Beneficiation Of Banded Iron Ore From Hassan, Karnataka

B P Ravi ,P S Kumar, M R Patil, S J G Krishna, C Rudrappa and P C Naganoor

Mineral Processing department, VSKU PG Centre, Nandihalli, Sandur. 583119
ravibelavadi@gmail.com
Abstract
A low grade banded iron ore sample Hassan, Karnataka State was collected for carrying out
bench scale beneficiation for evolving a process flow sheet to produce pellet grade concentrate
containing Fe >63%, SiO2 + Al2O3 <6%, LOI <2%. The scope of work comprised of
characterization, amenability of sample to size, gravity and magnetic separation, variation of
factors and parameters, test work under optimum conditions simulating local plant practice. The
as received sample consisted of mainly grayish brown coloured hard and compact lumps up to
100 mms size with minor amount of brown to black coloured fines. The sample assayed 35.11%
Fe (T), 2.08% FeO, 47.12% SiO2 and 0.89% LOI. The as received sample contained mainly
hematite and quartz. Martitized magnetite, magnetite, feldspar and chlorite/amphibole were
observed in minor to trace amounts. The as received Banded anhydrous iron oxide quartz sample
had fair degree of liberation at -65 mesh. The sample was amenable to beneficiation by gravity
concentration and WHIMS, The concentrates meeting the stipulated grade could be produced at
very fine sizes in case of WHIMS. Whereas, introduction of a gravity separation technique viz.,
tabling yielded concentrates meeting the specifications even at moderate size MOG. Ultimately,
a combination of stage grinding, desliming, tabling, WLIMS of deslimed table rejects at 2000
gauss at 65 mesh size, yielded an iron concentrates assaying 65.37% Fe, 4.10% SiO 2, 0.15%
Al2O3, Traces of S and P, and 0.20 % LOI with 82.3% Fe recovery and weight percent yield of
43.6 meeting the specification of the party.
1

Introduction

Review of Indian steel industry reveals that the steel output is expected to grow three fold during
the year 2020 from present production of 6 million tons. This warrants about 50 million tons of
quality iron lumps or beneficiated agglomerates during the year 2020. With increase in demand
for quality lumpy ores, the ratio of lumps to fines in mines tend to reverse. Significant efforts
have been made to utilize the sub grade iron ore fines and existing iron ore washing plant tails by
beneficiation followed by agglomeration preferably Pelletization by research labs IBM,, NMDC
R&D lab, IIMT, Bhubaneswar, NML, SAIL R&D lab ISM Dhanbad which is being implemented
by SAIL, TATA, JSW, Vedanta etc Alternatively, efforts are underway to explore the possibility
of utilization of low grade Banded Iron rock formations like BHQ, BHJ and BMQ. Though
processing of BMQ seems simple as evidenced by operations of KIOCL, JSL but since most of
the BMQ are located in sensitive thick forests where mining is banned. Efforts to process BHQ
BHJ are under way as evidenced by the works of IBM, IMMT, JSW and Rao et al [2010],
Nikkam et al [2010], Gurulaxmi et al [2010] and Nayak et al. [2014]. In view of above, A low
grade banded iron ore sample Hassan, Karnataka State was collected for carrying out bench scale
beneficiation for evolving a process flow sheet to produce pellet grade concentrate containing Fe
>63%, SiO2 + Al2O3 <6%, LOI <2%. and 90% minus 200 mesh, specific surface area of 1800
cm2/g and moisture <10% for use in on line grate kiln pellet plant.

Experimental

2.1
Material and equipment; About 200 kgs of low grade banded iron ore sample Hassan,
Karnataka State was collected for carrying out bench scale beneficiation for evolving a process
flow sheet to produce pellet grade concentrate assaying Fe >63%, SiO 2 + Al2O3 <6%, LOI <2%.
250 x150mm Roll crusher, Carpco riffler, Tyler sieve set, MPE 175 x 350 mm tumbling mill with
13.5 kg alls/ 19 mm to37.5mm steel rods, MPE Laboratory diagonal deck table, Creative
engineers 4x2 lab WMIMS, Local lab filter pan drying oven and balances.
2.2
Methods: Standard feed preparation and sampling methods, laboratory testing methods,
mineralogical and assay methods enumerated by hand books were followed. The experimental
work has been categorized as characterization, physical concentration like gravity, magnetic
separation varying the parameters, other auxiliary tests and final flow sheet results. The results
are discussed below.
3

Results and discussion

3.1
Characteristics of the sample: The as received sample consisted of mainly grayish
brown coloured hard and compact lumps up to 100 mms size with minor amount of brown to
black coloured fines. The sample assayed 35.11% Fe (T), 2.08% FeO, 47.12% SiO 2, 0.77%
Al2O3, traces of P2O5, 0.02% S(T), 0.07% Alkalies, 0.04% MnO, 0.13% TiO2, 0.39% CaO, 0.18%
MgO and 0.89% LOI. The as received sample contained mainly hematite [40-45%] and quartz
[45-50%]. Martitized magnetite-magnetite [5-10%], feldspar and chlorite/amphibole were
observed in minor to trace amounts. The as received Banded anhydrous iron oxide quartz sample
had fair degree of liberation at -65 mesh. The diagnostic amenability test on deslimed sample at
-65 mesh both by Sink Float test at 3SG using TBE and Hand magnet Frantz Iso Dynamic
magnetic separation yielded pellet grade concentrate indicting that the sample is amenable to ore
dressing. Ravi et.al. [2011] indicated similar results while dealing with most of siliceous iron
ores, banded iron ores of Karnataka during characterization studies.
3.2
Rod mill grindability tests: 1 kg Batches of -10 mesh sample were stage ground to -35 /
-65 / -150 mesh in lab. Denver rod mill (175 x 350 mm) at 67% Solids, 13.5 kgs rod charge with
stage ground time interval of 5 each. The ground products were subjected to wet sieve analysis.
The test conditions and results are given in Table1
3.3
Tabling tests varying MOG: Tabling test were conducted varying MOG -35 / -65 / -150
mesh. The test condition and results are given in Table 2. The results indicated that [1] Tabling
(gravity concentration) produced concentrate meeting the specifications of party. [2]
Concentrate grade increases with increase in fineness of mesh of grind[3]Optimum results were
obtained at -65 mesh grind (d 80 180 microns) yielding a concentrate assaying 64.71%Fe,
5.40% SiO2, 0.54%Al2O3 and 0.60%LOI with 79.0%Fe distribution at 42.2 wt.% yield. On the
contrary tabling at a very fine mesh of grind of minus 150 mesh d 80 90 microns yielded a
concentrate assaying 68.02%Fe (T), 1.43% SiO2, 0.20% Al2O3, & 0.15%LOI with 64.3% Fe
distribution at 32.1 wt. % yield.

Table 1: Rod mill stage grindability test

Size fraction
-10 +16 mesh
-16 +25 mesh
-25 +36 mesh
-36 +52 mesh
-52 +72 mesh
-72 +100 mesh
-100 +150 mesh
-150 +200 mesh
-200 +300 mesh
-300 +400 mesh
-400 + 500 mesh
-500 mesh

Aperture
microns
1,700
1,000
600
420
300
212
150
106
74
53
37
25

Cumulative wt.% passing

-10 #
-35 #
-65 #
-150 #
100.0
100
100
100
76.8
100
100
100
64.4
100
100
100
47.2
100
100
100
41.2
85.6
100
100
33.2
67.3
100
100
26.4
49.5
68.5
100
18.8
34.9
43.8
100
13.2
23.9
28.4
64.7
9.6
16.5
18.5
41.3
6.8
11.3
12.3
27.7
5.6
8.8
9.8
21.7

Table 5: Effect of Mesh of Grind on Tabling

Conditions: [1]. 5 Batches of -10 mesh stage ground to -35 / -65 / -150 mesh in
175 x 300 mm rod mill, 13.5 kg rod charge at 67% Solid at 5 stage Grind time interval .
[2]. Ground pulp tabled on Diester diagonal deck full tilt. 0.5 LPM 20% S pulp, 3.5 + 3 + 2.5
+ 2 LPM wash water
160 CPM, 8 mm stroke
Results:
MOG
-35 mesh
d80 280
microns

-65 mesh
d80 190
microns

-150 mesh
d80 90 microns

Product
Table Concentrate
Table Middling
Table Tails
Table Slimes
Head Cal
Table Concentrate
Table Middling
Table Tails
Table Slimes
Head Cal
Table Concentrate
Table Middling
Table Tails
Table Slimes
Head Cal

Wt.%
44.4
33.4
13.9
8.3
100.0
42.2
21.7
29.6
6.5
100.0
32.1
8.3
43.2
16.4
100.0

Fe
Assay% %Distn
62.18
80.5
12.02
11.7
12.50
3.0
19.50
4.7
34.28
100.0
64.71
79.0
12.79
8.0
9.60
8.2
25.40
4.8
34.58
100.0
68.02
64.3
29.21
7.1
13.00
16.5
25.00
12.1
33.97
100.0

3.3
WHIMS tests varying MOG: Tests were conducted by WLIMS followed by WHIMS
test varying MOG. The results of WLIMS and WHIMS test varying MOG from -35 / -65 / -150
mesh are given in Table 3. The tests indicated that [a] WLIMS followed by WHIMS could not

produce stipulated concentrate except at very fine MOG of -150 mesh. [b] WLIMS alone could
produce the desired concentrate grade concentrating only magnetite irrespective of MOG. [c]
Optimum results were obtained at minus 150 mesh grind yielding a composite mag concentrate
assaying 64.78%Fe(T), 7.27% SiO2, 0.26% Al2O3, 0.35% LOI with 70.9%Fe distribution at
38.1 Wt. % yield just failing to meet the specification. The lack of selectivity at coarse size was
attributed due to concentration of interlocked grains in magnetic fraction. Ravindran et. al.
utilized this concept for preconcentration of martitized magnetite from Bellary followed by
regrind and recleaner magnetic separation.
Table 3: Effect of MOG on WLIMS followed by WHIMS
Conditions:

[1]. 1 kg

batches of -10 mesh stage ground to -35 / -65 / -1500 mesh in

175 x 300 mm rod mill, 13.5 kg rod charge at 67% S at 5 stage grind time interval . [ 2]. Ground

pulp subjected to Wet Low Intensity Magnetic separation in WMIMS by increasing pole
distance and reducing the open air intensity to 800 gauss in open air, 9 mm ball matrix. [ 3 ]
Wet High Intensity Magnetic separation(WHIMS)2x4L,9 dia ball matrix, 10000 gauss in open
air 0 cm pole distance 100 cc pulp 30% S, wash water at each 1 cycle
Results:
MOG

Product
WLIMSMag. Conc
WHIMSMag. Conc
Non-Mag. Tails
Head (Calc.)
Comp Mag Conc
WLIMSMag. Conc
WHIMSMag. Conc
Non-Mag. Tails
Head (Calc.)
Comp Mag Conc
WLIMSMag. Conc
WHIMSMag. Conc
Non-Mag. Tails
Head (Calc.)
Comp Mag Conc

Wt.%
15.2
44.4
40.4
100.0
59.6
9.2
41.8
49.0
100.0
51.0
10.9
27.2
61.9
100.0
38.1

Fe
Assay% %Distn
65.67
28.3
48.94
61.6
8.82
10.1
35.27
100.0
53.21
89.9
67.00
17.9
57.31
69.4
8.98
12.7
34.52
100.0
59.06
87.3
68.95
21.6
63.11
49.3
16.41
29.1
34.84
100.0
64.78
70.9

3.4 Tabling,
WLIMS
&
WHIMS of table
rejects
varying
MOG: Tests were
conducted on 5 kg
-65 mesh
sample
stage
d80 180 microns
ground to varying
MOG -35/ -65 /150 mesh by a
process
-150 mesh
comprising
of
d80 90 microns
tabling, WLIMS
and WHIMS of
table rejects and
slimes. The test condition and results are given in Table 4. The tabling and WHIMS of table
rejects varying MOG indicated that [1] Increase in fineness of grind increased the composite
concentrate grade.[2] Tabling and WLIMS of table rejects produced concentrates meeting the
specification of party.[3] WHIMS of WLIMS non mag fraction though enhanced yield and %
Fe distribution of concentrate, significantly diluting the composite grade, much below the
stipulated level of >64% Fe.[4] Optimum results were obtained at -65 mesh, d 80 180 microns
mesh of grind producing composite concentrate assaying 58.34%Fe(T), 15.07% SiO 2, 0.32%
Al2O3, 0.27% LOI with 90.4%Fe distribution at 54.4 Wt. % yield.[5]The rod mill stage grinding,
to minus 65 mesh d80 180 microns, gravity concentration by tabling, WLIMS of d table rejects
-35 mesh
d80 280 microns

at 2000 gauss yielded a composite concentrate assaying 64.43 %Fe(T), 7.33% SiO 2, 0.35%
Al2O3, 0.28% LOI with 84.8%Fe distribution at 44.6 Wt. % yield just meeting the specifications
of the party except for SiO2+ Al2O3.
Table 8: Tabling WLIMS & WHIMS of table rejects varying MOG
Conditions: [1]5 kg batches of , -10 mesh 1 kg sample stage ground in 175 x
50 mm rod mill, 17.5 rod charge, 67% Solids, at 5 stage grind time intervals
to varying MOG of -35#/65#/-150#, d 80 280/180/90 microns.[2]Ground pulp tabled on Diester diagonal
deck table 160 cpm, 8 mm stroke, full tilt, 0.5 LPM 30% S pulp, 3.5+3+2.5+2 LPM wash water [ 2].

Ground pulp subjected to Wet Low Intensity Magnetic separation in WMIMS by increasing pole
distance and reducing the open air intensity to 800 gauss in open air, 9 mm ball matrix [3] Wet
High Intensity Magnetic separation (WHIMS) 2x4L, 9 dia ball matrix, 10000 gauss in open air 0
cm pole distance 100 cc pulp 30% S, wash water at each 1 cycle
Results

MOG

-35 mesh
d80 280 microns

-65 mesh
d80 180 microns

-150 mesh
d80 90 microns

Product
Table Concentrate
WLIMS Mag Concentrate
WHIMS Mag Concentrate
WHIMS Non mag tails
Head (Calc.)
T.Conc. + WLIMS Mag
T.Conc. + Comp. Mag
Table Concentrate
WLIMS Mag Concentrate
WHIMS Mag Concentrate
WHIMS Non mag tails
Head (Calc.)
T.Conc. + WLIMS Mag
T.Conc. + Comp. Mag
Table Concentrate
WLIMS Mag Concentrate
WHIMS Mag Concentrate
WHIMS Non mag tails
Head (Calc.)
T.Conc. + WLIMS Mag
T.Conc. + Comp. Mag

Wt.%
44.4
4.2
13.3
38.1
100.0
48.6
61.9
42.2
2.4
9.3
46.1
100.0
44.6
53.9
32.1
10.3
12.0
45.6
100.0
42.4
54.4

Fe(T)
Assay%
%Dist
62.18
79.2
40.23
4.8
23.62
9.0
6.40
7.0
34.88
100.0
60.28
84.0
52.41
93.0
64.71
82.1
38.53
2.7
26.47
7.5
5.65
7.7
33.88
100.0
64.43
84.8
58.02
92.3
68.02
62.2
39.12
11.5
48.94
16.7
7.43
9.6
35.12
100.0
61.00
73.7
58.34
90.4

3.5
Final test under optimized conditions : As the process comprising of desliming, gravity
concentration by tabling, WLIMS of table rejects yielded concentrates meeting the chemical
specifications of client, a final test under optimum conditions were conducted. The final
recommended process comprised of [1] Rod mill stage grinding of the sample to minus 65 mesh,
d80 190 microns. [2] Gravity concentration by tabling [3] WLIMS of table rejects at 2000 gauss.

Results are given in Table 5. Fig. 3 shows the flow sheet with material balance. The size analysis
of concentrate is given in Table 6 which indicates the necessity of further grinding of concentrate
to obtain desired Blaine value. The above process produced a composite iron concentrate (table
concentrate and WLIMS mag concentrate) assaying The above process produced a composite
iron concentrate (table concentrate and WLIMS mag concentrate) assaying 65.37% Fe, 4.10%
SiO2, 0.15 Al2O3, Traces of S and P, and 0.19 % LOI with 82.3% Fe recovery and weight
percent yield of 43.6. The concentrate obtained meets the specification stipulated by the party. It
was also observed that WHIMS may significantly increase the iron concentrate yield and %Fe
recovery by about 10%, but decreases the grade to about 59% Fe below the stipulated grade of
64% Fe. The final tails assayed 10.83% Fe (T).
Table 5 : Conditions & results of final test process
Conditions: [1] 5 batches of 1 kg -10 # stage ground to minus 65 mesh d 80 190 microns in
175 x 350 mm rod mill at 67% Solids, 13.5 kg rod charge at 5 stage grind time interval [2].
Tabling of deslimed sand with Diester diagonal deck table full tilt, 8 mm stroke, 160 cpm[3]
Ground pulp subjected to Wet Low Intensity Magnetic separation in WMIMS by increasing pole
distance and reducing the open air intensity to 800 gauss in open air, 9 mm ball matrix
Results:
Assay %
% Fe
Wt.
Dist.
Product
%
Fe
SiO2 Al2O3 LOI
Table Concentrate
WLIMSMag. Conc
Non-Mag. Tails
Head (Calc.)
Comp Concentrate
Table rejects

42.9
0.7
56.4
100.0
43.6
57.1

65.49
58.03
10.83
34.61
65.37
11.39

3.91
21.34
80.43
47.17
4.10
79.67

0.15
0.23
0.29
0.32
0.15
0.44

0.19
1.05
1.07
0.80
0.20
1.26

81.2
1.1
17.7
100.0
82.3
18.8

Table 6: Size analysis of final concentrate

Size fraction
-100 +150 mesh
-150 +200 mesh
-200 +300 mesh
-300 +400 mesh
-400 + 500 mesh
-500 mesh
Head (Calc.)
4

Aperture microns
150
106
74
53
37
25
D80 180 microns

Wt.%
25.5
13.3
8.2
5.1
2.0
2.0
100.0

Conclusions

A low grade banded iron ore sample assaying 35.11% Fe (T), 2.08% FeO, 47.12% SiO 2 and
0.89% LOI when subjected to evolved process comprising of stage grinding, desliming, tabling,

WLIMS of deslimed table rejects at 2000 gauss at 65 mesh size, yielded an iron concentrates
assaying 65.37% Fe, 4.10% SiO2, 0.15% Al2O3, Traces of S and P, and 0.20 % LOI with 82.3%
Fe recovery and weight percent yield of 43.6 meeting the pellet grade specification.
References
1
2
3
4

5
6
7

IBM Monograph of Iron ores 1997

IBM Iron and Steel Vision 2020 2010
N M Nayak, A Das and B K Pal, Feasibility of beneficiation of BHJ of eastern
India, Int. J. Engg. Res. & Tech., Vol 1 [9], pp 1-11.
Gurulaxmi SN, Ghosh TK and Mukarjee AK [2010], State of art of characterization
of BHJ for the purpose of beneficiation Proc. MPT 2010, Dec 2010, NML
Jamshedpur, India
Vidyadhar, A and Singh, A K and Srivastava, A and Nayak, B and Rao, K V and Das,
Avimanyu (2010) Beneficiation of banded hematite quartzite from Meghatuburu
mine, eastern India. Proc. MPT-2010, Dec 2010, NML Jamshedpur, India.
Suresh N, Anupam M, Singh G and Raghav PK,[2010], Studies on BHQ sample by
different methods Dec 2010, NML Jamshedpur, India
B P Ravi, PSKumar, SJGKrishna and C Rudrappa Characterization and processing
of some iron ores of India Trans. Ind Inst of Engrs. Sec D 94[2]pp113-120