English
Español
عربى
Français
Русский
Tiếng Việt
Preliminary Suggestions
| Typical indicators / objective observations | Likely direct causes | Low-cost actions to try first | When you should introduce / re-select PAM | Why PAM is recommended here |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fine trailing; slow clarification | High fraction of ultra-fines; insufficient bridging window; poor dispersion | Improve dilution/mixing; avoid under-dissolved polymer; stabilize feed solids | When fine capture remains weak after hydraulic tuning | High-MW bridging and correct charge window capture ultra-fines into settleable flocs |
| Cloudy overflow after blend change | Surface chemistry shift; reagent carryover; water salinity change | Stabilize reagent dosing; confirm pH and recycle-water quality | When blend variability is unavoidable and overflow clarity is critical | Grade selection provides a robust window across variable surface chemistry |
| Flocs form but break; results inconsistent | Excess shear at feedwell/pumps; wrong MW for circuit shear | Reduce shear exposure; relocate dosing point; adjust dilution ratio | When stable performance is required with existing equipment | MW/charge matching improves floc strength and shear tolerance |
Applicability boundary: Best for tailings clarification and densification. If overflow haze is primarily from dissolved color or very stable colloids requiring upstream coagulation, address coagulation first and then refine polymer selection.
Selection guidance: how to choose the right PAM for this circuit
Molecular weight (MW): bridging power vs. shear sensitivity
Higher MW typically improves bridging and aggregation, accelerating settling and improving clarification. However, high-MW flocs can be more shear-sensitive. If flocs form but break near the feedwell, pumps, or valves, MW and dosing point must be adjusted together.
Charge density (ionicity): matching particle surface chemistry
Charge density determines how strongly PAM interacts with fines and colloids. Too low may underperform; too high (or overdosing) may create fragile flocs or re-stabilize particles. The correct window depends on mineralogy, reagent regime, and water chemistry.
APAM / NPAM / CPAM: selecting the ionic type for the job
For many mining clarification and thickening applications, anionic or nonionic PAM is commonly evaluated first. Cationic grades may be relevant in specific streams where surface charge and contaminants require a different interaction profile.
Emulsion vs powder: choosing by site constraints
Powder grades can be cost-effective for stable operations with controlled solution preparation. Emulsion grades are often preferred when rapid dissolution, faster response, and more automated dosing are needed.
Initial recommendation
Starting point: Select an anionic/nonionic PAM window designed for ultra-fine capture and shear tolerance. Validate with a repeatable jar test method and confirm performance at the real dosing point in the plant.
Contact us for a precise grade recommendation
A precise recommendation requires your real operating data. Please submit the form and include the items below (you may provide ranges/estimates if exact values are not available). We also welcome complex or rare cases.
- Tailings PSD and % ultra-fines: Fine trailing is driven by ultra-fines; selection must target their capture.
- Recycle-water turbidity target: Sets the clarification requirement for reuse stability.
- pH and conductivity/salinity: Shifts polymer interaction strength and can change the optimum window.
- Feedwell shear conditions and dosing point: Determines whether flocs survive long enough to settle.
- Target underflow density: Balances densification vs overflow clarity.
- Problem repeat probability: Guides robustness requirements across ore blends.
What you will receive: recommended PAM type/form, 2–3 candidate grade windows, an initial dosing range for a controlled trial, and step-by-step jar test / plant trial guidance.
