MINERAL EXTRACTION OF GOLD CHIPBOARD in leachate

Arturo Cavero - Plant Superintendent Miguel Lara - Metallurgical Lab Supervisor

Company. Minera Sipan S.A.C.
I. INTRODUCTION The extraction process involves hauling gold ore mine to leach p
ad, where it is deposited forming levels of 8 meters (called lifts). This minera
l is washed with a cyanide solution, which gradually dissolves the gold containe
d in it, in its descent of lift to lift. For this process uses lime to maintain
a pH that prevents the formation of hydrogen cyanide (HCN). The ore placed on th
e pad (oxidized silica mineral type, colluvial, quartz alunite and mixed) had no
major problems in the percolation from the start, using the process described a
bove. From March of 2000, had problems with gold mining, since the cyanide solut
ion percolated no watering as in the original mineral, consequently resulting in
the decrease in gold recovery in the pad. So was performed metallurgical testin
g to solve the problem, it is ascertained that the most appropriate for this new
type of mineral leaching confronting us (with high clay content and plenty of w
ater) was agglomerated.
II. OBJECTIVES § § Determine which variables and ranges influence the extraction
of gold. Increase the percentage of extraction in the leach pads.
1
§
Determine a mathematical model based on the variables describing the phenomenon.
III.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Characteristics of Mineral Materials 3.1.1 The sample used for testing was p
repared from ore extracted from mine: the mineral quartz-alunite presents averag
e grade of 0.838 g/m3 head and colluvial mineral presents average grade of 2,256
head g/m3. 3.1.2 Data Collection Instruments: A. Reagents: Solution For prepara
tion of cyanide: sodium cyanide, NaCN sodium hydroxide, NaOH for analysis of fre
e cyanide: Silver nitrate, AgNO3 Rodanina B. Laboratory Equipment: Glass Test Tu
be Rack precipitation filter paper test tubes pipette tube holder, plastic bottl
es 1 liter pH meter vacuum distillation equipment Peristaltic Pumps Magnetic Sti
rrer
C. Teams
2
-
Analytical balance sieve Dryer Jaw Crusher Sprayer
3.2 Methods 3.2.1 Experimental A. Experimental Team: This consisted of a set of
20 plastic columns (1.2 meters high by 6 inches in diameter), each of which had
a hose for irrigation by a peristaltic pump, and another to collect the leach so
lution in buckets and then analyze it. B. Experimental Procedure: To be done as
the following steps: reception of the mineral. Separation of meshes. Quartering
of each mesh. · Analysis of head. · Analysis of acidity. Mineral test. Weighing
of each mesh. Homogenized mineral. Loaded column. Cyanide solution for irrigatio
n. Leach solution. Remaining solution to plant. Sample for analysis. Final leach
ing. Download mineral. Sprayed separation of each mesh screens.
3
-
Analysis of Colas.
C. Experimental Design: The experimental design is taken Fractional Factorial (1
) (3): 28-4, taking the following variables and ranges, are shown in Table A: RA
NK + 0 5 Kg / 15 Kg Tn / Tn 10 Kg / Tn 0.1 lbs / ton 1.5 kg / ton 0.8 kg / t 1 /
2 2 / 1 1 / 1 10% 18% 14% 0.0227Kg/tn 0.1134Kg/tn 0.06805Kg/tn 0 ppm 100 ppm 50
ppm 5 l / h. 7.5l/h.m2 10l/h.m2 m2 16 h 96 h 56 h Table a. The number of tests
to be developed are 20 in total, including the four centers that are described i
n Table b:
X1 x2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8
VARIABLES cement (relationship) type potassium nitrate min. (Quartz / coluv.) Hu
midity helps. Agglomeration. Cyanide Strength Ratio watering curing curing time
4
TEST MATRIX
234 134 123 124
Test 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
X1 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X2 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X3 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X4 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X5 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X6 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X7 + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
X8 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0
B. Table D. Data Taking Procedure: solid samples are taken before commencement o
f the tests to determine the head grade of ore. Liquid samples are taken daily f
or analysis of gold from the leach solution and pH and strength of cyanide. Soli
d samples are taken after completion of leaching to determine the mineral law ta
ils. E. Data Processing: The daily data are in formats with the aim of analyzing
the process and results are summarized in Table N º 01 (see appendix).
5
Data for% recovery of gold of all the evidence is statistically analyzed to dete
rmine the degree of influence of each variable independently and their interacti
ons (see Appendix).
III. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS: 3.1 Results: By analyzing the experimental data deter
mined that the recoveries are above 80% (test No. 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 1
3 and 14), even to values maximum of 87.5% (Test No. 10) and at least 72% (test
No. 15.) Statistical data processing (appendix), we obtain the significant varia
bles and interactions (potassium nitrate,% moisture and irrigation ratio). With
the significant variables and interactions determine a mathematical model. Repla
cing values of variables and interactions (Table N º 02-A, appendix) in the math
ematical model, we obtain recovery rates of gold (Table No. 02-B, appendix). Wit
h the tables N º 02-A and No. 02-B construct graphs No. 01 and No. 02 (appendix)
, where we observed better recovery rates of gold. In Figure No. 02 deduce the o
ptimum of the significant variables to obtain recoveries of 80% or higher. For p
otassium nitrate is from 0.31 to 1.12 g nitrate / t of ore, for humidity are wit
hin 11.2% to 15.8% by weight and the ratio of irrigation varies from 5 to 10 l/h
-m2.
6
3.2 Analysis of Results Of the variables and ranges studied were found to be sig
nificant: potassium nitrate,% moisture and irrigation ratio and a slight effect
on the interaction of all independent variables. The mathematical model is found
statistically verified by test F. From the graphs No. 01 and No. 02 we determin
e the optimum variables for recoveries greater than or equal to 80% § § § Potass
ium nitrate: 0.31 to 1.12 g nitrate / t of ore. Mineral Humidity: 11.2% to 15.8%
by weight. Irrigation Ratio: 5-10 l/h-m2.
We also found that economically the recommended range of significant variables s
hould be: § § § Potassium nitrate: 0.31 to nitrate 0,66 g / t of ore. Mineral Hu
midity: 11.2% to 13.2% by weight. Irrigation Ratio: 5-10 l/h-m2.
IV. CONCLUSIONS a) The variables that significantly influence the leaching proce
ss agglomerated ore in the studied range are: potassium nitrate (0.1 to 1.5 g /
t), moisture from the mineral (10-18%) and the ratio of irrigation (5-10 l/h-m2)
. b) For recoveries equal to or above 80%, the range of values of the significan
t variables are: potassium nitrate: 0.31 to nitrate 0,66 g / t of ore, moisture:
11.2% to 13.2 % by weight and the ratio of irrigation: 5-10 l/h-m2, which are w
ithin the optimum range, which implies reduction in operating costs.
7
c) By comparing experimental data and mineral ore, not agglomerated particle boa
rd is determined that the initial kinetics is higher in agglomerated ore. d) The
re was a coded mathematical model that describes the process: Y = 82.2 + 1.19x2
- 1.69x4 + 2.03x7 - 1.91x10 - 1.14x13.
8
Appendix A. Statistical calculations Calculation of Coefficients Matrix XTY
Nitra Cem Ayud Cuare% cure CN X6 X7 Irrigation Tiema Ratio -8.4 32.4 -11.8 cure
X8 X9 X10 -30.6 -16.4 7.8 X13 X12 X11 9.2 -18.2 -4.2 X14 X15 4.4 / Alun Hum. Agg
lomerated. 1315 X2 X1 X0 -2.2 -2.7 19 X3 X4 X5 5.2 -8.8
Matrix XTY/16
Cem -0.14 Nitra X0 X1 X2 82.2 19.1% Ayud Cuare cure CN X6 X7 Irrigation Tiema Ra
tio -0.52 03.02 -0.74 cure X8 X9 X10 -1.91 -1.03 0.58 X12 X11 X13 0.49 X15 0.27
-0.26 -1.14 X14 / Alun Hum. Agglomerated. 0.33 X3 X4 X5 -0.55 -1.69
B. Analysis of Variance:
Sum of Squares X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10 X11 X12 X13 X14 X15 Total Curvatur
e Error -2.2 19 5.2 -27 -8.8 -8.4 32.4 -11.8 -16.4 -30.6 9.2 7.8 -18.2 -4.2 4.4
25.99 5.65 -17,958 0.3 22.6 1.7 45.6 4.8 4.4 65.6 8.7 16.8 58.5 5.3 3.8 20.7 1.1
1.2 25,992 5.65 292.8 Degrees of Freedom 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 19 S
quares Mean 0.3 22.6 1.7 45.6 4.8 4.4 65.6 8.7 16.8 58.5 5.3 3.8 20.7 1.1 1.2 26
.0 1.9 0.2 12.0 0.9 24.2 2.6 2.3 34.8 4.6 8.9 31.1 2.8 2.0 11.0 0.6 0.6 13.8 10.
13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13 10.13
10.13 10.13 YES YES NO NO NO NO NO NO YES YES NO NO NO YES YES NO MEANS MEAN ME
AN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN 95% F or F,
1, 1 For> F
c. Coded scale mathematical model: Y = 82.2 + 1.19X2 - 1.69X4 + 2.03X7 - 1.91X10
- 1.14X13
9
d. Verification statistically (if the mathematical model adequately represents t
he experimental data using the F test). If Fo <F table.
Test 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Coef. Found Mod 82.2 82.20 -0.14 1.1
9 0.33 -1.69 -0.55 -0.52 2.03 -0.74 -1.03 -1.91 0.58 0.49 -1.14 -0.26 0.27 0.00
1.19 0.00 -1.69 0.00 0.00 2.03 0.00 0.00 -1.91 0.00 0.00 -1.14 0.00 0.00 And 79.
10 85.70 81.90 82.20 76.30 80.80 86.20 84.30 81.60 87.40 85.00 84.20 81.80 87.50
71.90 79.30 Yest 80.68 86.33 82.73 83.83 74.25 79.9 84.4 85.5 80.45 86.1 82.95
84.05 82.13 87.78 76.53 77.63 Resid. (Y-Yest) -1.58 -0.63 -0.53 -1.93 2.05 0.90
1.80 -1.20 1.15 1.30 2.05 0.15 - 0.33 -0.28 -4.63 1.67
SC = 48.16 SCMR = 4.01 Fo = 2.11 F = 8.74 Fo table <F table. This means that the
mathematical model found, adequately represents the process.
10
TABLES Table No. 01: Percent Gold Recovery Testing.
Test No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
% Retrieve. 79.1 85.7 82.2 81.9 76.3 80.8 86.2 84.3 81.6 87.4 85 84.2 81.8 87.5
71.9 79.3 85.9 85.6 83 85.7
Table N º 02-A: Variables and Ranges (decode and encode)
X1 Cement (Kg / ton) 5.0 -1 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 -0.8 -
0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X2 Potassium (Kg / ton) 0.10 0.24 0.38 0.52 0.66 0.80 0.94 1.08 1.22 1.36 1.50 -
1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X3 Quartz / Clay -1.0 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -
0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X4 Humidity (%) 10.0 -1 10.8 11.6 12.4 13.2 14.0 14.8 15.6 16.4 17.2 18.0 -0.8 -
0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X5
X6
Ay. Agglomerated. (Kg / ton) NaCN treatment (ppm) 0.0227 -1 0 -1 0.0318 0.0408 0
.0499 0.0590 0.0681 0.0771 0.0862 0.0953 0.1043 0.1134 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
0.8 1
X8 tender. Heal (h) 16.0 24.0 32.0 40.0 48.0 56.0 64.0 72.0 80.0 88.0 96.0 -1 -0
.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
11
Table No. 02-B: Variables, Ranks (decode and encode) and% recovery of gold Calcu
lated
Cem., Nit. K, Type X7 min., Hum, CN agglomeration cur, cur Tiema -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0
.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 5 -1 64.0 69.3 73.5 76.8 79.0 80.1 80.3 79.4 77.4 74
.5 70.5 -0.8 5.5 WATER RATIO 65.0 70.2 74.3 77.4 79.5 80.5 80.5 79.5 77.5 74.4 7
0.2 6 -0.6 66.1 71.1 75.1 78.1 80.1 81.0 80.8 79.7 77.5 74.3 70.0 6.5 -0.4 67.2
72.1 75.9 78.8 80.6 81.4 81.1 79.8 77.5 74.2 69.8 7 -0.2 68.2 73.0 76.8 79.5 81.
1 81.8 81.4 80.0 77.5 74.0 69.5 7.5 0 69.3 73.9 77.6 80.1 81.7 82.2 81.7 80.1 77
.6 73.9 69.3 8 0.2 70.4 74.9 78.4 80.8 82.2 82.6 82.0 80.3 77.6 73.8 69.1 8.5 0.
4 71.4 75.8 79.2 81.5 82.8 83.0 82.3 80.4 77.6 73.7 68.8 9 0.6 72.5 76.7 80.0 82
.2 83.3 83.4 82.5 80.6 77.6 73.6 68.6 9.5 0.8 73.6 77.7 80.8 82.8 83.9 83.9 82.8
80.8 77.7 73.5 68.4 10 1 74.6 78.6 81.6 83.5 84.4 84.3 83.1 80.9 77.7 73.4 68.1
Y = 82.2 + 1.19X2 - 1.69X4 + 2.03X7 - 1.91X10 - 1.14X13 Where: X2 = Var. Indep.
(Potassium Nitrate). X4 = Var. Indep. (% RH). X7 = Var. Indep. (Ratio Irrigation
). X10 = interaction (X1X3 + X4X6 + X2X7 + X5X8) X13 = interaction (X1X6 + X3X4
+ X2X5 + X7X8)
12
F r i ca G # 0 1: PO RCENTA DERECUPERACIONDEORO JE
86.0 84.0 82.0 80.0 78.0
% D cup. Au
84.0-86.0
76.0
82.0-84.0
September 10 July 8
80.0-82.0
72.0 74.0 70.0
78.0-80.0
Ratio
76.0-78.0
6
Ce 0.6 m., Nitr ate, type m in., Hum., Help. agglomeration., CN cur., m Tie cur.
6 -0. 2 -0. 0.2
74.0-76.0
-1
5
1
72.0-74.0
70.0-72.0
Gr aphicides No. 02: PERCENTAGE OF RECOVERY OF GOLD (vis ta s up er ior)
10
9.5
9
8.5
8
7.5
Ratio
7
84.0-86.0
6.5
82.0-84.0
6
80.0-82.0
78.0-80.0
5.5
76.0-78.0
5
74.0-76.0
Ce m e nt, Nitrate K, Tip or m in.,% Hu m., Help. lom ag., CN cur ado, ado cur T
ie m.
72.0-74.0
70.0-72.0
13
REFERENCES: (1) Jorge Ayala, Richard Pardo "EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN OPTIMIZATION FOR
" CONCYTEC, 1995. (2) Sergio curated "METALLURGY OF GOLD" vol. Edit II. Workshop
s Publiasesores SRL., Lima, Peru. (3) Douglas C. Montgomery "Probability and Sta
tistics" Edit. McGraw-Hill Interamericana Editores SA, Mexico.
14