Mineral Beneficiation - Contact Angles and Surface Coverage

THE importance of contact angles in flotation has long been recognized, but little has been done to get quantitative relationships between the surface coverage of the mineral by the reagent, the length of the hydrocarbon chain, and the contact angle. It is well known that for a complete monolayer on the surface of a mineral the contact angle 8 is determined only by the reagent1 and principally by the chain length of the hydrocarbon radical. Although for flotation the monolayer usually is regarded as being complete, early experiments of Wark and Cox&apos; showed that at very small concentrations of potassium ethyl xanthate the contact angle on galena changed in a continuous way from 0&apos; to the equilibrium value of 60". Further, Gaudin and Vincenta showed a similar continuity using heptylic acid and sphalerite. This shows that with probably incomplete monolayers, 0 varies with the degree of surface coverage. At the time these experiments were made it was impossible to measure the actual amount of surface coverage, especially since the decrease of the collector concentration in the liquor could be influenced by chemical side reactions. Through the use of the radioactive tracer method for the measurement of the amount of collector adsorbed on the surface of the mineral, Gaudin and Bloecher&apos; were able to determine accurately the actual surface coverage of dodecylamine acetate on quartz, but they did not measure any contact angles. It is believed that the relationship between the surface coverage and the contact angle is extremely important in flotation, especially as Gaudin and Bloecher showed that a 95 pct recovery is possible with a coverage of only 5 pct. Theoretical Considerations The work of adhesion W is the energy bound (in ergs per sq cm) when an interface is formed. It is determined by the difference of the free surface energies (surface tensions) of the respective phases 7j and yZ before contact and the interfacial free surface energy y, after contact. The definition of the contact angle permits the elimination of the unknown surface energy of the solid and hence the calculation of W from the surface tension of the liquid y and the contact angle 8: W = y (1 + COS0) [1] Consider a surface consisting of two components, identified as 2 and 3, 1 being the liquid. The amount of 2 in the composite surface is x, where 0 < x < 1. The respective contact angles with 1 and air are 8, and 8.. The total work of adhesion of such a surface is the sum of the values of the components multiplied by their respective areas. A formal relation can be written: Wm = x-W2+ (l-x)-W, [2] in which W, is the work of adhesion of the composite surface. Eq 1 can be introduced into Wt and Wa, but in the case of W, some discussion is needed. If the two components are segregated, each component forming an integral part of the composite surface there is no physical meaning for a contact angle 8m calculated from W,, by using eq 1. If, on the other hand, the area of each patch of the components is small in comparison with, say, the diameter of the bubble used in measuring, it could be expected that 0m would have a physical significance, because of the action of the surface tension of the liquid-gas interface tending to smooth out sharp corners. How small these patches would have to be is difficult to predict, but by using composite surfaces with microscopically