between A and qp (Eq. (14)) an empirical relation between maximum size of oating particles dmax, otation cell constant, Ao,
and other essential parameters of the process is:

dmax d50



0
1
Ao 16qp 100qp
s

100
16
C
6r
hd B
C
h
i
sin B

qp  ql g
2 @ Ao 16qp 100qp  141:42 sin hd A
16

15

provided that the receding contact angle is greater than zero

(hr > 0).
The otation cell constant Ao, is expected to be constant for a
given otation cell dynamics, that is for otation tests performed
under the same regime. Eq. (15) should be treated as tentative
because the inuence of particle density on dmax was based on a
relatively small number of experimental points and only for

P.B. Kowalczuk et al. / Minerals Engineering 24 (2011) 766771

particles density less than 16 g/cm3. For heavier particles otation

tests should be continued.
Eq. (15) can be used only when the detachment contact angle of
the investigated material is greater than zero.
Acknowledgements
Financial support by the Polish Statutory Research Grant (343165) is greatly acknowledged. Fellowship co-nanced by European
Union within European Social Fund.
References
Brozek, M., Surowiak, A., 2007. Effect of particle shape on jig separation efciency.
Physicochem. Probl. Miner. Process. 41, 397413.
Chipfunhu, D., Zanin, M., Grano, S., 2010. The dependency of the critical contact
angle for otation on particle sizeModelling the limits of ne particle otation.
Miner. Eng. 24 (1), 5057.
Drzymala, J., 1994a. Characterization of materials by hallimond tube otation. Part
2: maximum size of oating particles and contact angle. Int. J. Miner. Process.
42, 153167 (erratum, 1995. Int. J. Miner. Process. 43, 135.).
Drzymala, J., 1994b. Hydrophobicity and collectorless otation of inorganic
materials. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 50, 143185.
Drzymala, J., 1999. note entrainment of particles with density between 1.01 and
1.10 g/cm3 in a monobubble hallimond otation tube. Miner. Eng. 12 (3), 329
331.
Drzymala, J., Ahmed, H.A.M., 2005. Mathematical equations for approximation of
separation results using the Fuerstenau upgrading curves. Int. J. Miner. Process.
76, 5565.
Drzymala, J., Gutsche, O., 1990. Hydrophobicity and oatability of silver iodide.
Internal Report of Investigations to D.W. Fuerstenau, Berkeley, JulyAugust
1990.
Gontijo, C. de F., Fornasiero, D., Ralston, J., 2007. The limits of ne and coarse
particle otation. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 85, 739747.
Gribanova, E.V., Mashonskaya, E.V., Cherkashina, L.M., 1988. Effect of solution
concentration on quartz contact angle. Kolloidnyi Zhurnal 50 (4), 818821.
Janczuk, B., Chibowski, E., Bialopiotrowicz, T., 1986. Time dependence wettability of
quartz with water. Chem. Papers 40 (3), 349356.
Koch, R., Noworyta, A., 1992. Mechanical processing in chemical engineering. WNT
Warszawa (in Polish).

771

Lamb, R.N., Furlong, D.N., 1982. Controlled wettability of quartz surfaces. J. Chem.
Soc., Faraday Trans. I. 77, 6173.
Li, C., Somasundaran, P., Harris, C.C., 1993. A levitation technique for determining
particle hydrophobicity. Colloids Surf., A 70, 229232.
Mitrofanov, S.I., Yatsenko, N.N., Kurochkina, A.V., 1970. Determining the critical
inertial forces causing mineral particles to detach from air bubbles. Tsvetnye
Metally (Moscow, Russian Federation) 43(8), 8789 (in Russian), English
Translation, Sov. J. Non-ferr. Met. 11(8), 8587 (1970).
Morris, R.M., Matthesius, G.A., 1988. Froth otation of coal nes: the inuence of
turbulence on cell performance. J. S. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 88 (12), 385391.
Nguyen, A.V., 2003. New method and equations for determining attachment
tenacity and particle size limit in otation. Int. J. Miner. Process. 68, 167182.
Phan, C.M., Nguyen, A.V., Miller, J.D., Evans, G.M., Jameson, G.J., 2003. Investigation
of bubbleparticle interactions. Int. J. Miner. Process. 72, 239254.
Pyke, B., Fornasiero, D., Ralston, J., 2003. Bubble particle heterocoagulation under
turbulent conditions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 265, 141151.
Rodrigues, W.J., Leal Filho, L.S., Masini, E.A., 2001. Hydrodynamic dimensionless
parameters and their inuence on otation performance of coarse particles.
Miner. Eng. 14 (9), 10471054.
Sahbaz, O., 2010. Modication of downcomer in Jameson otation cell and its effect
on performance. Dumlupinar University, Institute of Science, Kutahya, Turkey.
Sahbaz, O., Oteyaka, B., Ucar, A., 2010. Maximum oating particle size and
turbulence in Jameson cell. In: Proceedings of the XIIth International Mineral
Processing Symposium, Cappadocia-Nevsehir, Turkey, 68 October 2010, pp.
355361.
Scheludko, A., Toshev, B.V., Bojadjiev, D.T., 1976. Attachment of particles to a liquid
surface (capillary theory of otation). J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. I. 12, 2815.
Schubert, H., 1999. On the turbulence-controlled microprocesses in otation
machines. Int. J. Miner. Process. 56, 257276.
Schulze, H.J., 1977. New theoretical and experimental investigations on stability of
bubble/particle aggregates in otation: a theory on the upper particle size of
oatability. Int. J. Miner. Process. 4 (3), 241259.
Schulze, H.J., 1982. Dimensionless number and approximate calculation of the
upper particle size of oatability in otation machines. Int. J. Miner. Process. 9,
321328.
Schulze, H.J., 1984. Physico-Chemical Elementary Processes in Flotation. Elsevier,
Amsterdam.
Schulze, H.J., 1992. Element of physically-based modelling of the otation process.
In: Mavros, P., Matis, K.A. (Ed.), Innovation in Flotation Technology, NATO ASI
Series, Applied Science Series E, vol. 208. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London,
pp. 1719.
Schulze, H.J., 1993. Flotation as a heterocoagulation process: possibilities of
calculating the probability of otation. In: Dobias, B. (Ed.), Coagulation and
Flocculation. Theory and Applications. Dekker, New York, pp. 321353.