New Developments in Process Mineralogy of Platinum-Bearing Ores

"Mineralogical evaluation of ores containing platinum-group elements (PGE) is fraught with difficulties because of the low grades (often 1-3 g/t PGE), dispersal of PGE (usually as finegrained platinum-group minerals [PGM]), as well as occurring in solid solution in some base metal sulphides (BMS) such as pentlandite and pyrrhotite. Mineral processors not only need to know how the PGE are distributed, that is, their mineralogical distribution, but the grain sizes of the PGM, and especially the associated minerals.After obtaining a representative ground sample, common approaches include studying a large number of polished or polished thin sections, concentration of the PGM and sulphides by different gravity methods (e.g., heavy liquids, elutriation, micro-panning) and study of the produced concentrates. Unfortunately, these methods often do not produce concentrations that are sufficiently representative of a particular ore. The newly developed patented technology of hydroseparation (Rudashevsky et al., 2002) is especially effective at making concentrations of PGM over a wide range of concentrations (down to <300 ppb Pt+Pd+Au) and size fractions, including <45µm (down to a few micrometres in size), a size range not possible by other techniques. This water-based environmentally friendly laboratory technique provides a large amount of data from samples, which can range from 5 to 1000g, giving confidence to extrapolation of results to bench-scale and larger test work, especially when combined with quantitative image analysis to determine modal percent of major minerals and mineral liberation data, needed to predict the minimum (K80) and optimum (K40) grinds. INTRODUCTIONThe invention of the electron microprobe in the early 1960’s and scanning electron microscopes (SEM) with energy dispersive spectrometers (EDS) in the 1970’s presented mineralogists with powerful tools permitting them to obtain chemical and surface area data on minute amounts of minerals in situ, in a non-destructive manner. An area of process mineralogy that has very much benefited from this new technology was the characterization and understanding of PGM species, resulting in rapid growth of newly characterized species (Figure 1). Recognition of the first PGM may be ascribed to the Spanish explorer Ulloa in 1748, who described native platinum from South America. The second PGM (laurite, RuS2) was only recognised in 1866 by Wöhler in placer samples from Borneo (now Kalimantan) and the third (sperrylite, PtAs2) by Wells in 1889 from the Sudbury Ni-Cu sulphide deposits. The discovery of the important Pt-Pd deposits in the Bushveld Igneous Complex led to the characterization of the important Pt-Pd sulphides (cooperite, PtS2 in 1928 and braggite, (Pt,Pd)S2 in 1932). By the early 1960’s, only about 20 PGM were recognised, and many later proved to be poorly or incompletely characterized. Thus, the introduction of electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) led to a 50% increase of known PGM, as shown in a 1972 review on PGM (Cabri, 1972). At the time of the next review in 1981 (Cabri, 1981) the number of known PGM had grown to 75 and as of 2002, it had increased to 109 (Cabri, 2002). However, it is the author’s experience that less than about 25 PGM may be considered to be “common”, i.e., found in many different deposit types, as shown in Table 1, but usually only some of these occur in any one particular deposit."