Surface Areas Of Flotation Concentrates And The Thickness Of Collector Coatings

Fox the past 20 years it has been generally accepted that the flotation process is made possible as a result of the action of certain chemical substances on the surface of the mineral particles. In fact, it has been suspected, but never demonstrated, that this action produces on the mineral particles a layer of chemosorbed ions that is of the order of magnitude of a monolayer; that is, of a layer one ion deep. It is the purpose of this paper to present certain initial results on the relationship of mineral surface area and collecting-agent requirements. Up to about eight years ago, all considerations involving the surface area of finely divided solids were-limited by the fact that there was not in existence any general method for determining the extent of such surfaces, especially on mixed materials. However, the method invented by Brunauer, Emmett and Teller1 has changed the situation by providing a general procedure (BET method). This procedure has already been applied to mineral dressing problems2 -4 and has now received confirmation as to accuracy by an entirely independent method.5 This confirmatory or "absolute" method uses a very tedious calorimetric procedure and is not suitable for routine determinations; but still another method6 now is available to relate the results obtained by the BET method to those obtained calorimetrically. This Harkins-Jura method has the advantage that it does not require an assumption concerning the parking area per molecule of adsorbate (nitrogen). In the original work by Brunauer, Emmett and Teller the parking area per nitrogen molecule was calculated to be either 13.8Å2. or 16.2Å2. according as the nitrogen was assumed to be closely packed as in crystalline nitrogen or loosely packed as in liquid nitrogen. The initial experimental work from this laboratory2 supported the 13.8Å2. figure; that work was done on glass spheres of measurable geometric area and it was based on the assumption that the glass spheres were truly smooth; any deviation from this assumption would, of course, have made the calculated parking area higher. Harkins and Jura's results suggest that the parking area is not the same for all substrata; furthermore, the average of the 87 measurements cited indicates a "preferred" parking area for the nitrogen molecule of about 15.2Å2., with extreme values at 13.7 and 16.9Å2. The average of 21 determinations made in connection with this study' gave a parking area of 14.3 ± 0.27Å2. In view of this result and of the Harkins and Jura