The use of filter aids on iron ore fines

T Haskell1, S Dickie2 and Y Joe3

ABSTRACT
A current trend amongst producers is the increase in dewatering of iron ore fines (<0.5 mm), due
to an increase in wet beneficiation processes used to upgrade lower quality ore deposits, increased
water content in orebodies located below the water table, and increasing focus on transportable
moisture limits (TML). Vacuum filtration is commonly used for dewatering of iron ore fines, and as
with all filtration processes performance decreases with particle size. Significant improvements are
possible with the use of filter aids, usually anionic surfactants and flocculants. Anionic surfactants
reduce the surface tension of the associated water, which is then removed more readily leading to
improved filtercake moistures. Anionic flocculants used correctly can improve cake permeability,
in turn, decreasing cake formation times and increasing filtration rates. In addition to increased
throughput, savings and benefits for producers can include: moisture limit penalties, improved
handleability, along with energy and water savings.
The effect of filter aids on two iron ore fines samples from the Pilbara region were evaluated using
a lab scale vacuum filtration unit. The first sample showed a reduction in the filtercake moisture
content by 2.3 per cent weight/weight (w/w) with the use of BASF’s Drimax® 1234. For the second
sample a reduction in the filtercake moisture of 3.4 per cent w/w along with an increase in filtration
rate of 20 per cent was achieved by using a combination of Magnafloc® 5250 and Drimax® 1239 NF,
as both filter throughput and cake moisture were considered important by site.

INTRODUCTION
In 2014, Australia produced over 600 Mt of iron ore making
it the world‘s second largest producer and the world‘s largest
exporter. With Australia accounting for ~30 per cent of the
global production it is of no surprise that most production
sites are continually looking for improvements and innovation
in respect to the treatment of iron ore fines (IOF). IOF made
up approximately 48 per cent of the total iron ore seabourne
trade in 2011, with Australia and Brazil the major contributors
(Munro and Mohajerani, 2014).
The dewatering of IOF has become a regular topic of
discussion with a key focus on transportable moisture limits
(TML). TML is the maximum total water content allowed for a
given material to be transported to ensure that liquefaction
does not occur. For iron ore product the most common mode
of transport is sea bulk cargo, and liquefaction of bulk cargo
in ships presents a significant safety issue.
In mineral processing of iron ore fine material we often see
a high solids concentrate slurry produced which in turn needs
to be dewatered to achieve the desired saleable product. The
most common process for the dewatering of IOF material is
vacuum filtration. As with all filtration processes performance
decreases with a decrease in particle size/increase in surface
area. Previous results obtained by Amarante, Araujo and
Valadao (2002), determined that size distribution and surface
area significantly impacted on dewatering behaviour of IOF
material in Brazil even though samples shared the same
mineralogical and chemical compositions. Vacuum filtration
associated with IOF material usually involves the use of
a horizontal belt filter (HBF). A HBF works by providing a
continuous vacuum along a horizontal belt/cloth, which
allows a high solids slurry material to be fed onto the cloth
and allows drainage of the solid material. If low moisture IOF
product is desired a HBF is the most viable option undertaken
by producers. The ability for water to drain or separate more
readily from IOF material can be linked with the type of
association the water present has with the solids. The water
associated with IOF can be grouped into three categories:
1. has little relationship with the iron ore, and can be
removed easily
2. is closely related to the particle surface, and the extent of
its removal is affected by the surface physics and surface
area of the iron ore
3. is held internally within the iron ore, which is related to
the porosity of the iron ore.
In dewatering and filtration applications the loosely
associated water is easily removed, whilst the water held
within the IOF is unable to be removed, hence performance
of the process is dictated by the extent to which water is
associated with particle surfaces and particle contact points.
In previous studies, two types of vacuum filtration tests have
been examined, rotary (disc and drum) and horizontal belt
types. Rotary vacuum filtration test work usually involves the
use of a filter leaf apparatus (Figure 1) which is designed to
simulate solids pick up and cake formation which is the crucial
aspect for disc and drum filters. A study by Sastry, Kawulok-
Englund and Hosten (1983), used a filter leaf test method and

1. Technical Specialist, BASF Mining Solutions, Somersby NSW 2250. Email: tara.haskell@basf.com
2. Regional Business Development and Key Account Manager, BASF Mining Solutions, Auckland 2022, New Zealand. Email: scott.dickie@basf.com
3. Account Manager, BASF Mining Solutions, Perth WA 6152. Email: yefrey.joe@basf.com

IRON ORE CONFERENCE / PERTH, AUSTRALIA, 24–26 JULY 2017 183

T HASKELL, S DICKIE AND Y JOE
FIG 1 – Vacuum filtration using a filter leaf.
found that flocculant addition was effective in improving
cake yields but had little impact on moisture content. For
horizontal belt vacuum filtration test work, a simple vacuum
is applied to the treated slurry and water is drawn from the
sample (Figure 2). For horizontal belt vacuum filtration the
rate of dewatering and filtercake moisture contents is of the
highest concern.
Flocculants and surfactants have previously been tested
and proven to enhance filtration and dewatering properties
of IOF. The addition of an anionic flocculant and surfactant
into a IOF feed slurry in the paper by Dias, Valadao and
Araujo (2003) in Brazil, showed an enhanced performance of
the HBF with improvements in cake moisture, cake porosity
and cake formation time noted. The addition of an anionic
flocculant increases the porosity of the filtercake and in turn
allows for faster cake formation and easier drainage of water
unassociated to the iron ore particle itself. Cake formation
times when using an anionic flocculant were considered short
for IOF compared to untreated material (Condie, Stoesser and
Suasnabar, 1998).
Surfactants used in previous studies have also showed some
promising results. A plant trial using three different types
of surfactant chemistries was explored by Patra et al (2016),
where all surfactants gave good results in terms of filtercake
moisture reduction. The mechanism usually associated to
descibe the use of surfactants is surface tension reduction.
By reducing the surface tension of the water associated with
the IOF it is more easily removed/drained from the iron ore
product material and in a more realistic commercial time
frame. Previous studies by Condie, Stoesser and Suasnabar
(1998) found an anionic surfactant was the most effective at
reducing the surface tension of water within IOF. Cationic
and non-ionic surfactants are much less effective. Benefits of
using anionic surfactants not only include filtercake moisture
reduction, but also throughput rates and filtercake formation
times. Surfactants have previously been reported to have
significant positive impacts on the rate of filtration within
vacuum filtration applications (Besra et al, 1998).
FIG 2 – Vacuum filtration set-up for horizontal vacuum filters.
184
A combination of flocculant and surfactant can also give
promising results. The flocculant helps with faster filtration
rates through cake permeability, whilst the surfactant reduces
the water surface tension allowing for faster and easier
drainage. In the presence of flocculants, a complex surfactant
absorption mechanism seems to play a significant role in
enhancing dewatering characteristics (Besra et al, 1998).
In this study anionic surfactants Drimax® 1234 and Drimax®
1239NF were explored on two different iron ore mine sites
in the Pilbara region both wanting to reduce their IOF
filtercake moisture content in a HBF application. The use of a
flocculant, Magnafloc 5250, was also used in conjunction with
a surfactant for one site due to the small particle size presence
in the sample.
METHODOLOGY
Sample and preparation methodology
Samples were collected from two sites in the Pilbara region
of Western Australia just prior to the feed entry onto the
vacuum belt:
• sample 1 = 60 per cent w/w
• sample 2 = 64 per cent w/w.
The two surfactants used were BASF‘s Drimax® 1234 and
Drimax® 1239NF, both liquid, sulfosuccinate diester based
products. They are both virtually colourless in appearance
and neutral pH. The surfactant solutions were prepared and
dosed at one per cent w/v.
The flocculant used was BASF‘s Magnafloc® 5250 which is
an anionic, 25 mol per cent, polyacrylamide sodium acrylate
product. The polymers molecular weight distribution is well
suited for filtration applications. The flocculant solution was
prepared at 0.25 per cent weight/volume (w/v) then further
diluted to 0.025 per cent w/v prior to testing.
Filtration methodology
Vacuum filtration tests on IOF are primarily used to
determine the most effective chemical treatment and the
optimum dose rates for each particular site application. For
this test work, a benchscale vacuum filtration set-up was
used (Figure 2).
The two samples were both tested with no chemical
addition, a blank. The surfactant dose rates were then
varied. Sample 1 only required a surfactant addition. Sample
2 required an addition of flocculant into the matrix due to its
high fines content and particle size distribution. Without the
flocculant addition sample 2 had a long cake formation time.
The Drimax® surfactant products were directly dosed into
the feed solution and mixed for 15 seconds prior to entry into
the filtratest unit. Dose rates for the test work in relation to
the surfactant ranged from 29 g/t to 153 g/t. For sample 2,
IRON ORE CONFERENCE / PERTH, AUSTRALIA, 24–26 JULY 2017
 THE USE OF FILTER AIDS ON IRON ORE FINES

the flocculant was dosed prior to the Drimax® addition with a
15 second mixing interval in between additions.
Filtration time given for the complete test was 150 seconds
for both ore samples which corresponded to plant operating
conditions. The filtercake produced was weighed in an
aluminium tray and dried in the oven at 105°C for two hours.
The cake was then re-weighed and the moisture content of
the filtercake was calculated. Filtercake moisture content
versus surfactant dose rate was graphed in order to determine
optimum results.
The solids throughput capacity, was then calculated
in kilogram of dry solids per square metre per hour (kg/
m²/h). Other parameters such as cake thickness, filter cloths
and overall filtration times were not investigated in this test
work regime.
RESULTS
Sample 1 – 60 per cent w/w
A relationship between surfactant dose rate and filtercake
moisture content (Table 1 and Figure 3) was noted for
sample 1. As the surfactant dose rate increased the filtercake
moisture decreased. The untreated or blank sample observed
a final moisture content of 23.6 per cent w/w compared to
the material treated with Drimax® 1234, which achieved a
final filtercake moisture content of 21.3 per cent w/w with a
dose rate of 125 g/t. This equates to a 2.3 per cent reduction
in filtercake moisture. The trends also suggest in Figure 3,
that a further increase in surfactant may possibly give further
moisture reduction. However this was not explored further
as the moisture reduction observed was already sufficient for
site.
Sample 2 – 64 per cent w/w
A flocculant addition was required for sample 2 in order
to help with filtercloth blinding. The flocculant was dosed
firstly alone with the optimum dose rate found to be 0.7 g/t
(Table 2). A filtercake moisture reduction of two per cent
absolute was observed at the optimum flocculant dose rate
of 0.7 g/t. Dosing beyond this, a negative impact on filtercake
moisture was noted. The solids throughput rate was increased
by 20 per cent with the addition of flocculant at a dose rate of
0.7 g/t, from 650 kg/m²/h to 780 kg/m²/h. Overall a trend in
solids throughput was seen to increase as the flocculant dose
rate increased, however the inverse was seen in relation to
filtercake moisture content.
A further reduction in moisture was required for site
and therefore the addition of a surfactant post flocculant
addition was included. The optimum flocculant dose rate
was determined at 0.7 g/t, therefore a dose response curve
for the Drimax® 1239NF was performed (Figure 4). With the
addition of the Drimax® 1239NF a final filtercake moisture
reduction compared to the blank was 3.4 per cent absolute
(Table 3). Dosing above the optimum surfactant dose rate had
a negative impact on filtercake moisture content.
DISCUSSION
The filtercake moisture content of IOF has in more recent
times become of an increasing concern for iron ore producers
especially as feed quality and grade decreases. Vacuum
filtration being the most common process for IOF dewatering
TABLE 2
Results summary sample 2, with flocculant addition.
Product Flocculant Cake moisture Solids capacity
dose rate (g/t) (%) (kg /m²/h)
Blank 0 13.5 650
Magnafloc® 5250 0.7 11.5 780
2 11.8 820
3.5 12.2 825

TABLE 1
Results summary for filtercake moisture content
in relation to surfactant dose rate.

Product Surfactant dose rate Cake moisture

(g/t) (%)
Blank 0 23.6
Drimax® 1234 30 22.2
60 22.1
90 21.8
125 21.3
FIG 4 – Surfactant dose response with 0.7 g/t of flocculant
(Magnafloc 5250) addition prior for all samples.

TABLE 3
Results summary sample 2, with flocculant and surfactant addition.

Product Flocculant Surfactant Cake Solids

dose rate dose rate moisture capacity
(g/t) (g/t) (%) (kg /m²/h)
Blank 0 0 13.5 650
Magnafloc® 5250 0.7 30 10.1 780
+ 0.7 60 10.3 785
Drimax® 1239NF
FIG 3 – Surfactant dose versus filtercake moisture content. 0.7 90 10.3 785

IRON ORE CONFERENCE / PERTH, AUSTRALIA, 24–26 JULY 2017 185

T HASKELL, S DICKIE AND Y JOE
and therefore with the addition of filter aids a significant
improvement in relation to overall performance can be
obtained.
The purpose of a flocculant filter aid is to absorb at the
solid liquid interface and aggregate particulate matter.
Flocculants can increase the filter yields of solids and produce
a more permeable filter cake which in turn promotes rapid
dewatering. This aggregation of fine material also prevents
filtercloth blinding. Sastry, Kawulok-Englund and Hosten
(1983) also found that the addition of flocculant was necessary
in order to improve IOF dewatering. The paper also describes
that higher surface area material, yield low capacity filtercakes
with high moisture contents. In turn the pretreatment of
sample 2 with the addition of a flocculant was required and
significantly improved the dewatering characteristics of
the concentrate. Flocculant addition also produces a more
uniform, and permeable cake and has also been linked to
prolonging filter cloth life by preventing particle migration
into the cloth (Pearse and Allen, 1981). Also over dosing
flocculant is detrimental to filtercake moisture content and
was noted in sample 2. This increase in moisture can be
associated with the entrainment of water in the filtercake.
As the flocculant dose is increased an increase in size of the
aggregates formed can trap water inside the aggregates and
result in higher moisture filtercakes.
Surfactants can also be used solely or in combination with
flocculants in order to further reduce filtercake moisture
contents. In addition to surface tension reduction, surfactants
can also align themselves on the surface of the particle
and render it more hydrophobic enabling easier water
removal. Detrimental impacts of over dosing surfactants
can be attributed to dispersion action caused by adsorption
at the solids surface, the stabilisation of foam also needs to
be considered. Sample 2 saw negative impact when dosing
beyond the optimum surfactant dose rate. Surfactants are
also generally considered no benefit in relation to cake yields
(Pearse and Allen, 1981).
The addition of surfactants on both IOF samples from the
Pilbara region showed improvements in filtercake moisture
content. Sample 1, showed an overall decrease in filtercake
moisture of 2.3 per cent absolute with the addition of
Drimax® 1234. The reduction in filtercake moisture also has
other benefits for this particular site including; increased
belt life (less blinding), increased throughput, elimination of
exceeding the TML and increased water recycle back to plant.
With all these benefits the producer has given an estimate
that for every one per cent w/w moisture reduction, there is
a cost saving of approximately A$1 million. The addition of
an anionic surfactant has significantly improved the filtration
process reducing the surface tension of the water within the
feed slurry to allow for water to more readily drain away.
The investigation on the second sample of IOF material
(sample 2) was focused on two filtration characteristics;
filtercake moisture reduction and improving solids capacity
of the belt. The addition of the anionic flocculant was required
to aggregate the particles and prevent the filtercloth from
blinding. The blinding of the filter cloth can be strongly
attributed to the cake permeability.
If the filtercake is more permeable, this allows for faster
cake formation times and filtration rates. Improvements in
186
filtration rates in turn increases the potential solids throughput
of the vacuum belt. The solids throughput was increased
by 20 per cent for sample 2 with the addition of 0.7 g/t of
flocculant. Only small dose rates of anionic flocculant are
required with dose rates to be linked to the mass flow onto
the belt. From the sample 2 results we see that dosing above
the optimum 0.7 g/t dose rate, the filtercake moisture content
is negatively impacted (increases). This can be attributed to
the trapped water associated within the flocculated material
(interfloccular water). Floccules entrain a greater volume of
water than closely packed discrete particles (Pearse and Allen,
1981). However it is noted that solids capacity improves as
flocculant dose rate increases. A trade-off between optimum
moisture content along with solids throughput is necessary
in order to meet site requirements. A reduction in moisture
content was observed for sample 2 of 3.4 per cent absolute
with Drimax® 1239NF with a pre-dose of 0.7 g/t of anionic
flocculant.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of an anionic flocculant and surfactant was able to
successfully treat two IOF samples from the Pilbara region.
Both vacuum filtration applications produced a lower
filtercake moisture content when the surfactant was applied.
The second sample required an addition of flocculant which
improved the solids throughput rate on the vacuum belt by
forming a more permeable filtercake.
Overdosing either flocculant or surfactant saw a negative
impact on filtercake moisture content.
Solids throughput capacity was improved with increasing
flocculant addition but inversely impacting filtercake
moisture content.
REFERENCES
Amarante, S, Araujo, A and Valadao, G, 2002. Cake dewatering of
some iron ore industrial products, Minerals and Metallurgical
Processing, 19:161–164.
Besra, L, Singh, B P, Reddy, P and Sengupta, D K, 1998. Influence of
surfactants on filter cake parameters during vacuum filtration of
flocculated iron ore sludge, Powder Technology, 96:240–247.
Condie, D, Stoesser, T and Suasnabar, D, 1998. The vacuum
filtration of iron ore ultrafines, Separation Science and Technology,
33:2265– 2280.
Dias, C, Valadao, G and Araujo, A, 2003. The effect of reagents on
ultrafine iron ore vacuum filtration, Filtration and Separation,
40:37–39.
Munro, M and Mohajerani, A, 2014. Determination of the
transportable moisture limit of iron ore fines for the prevention of
liquefaction in bulk carriers, Marine Structures, 40:193–224.
Patra, A, Makhija, D, Mukherejee, A, Tiwari, R, Sahoo, C and
Mohanty, B, 2016. Improved dewatering of iron ore fines by the
use of surfactants, Powder Technology, 287:43–50.
Pearse, M and Allen, P, 1981. Chemical treatments for optimum
filtration performance, in Proceedings Filtech Conference, pp 39–57
(The Filtration Society).
Sastry, K, Kawulok-Englund, D and Hosten, C, 1983. Comparative
study of the vacuum filtration behaviour of iron ore concentrate
slurries, Technical note, pp 1432–1436 (Society of Mining,
Metallurgy and Exploration).
IRON ORE CONFERENCE / PERTH, AUSTRALIA, 24–26 JULY 2017