Column Diameter Effects on Dynamic Froth Stability Measurement

"Dynamic froth stability tests have found widespread application to quantify froth performance. However, little to no attention has been given to scale parameters in the performance of these measurements. One of the most frequently changing scale parameters in the laboratory scale is the column diameter as this directly influences the amount of material needed for testing. Four different column diameters (50, 100, 200 and 300 mm) were used for this study. Column diameter experiments were done on an industrial scale by means of manual tracking of froth growth versus time. An increase in measured dynamic stability was seen with increasing froth column diameter, which reached a limiting value at large column sizes. It is thought that this behaviour is controlled by the differences in drainage rates of the bulk froth compared to froth in contact with the wall. The column diameter required to represent full-scale froth stability is proposed. A ratio of column surface area to total bubble surface area was used to correct for different column diameters.INTRODUCTIONThe froth phase in flotation contributes significantly to the overall performance of the process (Zanin, et al., 2009). Numerous parameters have been investigated to quantify froth performance, most notably froth recovery (Feteris, et al., 1987; Seaman, et al., 2004; Vera, et al., 1999). Experimentally gathering data to determine froth recovery is challenging and for this reason froth stability has been highlighted as a possible alternative.Froth/foam stability is defined as the time of persistence of the froth/foam and is affected by numerous factors, such as: drainage of the liquid in the lamellae (gravitational and capillary), viscosity at the bubble surface, thickness of the electrical double layer and gas diffusion through liquid films caused by pressure differences between bubbles (Aktas, et al., 2008; Beneventi, et al., 2001). It is well documented in both froth and foam literature that froth/foam stability will heavily influence the performance and appearance of the froth/foam phase (Ata, 2012; Farrokhpay, 2011; Weaire, et al., 2005). Experimentally this has been explicitly proven as an increase in froth stability, characterised by water recovery, usually results in an increase in both valuable mineral and solids recovery (Wiese, et al., 2011; Banford, et al., 1998)."