Beneficiation of Brannerite

June 2009AusIMM International Uranium Conference

Mineral Laboratories

Amdel is a member of the Bureau Veritas

Group

Contents

1. Disclaimers

2. Mineralogy – know your enemy

3. Heavy Liquid Separations

4. Spiralling

5. Flotation

6. Magnetic Separations

7. Summary

Beneficiation of Uranium Brannerite Ores

Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

• Thanks to our client who has kindly allowed me to release this information.

• The client has requested their identity NOT be disclosed so as to comply with ASX disclosure requirements. So any information thatcould reveal this has been withheld.

• The information presented is based on lab scale testing and not plant scale.

• No technicians were harmed in the production of these test results.• Copious quantities of beer were consumed in the production of this

presentation and hence don’t believe anything you read.

• Further for those who DON’T ask any difficult questions, the beers are on me at the bar at 5.30pm today.


Brannerite – an introduction

• (U4+,Ca)(Ti,Fe3+)2O6 complex• Radioactive

• SG 4.2 - 5.4

• Refractory ore – more difficult to leach• Paramagnetic

In our case we have 5 bulk composites from different sections of the ore body.

Courtesy: Mindat.org

Indicative Head Grades – Fusion ICP (OES & MS)


Bulk Chemistry of our Samples

MnO (<0.01%)P2O5 (0.8%)

Th (150-310ppm)Fe2O3 (1.5%)

MgO (1.8%)

CaO (1.5%)

U (100-395ppm)

TiO2 (0.5%)

Na2O (6.3%)

K2O (1.8%)

Al2O3 (14.3%)

SiO2 (70%)

Head grade of U from 100 to 395 ppm.


Bulk Mineralogy of our Samples - QEMSCAN

• Brannerite predominantly liberated or high grade middling in -1.0mm sample

• Average grain size from 5 – 25 microns, but up to 250 microns top size

Brannerite0%

Mica8%

Fe Mn Oxides0% Pyrite

0%

Others1%

Calcite0%

Rutile/anatase1%

Apatite2%

Thorite0%

Other Silicates1%

Feldspar63%

Quartz24%


Assay by Size

Observed

• High grade U in the -20 micron fractions

• U in the large size fractions

• Cumulative grade by size shows U evenly distributed by mass

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0.000 0.025 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.125 0.150 0.175 0.200 0.225 0.250 0.275 0.300

Size (mm)

U (

pp

m)

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5

• Screened from 3.35mm to 20 microns


Processing Implications from Mineralogy

• Beneficiation prior to grinding unlikely to be successful• High SG likely to favour gravity separation

• Concentration Criterion of 1.9-2.7 depending on SG value of Brannerite

• Leach likely to involve high free acid levels 50g/L• Acid consuming minerals present in significant proportions

• Presence of Mica likely to affect flotation performance

• Presence of Phosphate has some possible implications for flotation• Paramagnetic properties presents magnetic separation potential

Recovery the driver for this client

Density Gradient


Heavy Liquid Separations for Gravity Separation Assessment

• Gradient of heavy liquids from low SG at top to higher SG at bottom

• Eye-ball technique - qualitative• -150, +75 micron fraction

• Showed potential for separation at an SG of 2.7


Heavy Liquid Separations for Gravity Separation Assessment

• Likely to quantify the maximum performance for gravity separation

• Each sample subjected to HLS at SG of 2.7

• Results include -20 micron fraction

89.70% 89.30%

78.90%81.30%

11.80% 11.70%12.60%11.70%7.80%

88.10%

3633

1367

2194 2159

4386

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Rec

ove

ry t

o +

2.7

SG

Fra

ctio

n

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)

Wt% U Recovery U Grade

• Significant rejection of mass by gravity separation possible


Spirals

• -1.0mm feed material• Deslime at 250 microns

prior to spiral• Bulk Density 30%

• Flowrate ~1000kg/hour wet

65.9%

72.5%74.0%

76.3%

84.8%85.5%

73.2%

79.6%78.0%

90.2%

519

271

138

305 299

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Rec

ove

ry (

%)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)



Spiral Enhancement

• Observed tail was dominated by large white grains

• Deslime the tail post spiral at 250 microns

• +250 micron tail comprised 90% of the mass and assayed at 89 ppm U

65.9%69.0%

85.5%

94.9%

519534

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Sample 1 Sample 1 with Tail Deslimed at 250 microns

Rec

ove

ry %

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)


• Suggests potential for sequential scavenger/cleaner spiral arrangement

Range of Collectors Tested


Sighter Flotation – 2.5L cell

• Anionic collectors performed better than the cationic one• Fatty acid achieved 79.4% recovery at a grade of 1096ppm in 26.6% of the weight.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

U Recovery (%)

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)

mono/di phosphoric acid esther (-) fatty acid (-) alkyl hydroxamate (-) talow diamine acetate (+)


Bulk Flotation – 15L cell

• Average U recovery 89%, peaking at 95%

• Average U grade 1096 ppm

• Average mass rejected 78%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Float Number

Rec

ove

ry (

%)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)

Wt Recovery (%) U Recovery (%) U Grade (ppm)

• Increased float time to 40 minutes

• 45 floats conducted to produce a bulk concentrate

Conducted as part of our new WHIMS commissioning


Magnetic Separation

• Very visual split achieved• Initial Frantz testing done on a 38-212 micron split of Sample 4

• U grade 2571ppm in 9.6% of the mass but only 61.5% recovery


SAMPLE

WHIMS Pass 1

TAIL

WHIMSScavenger

WHIMSCleaner 1

WHIMSCleaner 2

WHIMSCleaner 3

MIDS CON

Non Mags

Non Mags

Mags

Mags

Mags

Mags

Non Mags

Non Mags

Non Mags

AMDEL WHIMS Standard Test Sequence

Mags


Magnetic Separation

• Test at 2 magnetic intensities, 10kG and 18kG

• High intensity expected to be required for paramagnetic Brannerite

20.9%

34.7%

43.3%

73.7%

83.7%

74.1%

18.0%

87.9%

2436

2930

833 811

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Sample 1 - WHIMS 10kG Sample 1 - WHIMS 18kG Sample 4 - WHIMS 10kG Sample 4 - WHIMS 18kG

Rec

ove

ry (

%)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)


• Significantly different behaviour amongst the two samples tested


Quick Comparison of the Three Beneficiation Techniques

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Spiral Flotation Magnetic Separation

Beneficiation Method

Rec

ove

ry %

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

U G

rad

e (p

pm

)


Leach, IX and SX


Glimpse of Next Stage

• Up to 95% U extraction but at some significant acid consumptions ~254kg/T

• IX and SX results to come

Questions…

PS don’t forget beers on me at 5.30pm today.

Technology

Beneficiation of Brannerite