froth management, and therefore negatively affects efficient froth collection (Brito-Parada et al. 2020). Figure 3 – Froth Transport Distance, Froth Surface Area, and Lip Length as a function of Flotation Tank Volume (Modified from Corona-Arroyo et al. 2021). After cell sizes reached up to 300 m3, continuing to operate with current froth management designs was no longer possible, due to the significantly increased froth surface area and froth transport distance (Corona-Arroyo et al. 2021). This is evident in Fig. 3, which shows an increase in lip length and a corresponding decrease in froth transport distance after implementing the double internal launder design. Increasing cell size presents challenges in avoiding stagnant froth zones at the center of the flotation cell (Brito-Parada et al. 2020). These stagnant froth zones negatively affect recovery by decreasing the transportation potential of particles to the launder lip (Bermudez et al. 2021). Therefore, to better optimize the final recovery of the cell, maintaining a stable froth layer is crucial, as it can resist coalescence, bubble bursting, and prevent particle drop-back (Farrokhpay 2011). The stability and structure of the froth are significantly influenced by both the size and quantity of solid particles. Coarser grind sizes and a relatively large surface area compared to the number of solid particles negatively affect froth stability as well (Liu et al. 2022; Heath 2013). As the flotation performance is straightly correlated with the collected amount of valuable minerals, the optimized froth crowding is essential for well performing operation (Metso 2021). Level of crowding (CL) can be calculated based on tank surface area and froth surface area, according to Eq. 2 (Grau et al. 2019): =100( − ) (2)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2