Why JinChan Produces Different Results on Different Ores

Gold ore is not just about Au content

Gold content is an important initial characteristic, but in itself does not describe the technological behavior of the ore. When preparing a test program, it is necessary to take into account a wider range of characteristics of the material being tested.

Yılmaz and Sayın specifically examined two gold ores with different chemical and mineralogical properties. Before comparative leaching tests, the authors conducted:

• chemical analysis
• mineralogical analysis
• XRD
• SEM
• EDS
• granulometric characteristics

The Au value in g/t is not a complete technological characteristic of the ore.

The form of gold matters

For leaching, not only the amount of gold is important, but also its availability for contact with the leaching solution. Mineralogical and microscopic studies provide information about the nature of the material that cannot be obtained from general analysis of Au alone.

The same Au content does not mean the same availability of gold for leaching.

Two real-life examples from the same study

One reagent - two different ores

Yılmaz & Sayın examined the Çukuralan and Kaymaz samples.

The values ​​refer only to the samples studied by the authors of the work.

Despite the relatively similar initial gold content, the chemical and mineralogical composition of the studied materials differed. That is why the authors considered them as ores with different characteristics.

The chemical composition of the two ores was indeed different

Composition difference ≠ proven cause of recovery difference.The table shows the differences in the composition of the samples studied, but does not establish which component was responsible for the differences in leaching. Correlation cannot be passed off as proven causation.

What happened at the same selected JinChan concentration

Under the regime, which the authors determined to be the best among those studied for both ores, the proportion of solids was 40%, and the concentration of JinChan was 300 mg/l.

These are the results of a specific study under specific sample preparation and test conditions. They are not standards or recommendations for other ores.

The same specified reagent concentration did not result in the same actual consumption and the same recovery on two different ores.

Why it is impossible to assign a cause only by chemical analysis

Chemical analysis shows the presence and content of components. Mineralogical research provides additional information about the composition and structure of the material. Leaching test shows the actual technological behavior of the prepared sample.

To prove the effect of a particular element or mineral, a specially designed series of controlled studies is required. Therefore, the logic “there is high As in the ore, which means it was the one that caused the low recovery” is incorrect without such a study.

Composition analysis helps form a hypothesis. A technological test tests it.

What the official manufacturer JinChan says

In the Instructions for Use, the manufacturer lists among the applications of JinChan oxidized gold and silver ores, primary ores, high-sulfur and high-arsenic gold ores, gold concentrates and other specified types of gold-bearing material.

In the dosage calculation section, the manufacturer simultaneously recommends conducting a beneficiation test, determining optimal conditions and adjusting the regime depending on the content in the ore and components affecting the process.

Specifying an ore as an application does not mean that it is guaranteed to have a specific recovery percentage or standard reagent consumption.

High-sulfur or high-arsenic ore is not a ready-made technological diagnosis

The official manufacturer classifies high-sulfur and high-arsenic gold ore as JinChan's area of ​​application. This does not establish whether a particular material requires pretreatment, does not prove the conditions is insensitive to As or S, and does not specify a universal consumption.

For a complex material, the scope of application of the reagent and the actual technological efficiency are different issues. The effectiveness of the regime must be established by testing a specific ore.

Another published example: Carlin-type concentrate

Guo and co-authors studied JinChan on a specific Carlin-type concentrate and experimentally selected the conditions for this material. In the published work, the optimal JinChan concentration tested for this concentrate was 1,0 g/L.

This is the result of a specific experiment on Carlin-type concentrate, and not a recommended concentration for other ores.

What data is desirable to know about the ore before the test?

The scope of the initial characteristics is determined by the research task and the complexity of the material.

Why two COAs do not allow us to compare two ores technologically

Conventional chemical analysis can show the content of a number of elements, but in itself does not show a complete picture of the technological behavior of the material. A reliable prediction of JinChan recovery cannot be obtained from Au, Ag, As, Cu, S or any other single indicator alone.

The COA describes the composition of the sample. Leaching test shows the behavior of this sample in the selected process conditions. These are different types of information.

Why the results of someone else’s factory cannot be transferred to your facility

The consumption, extraction and conditions determined at one enterprise are not a proven conditions for another ore. The result of another object can be used as a technical reference or published example, but not as a guaranteed forecast for one's own enterprise.

How to properly use published examples

Practical conclusion for the client

When choosing JinChan, the first question to answer is not “how much reagent is needed per ton,” but rather “how does a particular ore perform in a controlled test.” After this, you can optimize the concentration, flow and other parameters of the regime.