NO.

2, JUNE 1974
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. MAG-10, 223

[85] J. Goldman,]. Phys. Rad. 12, 471 (1951). 1891A. Hubert,Ann. Phys. 13, 395 (1964).
I861 G . Simmons and J. Thompson,Proc.IEE 118,1302 (1971). [90] H. Callen and N. Goldberg,]. Appl. Phys. 36, 976 (1965).
I871 P. Banks and E. Rawlinson,Proc.IEE 114, 1537 (1967). [91] C. Brownsey and G. Maples, Proc. IEE 213, 1855 (1966).
I881 K. Foster and J. Seidel, AIP Conf.Proc. #5,1514 (1971). [92]. C.Holt and J.Robcy,I-’roc.IEE 114, 1336 (1967).

Magnetic Separation: A Review of Principles,

Devices, and Applications
JOHN A. OBERTEUFFER

Abstract - Conventionalmagneticseparationdevicesare than to refining mechanical operation for various feeds. High
widely used for the removal of tramp iron from a variety of gradientmagneticseparationdevicescapable ofseparating
feed materials and for the beneficiation of ferrous ores. These even very weakly paramagnetic particles, however, have been
devices for separation of strongly magnetic materials employ designed t o maximize the magnetic forces. Recently developed
avariety ofmechanical designs. Recentlydeveloped high devices of thistype will greatly extendtheapplicationof
gradient magnetic separation devices extend the useful appli- magnetic separators. This paper surveys the principal types of
cation ofmagneticseparation to veryweaklymagneticma- conventional and high gradient magnetic separators and their
terials of small particle size. Potentialapplicationsofthese operations and applications. Thegeneral principles of magnetic
new devices in pollution control, chemical processing, and the separationarediscussedandapplied to indicatesomeactual
benefication of nonferrouslow gradeores is indicated.The and potential limits of magnetic separation devices.
principle of operation of magneticseparation devices is the
interactionbetweenmagnetic faacesand competing gravita- Elements of a Magnetic Separator
tional,
hydrodynamic, and
interparticleforces
withinthe
magneticseparator.Withoutresort to adetailedanalysis of Magnetic separation is aphysicalseparation ofdiscrete
the separation process, an understanding of the characteristics particles based on the three-way competition between tractive
of magnetic separators is possible by consideration of a simple magnetic forces,’ gravitational, frictional or inertial [ 6, p. 441
force-balancemodel.Descriptions of the conventional grate, forces, andattractiveor repulsiveinterparticleforces.These
drum and belt magnetic separators, laboratory magnetic sepa- forcescombine t o actdifferentially on particlesofdiffering
rators, and several high gradient devices are given to illustrate magnetic properties in the feed material. Fig. 1 represents the
the devices of major commercial importance and to illuspate principal elements of the operation of a magnetic separator.
the physical principlesof magnetic separation.

FEED
I. INTRODUCTION
Magnetic separation is an old technique for the removal of
tramp iron and for the concentration of iron ores. Since 1849,
numerous United States patents on magnetic separation have
beenissued, andtextsbyLangguth [ l ] ,Korda [ 2 ] , and
Gunther [ 3 ] before 1910 describeavariety of devicesfor
mineral processing. Magnetic separation is probably the largest
industrial use of magnetism, exclusive of motors and electric
powergenerating devices. Conventionalmagneticseparation
devices are generally restricted to separating strongly magnetic
materials, such as iron and magnetite. A number of different TAIL MAGS

types of devices have been developed, but they reflect a ten-

MIDDLINGS
dency to give less attention to maximizing the magnetic forces
Fig. 1. Schematic rcpresentation of magnetic separator.
ManuscriptreceivcdOctober 5, 1973; revised February 26, 1974.
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under a
RANN (Rcsearch Applied to National Necds) Contract. ’
Magneticseparators
utilizing
time-varying
magnetic
fields to

ratory,
Cambridge, Mass. 02139.
-
The author is with the M.I.T. Francis Bitter National Magnet Labo- produce separations on the basis of magnetic
[4,
1091
p. will
benot
v

or conductivity [ 5 ] considered
here.
coercivitv or remanence
224 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, JUNE 1974

The feed is split by the magnetic separator into two or more drum. These particles are deposited to the right as the drum
components. If the separator is to produce a magnetic concen- moves past the end of the magnets. The nonmagnetic particles
trate then the tails are the nonmagnetic component. The mag- fall freely off the drum to the left. Such a separator may use
netic concentrate is called the mags and other less magnetic eitherpermanentmagnetsorelectromagnets. Magnetic sepa-
components arecalled middlings. Eachofthesecomponent rators similar to these are widely used for the beneficiation of
streams must be transported into, through, or out of the de- magnetite-bearing iron ores.
vice. The magneticandcompeting gravitational,
friction,
hydrodynamic, or inertial forces tend to separate the particles;
HIGH INTENSITY MAGNETIC SEPARATION
attractiveinterparticleforcestendtoreducethedegreeof
separation.Inanyrealseparationbothmagneticandnon- FEEDIN
I

magnetic particles may be found in the tails, or middlings, and

only in the limiting case can the magnetic separation be con-
MAGNETIC
sidered complete.' The efficiency of the magnetic separation
MAGNET COIL
may be expressed by both the recovery, the ratio of magnetic /

material in the mags relative to that in the feed, and the grade,
\
the fraction of magnetic material in the mags.3 These are two
comrnonly employed independent measures of separator effec- STAINLESS / II \
tiveness and depend on the
described above.
relative magnitude of the forces STEEL WC
MATRIX
\ FI

I /
FILTERED
LIQUID O U T
u
Fig. 3. Schematic representation of Kolm type separator.

ROTATING
STATIONARY ,/ DRUM The device shownschematicallyin Fig. 3 isaKolm-type
MAGNETS
.
. high gradientmagneticseparator [ 9 ] , [lo]. A magnet de-
signed t o produceastrongadjustablefieldinthecanister
volume is used. This volume is packed with a matrix of fila-
TAILS
mentary, ferromagnetic material. Strong magnetic forces pro-
MAGS duced by the high field gradients at the edges of the filaments
are effective in trapping. very fine (< 100 micron) particles of
~~

CONVENTIONAL
DRUM- TYPE MAGNETIC
SEPARATOR even weakly magneticsubstances.
These
filaments
are
chosen
to match the size of thefeedparticlesinorder t o optimize
Fig. 2. Diagramatic illustration of dry drum separator.
the magnetic forces. The feed, in a fluid (usually water) slurry,
is passed downthroughthecanister.Thefluidandnonmag-
although many ways of categorizing magnetic separators netic particles pass easily through the relatively open structure
existit is useful to describeexamplesof two general typesofthematrix.Thetrappedmagnetic Particlesare
initially. The drumseparator is representative
of
conventional washed Out when the is reduced to zero. Devices
lowgradientmagneticseparatorswhiletheKolm-Marston ofthistypeareusefulfortheconcentrationor removal of
high gradient magneticseparator (HGMS) [ 8 ] is an example fine magnetic particles in Ore processing Or water
of the more recently developed induced pole devices. In a con- Purification.
ventional drum-type separators like that shown in Fig. 2 the
feed material (dry in this case) is introduced at the top of a Uses ofMagnetic Separation
rotating drum. The particles are carried downward along the
drum by thecombinedactionofgravitationalandfrictionalTheconventional use ofmagneticseparationfallsintotwo
forceswhichtransmittherotation of thedrumtothe par- generalcategories: the purificationoffeedswithmagnetic
titles. Magnetic forces produced by stationary magnets within components and the concentration of magnetic materials. The
the drum hold the more magnetic particles against the rotating desired product in the first case is the nonmagnetic product
while that in the second case is themagneticproduct.Such
separations are carried out for the removal of tramp iron from
2 this paper only the theory of separation of feeds which contain a variety of feeds and for the beneficiation of several strongly
distinctly magnetic and nonmagnetic (or diamagnetic) particles will be magnetic ores. Table 1 indicates the major applications of con-
examined.This is not often the case in practicebecause even with fine ventional magneticseparators. The removal of tramp iron is
grindingrealmineralsalwayshaveparticlescontaining both the non-
magnetic and magnetic components. These particles generally constitute desirable to insure the Purity of many types of feeds, to Pre-
the middlings. The scope of this paper precludes exploring the question vent damage to grinding devices, and to reduce thefire hazards
of resolution or separability of two different magneticspecies.
from sparks caused by tramp iron. A variety of mineral sys-
3These definitions are not unique (see, for example, [ 7 ] ) and, of
course, depend on whether the desired product is the magnetic or non- tems are beneficiated by the use Of magnetic In
magnetic. these systems either the mineral or the gangue (the unwanted
OBERTEUFFER: MAGNETIC SEPARATION 225

TABLE I
Uses of Magnetic Separators

--Tramp Iron, Magnetic Removal [ l l ]

Food Processing Pharmaceuticals
Chemicals Cool i ng F1 ui ds
Minerals Scrap Metals
Roads Miscellaneous Materials
Water, glass,cork,textiles

--Minerals Beneficiation [12]

Chromium Rhenium Rare Earths Diamond
Colombium Tantalum Tin Garnet
I1.m Tungsten Titanium Kyanite
Manganese A1 umi num Yttrium Talc
Molybdenum Germanium Bari um
Nickel Hafnium C1 ay

--Iron, Recovery
Solid Waste
HeavyMedia (Ferrosilicon)

TABLE I1
Potential Applicationsof High Gradient Magnetic Separation

--Mineral Beneficiation(In Addition to ThoseSystems ListedinTable I.)

Coal Beryllium Magnesium Thall
i um Sulfur
Thorium Bismuth Mercury Zinc
Uranium Cadmium Platinum- Zirconium
Cobalt group Asbestos
Copper
Silicon Gallium Radium Feldspar
Vanadium Go1 d Scandium Graphite
Antimony Indium Si 1ver Lithium
Arsenic Lead Tellurium Mica

--Water Treatment -(Magnetic Filtration)

MagneticSuspended Solids
Non-MagneticSuspended Solids*
DissolvedSolids*
Oils

--Wastes Treatment f o r Recovery of Magnetic Materials

Smelter and FurnaceDusts
Coal and Oil Ashes
Ore Tailings

--Removal o f Paramagnetic Particulate Impurities

Chemicals
Minerals
Pharmaceuticals
Fluids
--Chemical Processing
Recovery ofweakly magnetic fine precipitates, Deposition and
recovery o f substances on magnetic particles
* by magnetic seeding and flocculation
226 JUNE MAGNETICS, ON TRANSACTIONS IEEE 1974

components) may be stronglymagnetic.Roasting of ores to ration device includes both the design and its variable param-
increasetheirmagnetization (i.e., hematite to magnetite) ex- eters,particularlythemagneticfieldandtheprocessrate. A
tends the applicability of conventional devices. Magnetic sepa- simple theory of magnetic separation which accounts for the
rators are also used in certain iron recycling applications. generalrelationshipsbetweentheseparameters will bede-
The minerals separable in conventional devices are generally veloped in this section. It will also be shown how the magnetic
those with intrinsic or “induced” magnetizations at least 1% force in a separator may be maximized by matching the mag-
ofthatofiron[13, p. 13-02]. Manyweaklymagnetic ma- netic field gradient to the particle size.
terials in fields of a few kilogauss, by comparison, have mag-
netizations less than 0.01% ofthatofiron. An industrial Magnetic Force
0

installation of a Jones high gradient device (described later)

The magnetic force of interest in the magnetic separation
device exists in Brazil for the treatment of a so-called “non-
devices considered here is the dipolar tractive magnetic force.
magnetic”(ferric)ironore [ 141 while several Kolm-Marston
We shall consider both the optimization of this force and its
devices are in use in Georgia to remove weakly magnetic im-
dependence on the size of the particle to be separated.
puritiesfrom clay [ 8, p. 551. Table I1 listssomepotential
A generalexpressionof themagneticforceonaparticle
applicationsof high field-highgradientmagneticseparators
in vacuo (see,forexample, [ 2 5 ] ) in electromagnetic units is
designed
- to maximize the relative magnetic force. The list of
other mineralswhichoccur as weaklymagneticmaterialsor
with weakly magnetic impurities is considerable [ 121, [ 151,
and [SI. In addition to the most obvious application tq the where M is themagnetizationoftheparticle in magnetic
ferric iron ores [ 8, p. 711, [ 161, weakly magnetic impurities field H. The integration is taken over the particle volume. The
includingpyriticsulfur [ i 7 ] , [ 181 maybe removed in high force is thegradientofthemagneticpotentialenergy.This
gradient devices. expressionmay be generalizedfor a particle in amedium
Tests have been conducted on several weakly magnetic ores where neither the magnetizations of particle or of the medium
using a Jones separator [ 191, [ 201. The use of magnetic sepa- is large compared to H and simplified by considering only the
ration for water filtration [21] appears promising. Suspended x-componentoftheforceduetothex-component of the
solidswhichare even weaklymagneticmay be removed di- field gradient. Thus
rectly at high flow rates in properly designed separators [ 221.
Nonmagnetic suspended solids
and even certain dissolved
solids [23] may be removed by seeding the water with mag-
netic particles and chemically flocculating the impurities with where M p and M
, are the magnetizations of the particle and
the seedparticles.Thesecompositeparticlesmay thenbe mEdium, respectively. It is clear that the force depends on the
filtered magnetically. integral of both the magnetic field H and the gradient dB/dx
There are also a number of speculative applications for high over the particle volume. Even for relatively simple geometries,
gradientseparation.Anumberofwasteproducts,including the evaluation of this integral is difficult and usually not pos-
furnacedustand ashes,may be treatedforthe recovery of sible in closedform. In ordertoexplorethedependence of
valuable magnetic materials. Fine weakly magnetic impurities the force on the particle size it will be assumed that (2) may
in various chemical and pharmecutical feeds may be removed be replaced by
inthis way. Fineprecipitatesmay be recovereddirectly in
HGMS devices while certain substances may be recovered by
deposition onto trapable magnetic particles.
where r is a point within the particle having volume v , such
that (3) has the same magnitude as (2). For the media and par-
II. THE PHYSICS OF MAGNETIC SEPARATION
ticles that will be considered here, the magnetization M ( r ) is
A general description of the physics of magnetic separators equal to x H ( r ) yielding
will be given in this section. Both qualitative and quantitative
predictions of separator performance can be drawn from such
a description. Analyses of actual trajectories are beyond the
scope of this paper. a treatment of this type has been carried xP and x, are the susceptibilities of the particle and media,
out by Himmelblauforparticlestrapped by a magnetized respectively. Inorder to evaluatethisexpression r willbe
fiber,the basic element of a Kolm type separator [24]. In- taken as the center of the particle. It may be shown that this
cluded in the treatment, given in the following, of the perform- assumption results in F, + constant as r + m as it properly
ance of a magneric separator are both the quantity and quality should.
of its separation, therecovery and the grade. The magnetic field and field gradient which act on the par-
The operative magnetic, competing, and interparticle forces ticles in all magnetic separation devices may be produced in a
determine separator performance. These forces are dependent variety of ways and result in widely varying field geometries
on both the nature of the feed to be separated as well as the and strengths. In some cases permanent magnets produce the
characteroftheseparation device. Thenatureofthefeed fields directly while in others coilsandironmagnetcircuits
includes its size and physical properties which may affect the areused to magnetize aferromagneticstructurewhose field
variousforcesinvolved. Thecharacter of themagnetic sepa- gradients attract the magneticparticles.
OBERTEUFFER: MAGNETIC SEPARATION 227

CALCULATEDMAGNETICFORCE
vs
WIRERADIUS

FM
(orbltrory
units)

PARTICLETRAPPED BY MAGNETIZEDWIRE
-561
.Olb O.lb lb IOb lOOb
Fig. 4. Cross section of spherical particle, radius b , attached to ferro- RADIUS, o
magnetic wire, radius a, magnetized by uniform magnetic fieldH,.
Fig. 5. Relative magnetic force FM on particle of radius b due to mag-
netized ferromagnetic wire of radiusa as a function ofwire size.
We will consider the role of the field and its geometry
- in
maximizing the magnetic force. It is clear that increasing the
In Fig. 5 the magnetic force is plotted as a function of the
value of the magnetic field H will increase the magnetic force
ratio of the wire radius to the particle radius alb. It is clear
both by increasing themagnetizationoftheparticleand,in
that the magnetic force on the particle is maximized for a wire
general, by increasing the value of the field gradient. However,
diameterofthesameorderofmagnitude as theparticle di-
itmay beseen intuitivelythatthemagnetic fieldgradient,
ameter. Indeed taking the derivative of F , of (7) with respect
that is, the distance in which the magnetic field changes by a
totheratio alb indicatesthemaximumoccursforawire
significant amount will strongly affectthemagneticforce.
diameter 2.69 times the particle diameter.4
Although the argument may be made more generally, we shall
considertheforces on asphericalparticle dueto aferro-
magnetic wire in a uniform applied magnetic field as shown in CACULATEDMAGNETICFIELD,
GRADIENT 8 FORCE
Fig. 4. Along the axis of symmetry and for values of applied vs
DISTANCE
magnetic field Ho less than the bulk saturation value of the
ferro-magneticwire H,, themagnetic field [26, p. 2611 is
given by the expression FM
(arbitrary
units) 10
.-. H,+ H(r)

H = Ho (l+$).

For Ho greater than H,, H i s given by

t DISTANCE
FROM
SURFACE
OF WIRE, r
'PARTICLE
The magnetic field gradient for applied fields Ho less than H, WIRE

along the axis a t the particle is given by the expression Fig. 6. Functionaldependence of totalmagnetic field H ( r ) , field
gradient dHldr, andforce FM onparamagneticparticleofradius
3.3 microns due to ferromagnetic wire in uniform magnetic field or
radius 10 microns with distance from surface of wire. Scale cross
sections of wire and particle also shown.
if the magnetization of the particle is small. The radius of the
wireis a andthedistancefromthecenterofthewire is r.
Theconditionthatthemagnetic fieldgradientrangebe
Theseequations describeaferromagneticcylinderinan ap-
matched to the particle size (i.e., a X 3 b ) is illustrated graphi-
plied field H o .
cally by Fig. 6. In Fig. 6the relativemagneticfield,field
For a spherical paramagnetic particle of radius b we shall
gradient, and force due to a uniformly magnetized wire in a
consider what value of wire radius a will produce the maxi-
magnetic field are plotted as a function of distance from the
mum magnetic force at the center of the particle in a constant
surface of the wire along the axis of symmetry. Superimposed
appliedfield. As hasbeen indicated,themagneticforceon
on this plot are scale cross sections of the particle and wire for
the particle will be given by assuming that all of the particle
is at the same distance from the wire as its center. The mag-
neticforceontheparticle is then givenby thefollowing 4Note added in proof: In a private communication J. J. Nolan has
expression: pointed out that the ratio alb at which the maximum force occurs may
be generalized toincludethemaxitnumforceforaparticlewhose
center is nb distant from the center of the wire along the axis. In this
3
8
F , = --n b3 (X, - X,) ( H o + Ho-$)Bo-$. ( 7 ) case the ratio alb which produces the maximum force is just 2.69~1.
 228 1974

which this is a matched system. It is clearly important for the where v is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid medium and v is
magnetic field t o undergo its greatest change across the di- the velocity of the particle relative to the stream. This relation
ameter of the particle. The drop off of magnetic field, field applies in the Stokes region, that is, where the product of the
gradient,andforce away from amagnetizedelement is acom-relativevelocityandparticlediameterare less than about
mon feature of magneticseparators. It is useful t o refer the 0.01 cm2/s. The dependence of the gravitational force on the
approximate distance over which this drop off takes place as third power of the particle radius means that the gravitational
the range of the magnetic force and t o some average field and force will be significant for large particles. The hydrodynamic
field gradient within this range as the effectivefield and field drag force, which in the Stokes regime depends on the first
gradients
separator
the
of element. power
particle
the
of radius, willimportant
be for small par-
We maynowconsiderthedependence of themagnetic ticles. Thus in a magneticseparatorwhichtreats large particles
forceontheparticlediameterformagneticseparatorswhichindryform,thefeedmaterialmight be passed throughthe
are gradient-matched, that is, in which the radius of the wire is separator under the force of. gravity. The magnetic forces
equal to three times the particle radius. In this case (7) may be would have to be sufficient to hold the magneticparticles
rewritten.as of
against
competing
forcethe separator
for wet gravity. a In
smallparticles themagneticforcewould have tobe larger
F , = 1.84 (x, x,)
- H: b 2 .
(8) thanthehydrodynamicdragforcewhichthe slurrystream
Hence the magnetic force varies as the square of the radius of would exert on the trapped particles.
the particle in the matched systems. Later, the dependence of
themagneticforceontheparticleradiusforanoptimized
magnetic separator will be compared with the dependence of
mpeting the particle size. DRAG MAGNETIC,
ANDGRAVITATIONAL
Finally, it may be noted that if the magnetic force falls off FORCE VS
PARTICLE SIZE
significantlyoveradistance of oneparticlediameter,each (matchedsystem

trapping site in the magnetic separator will have a capacity of

approximatelyone particle. Thusinany practical separator
FORCE ~

thenumberofmagnetictrappingsitesmustbemade very (dynes)

large. For a separator using pointtrapping sites,suchas

needles [ 2 7 ] , obtaining a significant number of trap sites poses
very serious practical difficulties. In magnetic separators which
utilize magnetized fibers or wires the number of trapping sites
is approximatelythetotallengthofthefibersused in the
the separator
ofdiameter
divided
the by particles t o be c
.OIp. I I 100 I 100
trapped. Thus the capacity of the fibers for trapped materials PARTICLE RADIUS, b
is approximately the same as the volume of the fibers them-
selves. Fig.
plot
7. Log-log of inagnctic
gravitational
competing
(F,44) and
( F G ) anddragforces (FD) versus particlesize b for magnetized
wire whose size is matched to that of particle to be trapped. Com-
Competing Forces for putcdferromagnetic
wire
CuOby
attracted
particle of radius
3b magnetized by 10 kOc fieldandactcduponbyslurrywith
Theforcesinmagneticseparatorswhichcompetewiththe vclocity o f 5 c d s c c .
magneticforcesandacton all of theparticleswhich travel
throughtheseparator are thoseof gravity, hydrodynamic
drag, fraction, alld inertia. ~ ~on the ~ of magnetic
~ As ~indicatedinthe
d previous
i section,
~ whenthegradient
~ is
separator, certain of these forces may be or less im. matchedtotheparticle size, thenthegeometry o f t h e field
portant. In this discussion we will consider only gravitational gradient is optimum, and the effectivemagnetic force varies
and hydrodynamic drag forces which are importantin de. as the square of particle the Size. Thus we the
terminingthe characteristics ofmanymagnetic separators,magneticand competingforcesforthe gradient-matched mag-
including high gradient devices. Frictional and inertial forces neticseparator as afunctionofparticle size. Suchacom-
are important in some conventional separators. parison is shown in Fig. 7, where the gravitational, hydro-
F~~ a spherical particle of radius b and density P p the gravi.
dynamic drag, and magnetic forces, as functions of Particle
tational or buoyant forceis given by radius, have been plotted for a spherical cupric oxide particle
in a magnetic field gradient produced by a ferromagnetic wire
4 ina 10 kilogauss magnetic field. Forseparatorswhichtreat
F = - 71 b3 (P, - P f ) g (9) very large particles the gravitational force clearly predomi-
n 3
nates while for those which treat very small particles hydro-
where Pf is the density of the fluid n d i u m usedin the SePa- dynamic dragpredominates. It is clear from Fig. 7 that the
ratorand g is the gravitational constant.Thehydrodynamic magnetic force is larger thaneither of thecompetingforces
given by
dragforce (see, forexample, [ 281 ) is onlyovera limited size range: fromabout five pmtoapproxi-
mately 1 mm, in the case chosen. The condition that the mag-
Fd = 1 2 r u v b (lo) netic
force
be larger than
the
sum of the
competing
forces in a
 ‘1 n
OBERTEUFFER: MAGNETIC SEPARATION 229

possible to separate weakly magnetic substances by magnetic

FORC:SRATIO forces, butonlywithinarestricted range of particle sizes.
7- PARTICLE S I Z E Because most of our experience with magnetic forces has been
(for matched
gained from strongly magnetic particles, which may be trapped
6i I I systeml over a very large range of sizes, this effect is not well known.
We may explore the concept of magnetic separability fur-
ther. We shall consider the range of particle sizes and sus-
ceptibilities that are separable in two actual separators and in
an “ideal” magnetic separator. This “ideal” separator operates
atsomereasonablemagneticfield (10 kG)andatawater
slurry velocity of 5 cm/s. It is assumed for simplicity that only
gravitational andStokeshydrodynamic drag forcescompete
in this device. Thelimitingparticle sizes forsubstances of
various magnetizations may then be determined from (8), (9),
PARTICLERADIUS, b and (10). The upper limit occurs because gravitational forces
Fig. 8. Force ratio (magnetic force divided by competing gravitational eventually overcome magnetic forces for large particles, while
and drag forces) versus particle size for matched system described the lower limit occurs because drag forces overcome magnetic
in caption of Fig. 7.
forces in the limit of very small particles. This concept is illus-
tratedin Fig. 9. Particleswhose size andmagnetizationat
magnetic separator is an approximate condition for the sepa- 10 kilogauss lie in the region above the lower curves may be
rability of magnetic particles. The ratio of magnetic to com- separated magneticallyin the “ideal” gradient-matched sepa-
peting forces from Fig. 7 is plotted in Fig. 8 and shows that rator. These curves represent the conditions
the most effective size for trapping a cupric oxide particle is
about 100 microns for the conditions indicated. The particle
F, = F h a g and F , = Fgravity 5
size for which the maximum force ratio occurs in the general
case of a gradient-matched separator may be determined by
taking the derivative of the ratio with respect to the particle respectively. Increasing the applied magnetic field or decreas-
radius yielding. ing the flow velocity which determines Fhagwill, of course,
shift the curves downward to increase the range of separable
particles.
For comparison the approximate range of sizes and mag-
netizations of trappable particles in a drum separator has been
plotted in the same figure. The magnetic field and gradient are
Since most substances have densities between 1 and 10, the assumed to be 400 G and 400 G/cm, respectively [ 291, and a
optimum particle size for magnetic trapping is approximately peripheral drum speed of about 300 cm/sec [ 13, p. 13-16] is
the same for all substances. In other words, nature makes it assumed. At the left the recoverable region is bounded by the
condition that F, = F&%,while at the right it is assumed that
particles larger than 3 cm would be mechanically unable to
EFFECTIVE RANGE IN MAGNETIZATION
AND SIZE OF
pass through such a separator. The lower limiton suscepti-
Memu MAGNETIC SEPARATORS bility isimposed by theconditionthat F, = Fgravity. Also
gm t shown on this plot is the theoretical separability range for a
Kolm-type HGMS device operatingata slurryvelocity of
5 cm/s an applied field of 10 kilogauss and a fiber diameterof
100 pm. The left-hand boundary of the range of this separator
is determinedbythecondition F , = Fdrag while the right-
handboundary is approximatelythe limit of particle size
which will not mechanicallyclog the device. This device is
suited to a wide range of susceptibilities in the range of small
particles sizes.
It may be noted that the recovery is, ingeneral, less de-
pendent on the magnetic susceptibility or magnetization of a
substance than on particle size. Thus a device that treats some
PARTICLERADIUS, b
size distribution of particles cannot be very selective between
materials whose magnetic ‘properties differ only slightly. This
Fig. 9. Log-log plot of magnetizations and particle radii at separation
limit, (magnetic force equals competing force). Solid curves define
difficulty is inherent in magnetic separators of most types. In
limitsforgradientmatcheddevices,slurryvelocity 5 cmlsec,ap-
plied field 10 kOe, broken curves define limits of Kolm type sepa-
rator using 100 pm stainless steel wool; dashed curves define limits 5This limit depends on both the magnetization and the density of
for typical drum separator. the particle and is, therefore, not strictly linear.
230 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, JUNE 1974

practice, however, it is often the case that the materials to be some function of the ratio F,/F, and for simplicity will be
separated diverge widely in their magneticproperties. considered proportional

Fm
The Determinationof Grade and Recovery R , = K-
F,
The com.petition between the magnetic force and the com- where K is the constant of proportionality.
petingforcesin amagnetic separatordeterminestheprob-
ability that a magnetic particle will be trapped or recovered in
the magnetic separator. The interparticleforces, those between
magnetic and nonmagnetic particles, determine how pure the
products of the magnetic separation will be. If forces between
the particlesare larger thanthemagneticandcompeting
forces, then many nonmagnetic particles may be trapped along
with magnetic particles. Conversely, many magnetic particles
may be carried along with nonmagnetic particles and fail to be -I-
trapped. A detailed discussion of these interparticle forces is
beyond the scope of this paper, but some general remarks may
be made. Interparticles forces include friction,magnetic attrac-
T
tion, and electrostatic attraction, including Coulomb, van der
Waals, and double layer forces. For larger dry particles, fric-
tionalandmoisture-induced adhesive forces will dominate
MAGNETIC,INTERPARTICLEANDCOMPETING
while for very small particles indry systems, electrostatic FORCES ON PARTICLESNEARA
MAGNETIZED WIRE
forces will exist. In wet systems for very small particles, sur-
face-chemical double-layer forces between particles will gen- Fig. 10. Schematicrepresentationofmagneticparticleattractedto
erally be an important factor. These interparticle forces may magnetizedwire b y magneticforce FM, whilecompetingforces
F , tend to draw it away. Nonmagnetic particle is attracted to mag-
beminimized by variouschemical surfactants (see, for ex- netic particle by some interparticle force Fi but is also drawn away
ample, [ 301, [31]) but in the limit of very small particles by competing forces.
they represent a limit to separability. In the discussion of the
next section it will simplybeassumed that these forces are
Now the recovery ofnonmagnetic particlesin the mags
present and may be represented by a constant term F j .
must be considered. The mechanism by which these nonmag-
The effect of the interaction of the magnetic, competing,
netic particles are drawn in with the magnetic particles is the
and interparticle forces on the characteristics of the magnetic
attraction between these particles due to interparticle forces.
separator may be determined qualitatively. The characteristics
So the recovery of theseparticles is a function of both the
include both the capacity of the separatorto recover magnetic
recovery of the magnetic particles R, and the strength of the
particles from the feed and the quality of 'that recovery. We
interparticle forces. The nonmagnetic particles may be thought
will use the grade G, and recovery R A as have been defined
of as being trapped onto the magnetic particles by the inter-
as the measures of separator performance. By definition, we
particle forces against the competing forces. This concept is
may write the grade as a function of the recoveries of the mags
indicated schematicallyin Fig. 1 0 which shows thethree
and nonmags recoveries
forces,magnetic, competingandinterparticleactingon two
particles in an elemental separator. Thus the recovery of the
nonmagnetic particles in the mags may be written

r Fi
R,, = K R,-
where R,, is the recovery ofnonmagnetic particlesin the FC
mags, and A is a constant, the mass ratio of nonmagnetic t o
magnetic particles in the feed. Both R,, and R, depend in where K t is the constant of proportionality. Combining ex-
different ways on the dependent variables of the separation pressions (12), (13), and (14) gives
process. Thus the grade is not, in general, a unique function
of the mags recovery.
In order t o relate R , and R,, to the forces in the sepa-
rator some simple probability arguments may bemade. The
magnetic separator is considered to be a black box into which
feed is passed, producing tails and mags. The probability that The expressions indicate that the recovery should increase
a magnetic particle will be retained in the mags will be some with increasingmagnetic forceand decrease with increasing
function of the ratio of the magnetic force to the competing competing forces, while the grade of the mags should increase
forces. This is clear since zero magnetic force ina magnetic with increasing competing forces. The effect of changing these
separator would simply result in all the feed coming out in the forces on the recovery and grade in a practical device may be
tails due to the competing forces. The recovery R, then is explored.
OBERTEUFFER:MAGNETICSEPARATION 231

RECOVERY OF CuO VS APPLIED MAGNETIC FIELD competing forces and, for constant magnetic force, decreases
SLURRYVELOCITIES OF 2 AND 22%
100% the recovery. The effect of increasing competing forces by
90 increasing slurry velocity on the grade of an oxidized taconite
sample is shown in Fig. 12. Although the results shown here
are for a Kolm high gradient magnetic separation device, they
aregenerallytrueformagneticseparationdevices(see,for
instance, [32, p. 4191, [33, p. 741, and [34, p. 1051 ).

111. MAJOR TYPES OF MAGNETIC SEPARATORS

Inthissectionthedesign,operation,andapplication of
Ho several conventionallaboratoryand high gradientmagnetic
Fig. 11. Recovery of CuO from CuO-Al,O, slurry as function of ap- separators w ill be discussed. This list of separators is not ex-
pliedmagneticfield for twodifferentslurryvelocitiesinKolm haustive but is illustrativeof themajortypesofmagnetic
type separator. separators. For descriptions of devices not covered here the
reader is referred to a 1941 review by Dean and Davis [ 4 ] ,
GRADEVSSLURRYVELOCITY the Handbook of Mineral Dressing [ 131, and Perry's Chemical
55% Engineering Handbook [35]. Inaddition several bookson
mineraldressingcontainchapters on magneticseparation:
Gaudin [36], Taggart [ 61, Pryor [37], andRichards [ 3 8 ] .
The major sources of magnetic separation articles are found
G in mining and mineral processing journals.
45
In order t o relate the general theory of magnetic separators
to the several devices describedinthissectionTable 111 is
presented. This table serves to summarize these devices.

Conventional Devices
35 0 2 4 6 8 IO 12 14 16 18 crn/sec
vs A. Grate: A simpleandverycommontypeofmagnetic
Fig. 12. Gradeofoxidizedtaconite separator is thegrateseparatorshown
(iron) ore as function ofslurry in Fig. 13. The sepa-
velocity in Kolrn-type high gradient magnetic separator. rator consists of a series of tubes placed in the pipe through
which the feed is passed. The tubes, often stainless steel, are
packedwithdiscsorshortrodsalternatelymagnetized to
The effect of increasing the magnetic force (by increasing produce essentially radial magnetic fields its indicated in the
the applied m2gnetic field) on the recovery of magnetic ma- figure. Ceramicmagnetsareused t o producestrongperma-
terials inthe mags foraKolm-typeseparator isshownin nent fields in this highly demagnetizing geometry. Devices of
Fig. 11 for CuO particles in water [ 101. The recovery has been this type are commonly used to separate bits of tramp iron
plottedasafunctionofmagnetic field fortwovaluesof
slurryvelocity.Increasingtheslurryvelocityincreasesthe

TABLE I11
Characteristics ofMagnetic Separators

DEVICE
T COMPETING
I

APPROXIMATE VALUES OF EFFECTIVE MAGNETICPARAMETERS

FIELD
-
FORCE RANGE FIELD GRADIENT FORCE*
FORCES Fe304 -
uo

Grate Gravity 1 Clll 500 Oe 500 G/cm

3x105 % 5 9
Drum Gravity,hydrodynamicdrag 5 500 500 3x105 5
Belt Gravity 1 - 10 100 - 1000 100 - 1000 5-50x104 -2-20
Davis Tube Gravity,hydrodynamicdrag 1 cm , 4000 4000 2x1 06 3x102
Frantz-Isodynamic Gravity ' 1 10,000 2000 1x1 06 4x102
..
Frantz-Ferrofilter Hydrodynamicdrag 0.1 10,000 100.000 1x108 zX1o4
Jones Hydrodynamicdrag 0.1 20,000 M0,000 1x108 8x104
Kolm-Marston Hydrodynamicdrag 0.01 20,000 2.000,ooo lX109 8x1 O5

* For a particle whose diameter i s smaller than or equal t o the range o f the magnetic force.
 232 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, JUNE 1974

FEED
PIPE'-. title. With these devices it is possible to recovera middling
DISC MAGNETS fraction. The middlings particles are less strongly attracted by
the magnetic force than the concentrate particles and hence
may be made to fall into a 'Jin between the concentrate and
,,-TUBE
tailings bins. These middlings are generally composed of in-
completely liberated particles containing both magnetic and
nonmagnetic components. Since grinding of ores is expensive,
it is often economicallv aetractive to treat all the ore initially
Fig. 13. Grate type separator.Cut-awayshows stacking of disc-shaped with a dry separator and regrind the middling fraction
magnets in tubes and resultingmagnetic field lines.
beforeretreating it magnetically.Dry drumseparatorsmay
be used to treat particles be used to treat particles as small as
from a variety of feeds, including grains, food-stuffs,andother loo microns. The Performance Of these in Pro-
normally dry, low density materials, the amount of tramp iron ducing concentrates strongly affected by the humidity of
that is normally caught is relativelylow so that this type of the feed. If the humidity is high, small particles may stick to
separator need only be periodically cleaned by hand. The larger particlesresultingin a less complete separation.Since
gratesmay be rotatedtoreduce bufid-up and bridging ofthenonmagneticdrumin Fig. 2 turnspastthestationary
trapped
material on
the
upper bars. Separators of this
type are Poles Of the magnets within the it be
common~yinserted into the pipe through which a Favita- seen that a magnetic particle will experience a force of varying
tionally transported feed stream is flowing. magnitude as it rides on the surface of the drum. This varia-
The performance limits of such a separator may be calcu- tion in the strength Of the magnetic forcemayProduce a
lated by estimating the magnetic and competing forces on a motion
of the trapped Particles
which
piece of tramp iron. ~~~~~i~~ a magnetic field of aids in their separation from the unwanted nonmagnetic par-
500 gauss and magneticfield gradient of 250 gauss per centi- ticles. The reversal ofthe magnetic field between magnetic
meter, the magneticforce on a one centimeterradius sphere poles also resultsin a rotationof particles with remanent
of iron would be approximate~y 2 x 106 dynes.6 The Favita- moments. The specific motion of the particle is strongly de-
tional force on such a piece of iron would be only 3 X lo4 Pendent On the Particle size [39I.

dynes. Comparing the magnetic potentialenergy (4 X IO6 ergs) The relative forces for a 50 cm diameter dry drum =pa-
to the gravitational potential energy corresponding to a free rator may be estimated by assumingafieldgradient at the
1 meterdrop of the particle ( 3 X lo6 ergs) indicatesthat surface of approximately 400 G/cmand afield of
inertial forces will compete significantly with magnetic forces. 400 G. The resulting magnetic force on a 100 micron mag-
The frictional forces between the tramp iron and the flowing netite particle would be 0.8 dyne. The gravitational force on
feed material would also act as a competing force. For large such aparticle would be 0.02 dyne, while the centrifugal
particles the major competing force will be the inertial forces. force for a drum rotation rate of 100rpm would be 0.06 dyne.
These forces vary as the cube of the particle radius, but it is The centrifugal forcemay be ~ ~ d ~ by c eslowing
d the drum
likely that the upper limiting condition on particle size will be rotationrate SO thatsubstances considerably less magnetic
the interspacing of the grate. The lower size limit of the par- than magnetite (for instance pyrrhotite) may be beneficiated
ticles, which may be trapped by the grate, will be determined in such a device-
by theinterparticleforcesbetweenthetrampironandthe The induced roll and pulley magnetic separators will not be
feed particles. discussed here but description of these devices may be found
B. Drum: Drum separators of several varietiesare p r o b in the references given previously.
ablythemostcommontypeofmagnetic separator. These There are three major types of wet drum separators: the
variations include pulley, dry drum, wet drum, and induced concurrent,counter-rotating,andthecounter-currenttypes
roll separators. Themostcommon use of the dry and wet [40]. These are shown in Fig. 14. The magnets in the drums
drum separators are for the beneficiation of ironores. Induced are like thoseshown in Fig. 2 and cover approximatelythe
rollseparators areused to treat less strongly magnetic iron same arc as the rotation-indicating arrows. In the concurrent
bearingores,whilepulley separators are most often used in drum magnetic separatorthefeed slurry is passed through
the removal of trampironfrom various feeds. These sepa- the trough in the same direction as the rotation of the drum.
rators may use either permanent magnets or electromagnets Magnetic particles are attracted to the rotating surface of the
and operate ina continuous mode. nonmagneticdrum by thestationarymagnetswithinthe
Drydrum,induced roll, and pulley separatorsoperatedrum.Thenonmagnetic particlessink tothelowestpoint in
much like the separator shown in Fig. 2 and described in the the trough and are drawn off as tailings. The magnetic con-
' introduction. The dry feed is thrown off one side or the other centrate is carried by the rotating drum up over the weir to
of the drum or pulley depending on the relative magnitude of the right. This type of separator produces a high grade con-
magnetic,centrifugal, or gravitational forcesactingon apar- centratefor particles on the order of a few millimeters in
diameter. The separation is relatively clean since the magnetic
particles are affected by the competing magnetic and hydro-
6This is an underestimate since we have neglected the contribution
of the force from the interaction of the gradient of the ironparticle dynamic drag forces a'' the periphery Of the drum'This
with the moment of the bar. cleaning occurs even thoughthe variationforce
due
in to the
OBERTEUFFER: MAGNETICSEPARATION 233

TAILINGS
TAlLiNGS

~~~

A
C .O N C U R R E N T B. COUNTER-CURRENT

\SLOTTED FEED WEIR

CONCENTRATE WASH.WATER HEADER

REPULPING

I
C. COUNTER-ROTATING

MAGNETIC
DRUM SEPARATORS
Fig. 14. Three types of drum separators: a. concurrent b. counter-
rotating c. counter-current (after Suleski [40]).

alternating poles within the drum does not produce the same recovery for particles down to about 70 pm. This device re-
degree of particle motion on the drum asis seen in the dry tains some features of both the concurrent and counter-rota-
separator where theviscous forces of the slurry are not present ting types.Thisseparator is shownin Fig. 14(c) as athree
[ 4 i ] . Sincetheconcurrenttankseparatoroftenproduces drum tandem separator. In this device the feed is introduced
tailing in which a relatively large amount of magnetic material at approximately the midpoint in the magnetic section of the
remains, the tailings are often retreated in a counter-rotating drum. The flow of the feed slurry is opposite to the direction
drum separator. of the drum rotation while the entrained particles travel in the
The counter-rotating separator is shown in Fig. 14(b). The same direction. These entrained particles are washed by water
feed is passedthroughthetroughoppositetothedirection introduced on the left side of the tank. The cleaned concen-
of drum rotation. The magnetic particles are picked up on the trate is overflowed to the left. A feature ,common to all wet
surface of the drum and carried up to the left.This device drum separators is the overflow of the concentrate slurry at
producesa high recovery butagenerallylow-gradeconcen- the end of the tank. This is desirable to prevent the magnetic
tratesincemostofthemagnetic particlesare trapped in a particles from being drawn through the air-water interface and
short section of the drum and there is little opportunity for theresulting loss of magneticparticles. Insomedevices
the mat of trapped particles to release entrained nonmagnetic in which a dewatered concentrate is desired, the magnetic par-
particles. The high recovery also results from the opportunity ticle are drawn up above the surface of the slurry and scraped
of particles to be picked up further downstream by the drum off the drum. In these cases the slurry must be recirculated to
and becarriedbackasconcentrate.Suchaseparatormay recover the lost magneticparticles.
treat particles down t o 100 microns. Because of its ability to The magnetic and competing forces in wet drum separators
pick up magnetic particles not immediately entrained this de- may be estimated assuming a magnetic field gradient a t the
vice has a larger capacity than the concurrent type. surface of the drum of 400 G/cm and field of 400 G. The
Thethirdtypeofmagneticwetdrumseparator,the magnetic and gravitational forces are, as before, 0.8 dynes and
counter-currentdrum, is oftenused as afinishingseparator 0.02 dynes, respectively. The major competing force in a wet
because it produces an extremely clean concentrate with good drum separator,-however, is the force of hydrodynamic drag.
234 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, JUNE 1974

Thisresults from the relativevelocityof the slurry or wash pole of the magnet at c. Material thus attractPd is intercepted
water which passes by an entrained particle. In the concurrent bythecross beltwhichrunsunderthepolepiece at right
separator this velocity is approximately the peripheral velocity angles to the feed transport belt. The material picked up by
while in the counter-rotating device these velocities are added. this fast running belt is thrown off to the side. The magnetic
Ingeneral,theperipheraldrumvelocitiesaresignificantly separation at a is similar.
higherthantheslurry velocities theformerbeingonthe The intensity of the magnetic force is determined by the
order of 200 cm/sec while the latter may be 50 cm/sec. The pole-gap and is limitedby the requirementthattwobelts
resulting drag velocity due to the Stokes force on a 100 pm loaded with material must pass between the poles of the mag-
particle for a relativevelocityof 200 cm/secwouldbeap- net. The feed size varies from a few mm to a few hundred pm.
proximately 0.7 dyne. In addition to its effect on the relative The competing force in this separator is the force of gravity,
dragvelocity,thedrumspeedalsoeffectsthecapacityofa thus assumingamaterial with density 5 g/cm3, the gravita-
drumseparator. A slower speed will result in areduced tional force is approximately 2 X lo4 b3 dynes, where b is the
capacity while a higher speed will decrease the recovery due particle radius as in Section 11. The magnetic force for a field
to higher drag velocities and result in greater wear of the drum gradient of approximately 1000 gauss per centimeter would be
surface. Drums in these devices are typically made of stainless 4 X lo3 Mb3, dynes where h ' is the particle magnetization.
steel or other wear-resistant material. Thesize of magnetic wet Thus particleswithmagnetizationssomewhatgreater than
drum separatorsis similar that of dry drum separators. 5 emu/cm3 (or 1%that of magnetite) could be separated. The
C. Belt: Belt type magnetic separators comprise a large class speed of the belt determines the capacity of this device. The
of devices. The belts are used to transport the feed material speed is limited for small particles by their tendency to be-
into the magnetic field region and transport the tails out. A comeairborneandfor large particlesby momentum.The
belt may also be used t o transport the magnetically attracted average velocity imparted by the magnetic force v = (2a, s)%,
material out ofthe fieldregion.Themagneticparticlesat- where am is the acceleration due t o the magnetic force, and s
tracted from the feed belt may be thrown off to the side by the size of the gap must be comparable to the feed beltveloci-
use of discs [13, p. 13-26] suspendedoverthebeltagainst ty. For a magnetite particle the limiting belt velocity is then
which the magnetic material is attracted or the magnetic ma- about 50 cmlsec for a 1 cm gap.
terial may simply be attracted to a suspended (guard) magnet
andremovedbyhand.Inwetbeltmagneticseparatorsthe
feedinaslurryisintroduced to the belt on whose surface
magnetic forces exist to hold and transport the trapped par-
ticlesaway.Theseforcesare produced by magnets of alter-
nating polarity behind the belt (see [ 13, p. 13-20], [ 311, and
[32]). Beltseparatorsareusedbothtobeneficiateminerals
and remove tramp iron.

FEED
CROSS B E L T S

Fig. 16. Davis Tube separator (after Schultz [45] ).

Laboratory Devices
A variety ofinterestingexperimental devices whichare
F E E DB E L T
TAILS MAGS properlylaboratoryseparators havebeendeveloped atthe
Bureau of Mines [42], [42]and elsewhere [44]. They will not
Fig. 15. Wetherill Beit separator (after Davis [4]).
be discussed here, however, since their use is relatively limited.
The Davis and Frantz magnetic separators described below are
For applications to minerals separation, the .Wetherill high not usedforindustrialprocessing,butarewidelyused to
intensityseparator 113, p. 13-23] representsasophisticated analyze the magnetic separability ofsmall samples.
type of cross belt device. This separator shown in Fig. 15 is A. Davis Tube: This type of laboratory separator is com-
used to treat a number of magnetic materials. On the left, feedmonly used in the minerals industry to determine the fraction
is dropped onto the transport belt running at about 100 cm/s. of strongly magnetic material (usually magnetite) in a feed. It
The nonmagnetic material which passes through the separator is not well-designed either as a separator oras an analytical in-
is depositedattherightwhilethemoststronglymagnetic strument, and only its wide use justifies its mention here. The
material is thrown off the belt position a ; the more weakly Davis Tube separator isshown in Fig. 16 and hasbeende-
magneticmaterial is thrownoffthefeedtransportbeltat scribed in a paper Schultz [45]. I t consists of an inclined tube
position b. The separator operates by attracting magnetic ma- 2.54 cm in diameter through which a few grams of feed ma-
terial off the feed transport belt and up toward the tapered terial either dry or in a slurry arepassed. A divergent magnetic
 OBERTEUFFER: 235

fieldis producedinonesectionofthetube by thetaperedtheparticles slide. Assumingthatthedevice is designedfor

pole tips of the magnet shown in the diagram. Strongly mag- paramagnetic particles for which
netic material may be held at this point, while the less mag-
M(H) = XH
neticmaterial is washeddownthetube.Thetubemaybe
vibrated during separation to free entrained nonmagnetics and then the product H dBldx should be constant. In this case the
produce a cleaner concentrate. The portion of material held in ‘integral of (2) reduces to
thetubecomparedtothefeed is usedtodeterminethe
FM = X H dB/& JdV
amount of strongly magnetic material in a given feed. Mag-
netic fields up to 6000 G at the center of the gap maybe m
= X H dBldx -
achieved. Because of the geometry of the pole tips, the mag- P
netic force, however, varies strongly across the tube, and it is where is the particle and is its density.
The
com-
likely that both weakly magnetic material in small amounts ponent of gravitational force acting on the particle also varies
(near the pole tips) as well as strongly magnetic materials are as the particle
retained by the Davis tube. The competing forces in this sepa-
rator are those of gravity and drag. The latter may be hydro- FG = mg sin e
dynamic drag Or friction due to other Particles in the dry where 0 is the perpendicular inclination of the chute from the
t The horizontal.
separation.

is independent of particle size. This fact allows the Isodynamic

separator to produce a separation based only on relative mag-
netic susceptibility. This device is unique since the separation
in all other devices depends on susceptibility and particle size.
Themagneticforce in the Frantz-Isodynamic separator may
be estimatedassumingthatabackgroundmagnetic field of
10 kilogauss and a magnetic field gradient of 2 kilogauss per
centimeter are available. Thisresults inamagneticforceof
approximately 16 X dyneson
a 10 pm particle of
weaklyparamagneticcupricoxide.Thecompeting gravita-
tional force maybe adjusted by changingtheinclinationof
thechute in adirectionperpendicular to theflowofthe
material. The full gravitational force on such a particle would
NON-MAGS
be 2.6 X Inordertoachievethedeflectionofsucha
Fig. 17. Frantz-Isodynamicseparator. particle the perpendicular incination of the chute would have
to be about 3 degrees. As the materials are separated by the
action of the magnetic and gravitational forces, a splitter in
B. Frantz-Isodynamic: Incontrast t o the Davis tube,the thechutedividesthestreamandallowsthemoremagnetic
Frantz-Isodynamicseparator is averysophisticated device and the less magnetic fractions to be caught at the end of the
which allows fractionation of even weakly magnetic materials. chute in two separate containers.
This separator, shown in Fig. 17, utilizes specially shaped pole If the device is used in the free-falldeflectingmodethe
pieces to produce a force which is approximately independent substancesof even smaller,(includingdiamagnetic)absolute
of distance inaregionbetweenthepole pieces. A narrow susceptibilities may be separated. Operating in’ this way it is
chute is placed between the pole pieces; the material to be claimed [46]that separationofsubstanceswithabsolute
separated passes down the inclined chute under the influence susceptibilitiesassmall as - 0.3 X IO6 emu/gm maybe
ofgravity. Thechute isinclinedboth parallel andperpen- obtained.
dicular to its length so that a component of gravitational force
may compete with the magnetic force. The chute is vibrated High Gradient Devices
to reduce friction and insure constant feeding. Alternatively
Recognizing that high magnetic field gradients can produce
the feed may be dropped between the poles in a fully vertical
large magnetic forces, a number of high gradient7 type mag-
position.Themagneticforcethenacts todeflect particles
netic separators have been devised. These devices have been
from their straight fall paths.
called“inducedpole”devicessincethe fieldgradientsare
The independence of magnetic force with distance implies
produced by applying a relatively uniform background mag-
that the product
netic field to a ferromagnetic structure(grids, screens, grooved

M ( H ) &/dx
’A number of magnetic separators have been called “high intensity”
separators. This generally designates separators of conventional design
be constant over the width of the chute in the plane in which employing magnets of greater strength than usual.
236 TRANSACTIONS IEEE ON MAGNETICS, JUNE 1974

platesor steel wool)andinducing magnetic poles along operated at superficial velocities in the range of 1-5 cm/sec.
properly oriented edges. Since large magneticfield gradients Although the magneticfield produced by the solenoidneed
can generally exist only in small volumes these separators are not be large to achieve thesegradients, the use of ribbons
designed for the separation of smallmagnetic particles. Pro- tends to reduce the number of screensper unit magnetized
ducing high gradients and large magnetic forces over a surface volume and hence the capacityof such a device.
area large enough to trap practical numbers of particles is a The usual application of these devices is for the removal of
significantproblem. Needles withtheiraxes parallel to the fine iron impurities in various fluids. A special recent applica-
applied field w i produce high gradients inrelatively
l
l low tionofthistype of device has beeninwaste watertreat-
fields but the available trapping surface is verylimited. By ment [ 501. The filter is used to remove very fine suspended
contrast filaments magnetized perpendicular to their long axis solids after a magnetic seeding technique [ 211. In this process
have a large demagnetizing factor, but much greatersurface magnetic ironoxideandthen acoagulantare added to the
area. The three separators described below have approached water to be treated. Fine nonmagnetic particles become
this problem in different ways. Another device in this general flocced withmagneticparticles and these composites are re-
class is the Carpco separator [47], [48] which utilizes ferro- moved in a Frantz-Ferrofdter.
magnetic balls and other shapes on which poles are induced.
It produces only relatively modest field gradients and will not GROOVED
be discussed here.

NET

?
TAILS OUTLET

Fig. 19. Jones separator (after Jones [ S l ] ).

7
INLET B. -Tortes: Jones magnetic separators utilizea series of
Fig. 18. Frantz-Ferrofilter. grooved plates, placed between the poles of an electromagnet,
Such a separator is shown in Fig. 19. The slurry with particles
to be separated is passed through the chamber containing the
A. Frantz-Ferrofilter: The Frantz-Ferrofilter is a magnetic plates. The magnetic particles are trapped along the edges of
separator consisting of a series of screens or grids placed in.. the grooves where the field gradient and the magnetic forces
thebore of asolenoidmagnet.Smallparticles of ironand are large. Thenonmagnetic particles and slurryliquid pass
other fairly strongly magnetic materials may be trapped from through the chamber and out below. As in the Frantz-Ferro-
slurries or dry feeds. A device of this type is shown in Fig. 18. filterthe magneticparticlesmaybewashed outwhenthe
The feed slurry, in this figure, flows in at the bottom passing magnetic field is reduced to zero. While relatively large field
through the screens and out at the top. The screens are mkde. gradients are. produced, the capacity of this device is limited
from ribbons of magneticstainlesssteelset on edge. These by the surface area available on the grooved plates. This sepa-
devices operateintermittently;theflow is interrupted,the rator has beendescribedin papers by Jones [5], [52], and
field is reduced to zero, and the magnetic particles are back- Stone [ 531.
washed. The magnetic field produced by the coils surrounding The magnetic, hydrodynamic drag, and gravitational forces
the screens need not be large since the demagnetizing factor of may be estimated for a 10 pm particle of iron. The magnetic
the ribbons is low. The induced poles in this device are along force is estimatedto be approximately1.4dyne, while the
the edges oftheribbons which makeupthe screens. The gravitational force is 3 X dyne,
andthe
hydrodynamic
manufacturer’s literature [ 491 for this separator indicates that drag force for a slurry velocity of 50 centimeter per second is
amagnetic forceof IO8 dynes/cm3foriron is developed estimated to be 2 X dynes. It is clear thatthe magnetic
along the edges of the ribbons which makeupthe screens. force is considerably larger than the competing forces for even
Suchamagnetic forceforiron implies an effectivefield a 1 0 micron particle of iron. A particle with a magnetization
gradient of approximately 60 kilogauss percentimeter.The several orders of magnitude less than of iron could be trapped
maximum slurry velocity of such a separator may be estimated bysuchaseparator.A continuous Jones separator hasbeen
for a 1 pm particle of iron. The magnetic force on such a par- developed [ 521. This device is similar to that shown in Fig. 19,
ticle would be4 X dynes/cm3andthemaximum water except that a series of chambers of grooved plates are mounted
slurry velocity would be approximately 1 0 centimeters per on a ring which is allowed to rotate into and outof the region
second. Theratingfor these devices indicatethattheyare between the poles of the magnet. In this way the slurry may
OBERTEUFFER:MAGNETICSEPARATION 237

pass throughthechamber in themagnetic field andthe tion generally begins atabout 7000 gauss. Thusfor even
trapped magneticparticles may bewashed off whenthe stronglymagneticparticles such a separator can continue to
chamber leaves the magnetic field. increase in efficiency with increasing magnetic fields, up to an
The use of solid grooved plates in this device as shown in appliedfield of about 20 kilogauss. At this point both the
Fig. 19 results in an effective closing of the magnet gap. This fiber and the ferromagnetic particle will be magnetically satu-
relatively small gap decreases thereluctance of themagnet rated. For paramagnetic material the efficiency of this sepa-
circuit and gives stronger fields in the openings between the rator can increase up to the magnetic saturation of the para-
plates thanwould be possible otherwise withthe magnetic magnetic material (generaily greater than 100 kilogauss). The
circuit employed. The effective capacity of the device, how- use of the Marston magnetic circuit makes the necessary large
ever, is reduced by the volume of the iron plates. magnetized volumes economically attractive.
Jones separators are designed for the beneficiationof weak-
ly magnetic materials. A survey [19] of minerals separability
with this device was undertaken several years ago by the SLURRY
INPUT WASH WATER IN
CanadianBureau of Mines. A continuous Jones separator is
used commercially for the treatment of weakly magnetic iron MATRIX
ores in Brazil [ 141.
COIL
C . Kolm-Marston: Kolm-type high gradient magnetic sepa-
rators were developed several years ago in conjunction with a CAROUSEL

series ofexperiments designed tocapturethe elusive Dirac

AGNETICS OUT
monopole [55]. Weakly magnetic fine particlesfromocean
MIDDLINGSOUT
bottom sediments were thought to contain monopoles and a TAILINGS
OUT
magnetic separator was developed to filter these sediments. A
batch device ofthistype has been shownschematicallyin CAROUSEL HIGH GRADIENT
MAGNETIC SEPARATOR
Fig. 2. Thedevelopment of anefficient magnetic circuit
[8, p. 251 surrounding the solenoid magnet of the Kolm de- Fig. 20. Kolm type high gradient “Carousel” separator.
vice has made scaled-up industrial devices ofthistype eco-
nomically attractive. Kolm-Marston separators have been put
into commercial use in the clay industry [8, p. 551 to sepa- A continuous, high gradient magnetic separatorhas also
rate weakly magnetic staining impurities fromclay slurries. been developed. A device of this type is shown in Fig. 20. This
These separators are normallyrunwith a water slurry device has been tested in ourlaboratory [8, p. 711 andis
which is convenient for transporting fine particles, but air or scheduled to be putinto pilot plantoperation to treat so
other fluids may also be used. The matrix of filamentaryferro- called “nonmagnetic”taconite ores. These weakly magnetic
magnetic material is oftencomposedof magneticstainless ironorescannot be beneficiatedinconventionalmagnetic
steel wool with an average strand diameter of 7 100 pm. The separators. This device consists of a wheel containing cells in
effectiveness of such fibers is then greatest for particles about which the steel wool matrices are placed. The wheel rotates
30 p m diameter. i n practice, particles of cupric oxide as small within a circular housing. The cells pass continuously into a
as 1 pm diameter may be trapped. The rough filaments of the high magnetic field region where the slurry with the feed to be
stainless steel wool resist compaction in the applied magnetic separated is introduced. The fluid and nonmagnetic particles
field so the matrix retains its relatively uniform open volume. pass through the cells and out below, while magnetic particles
At a packing density of a few percent, the average interstand are trapped within the matrices. When the cell rotates out of
distance is of the order of 500 pm, limiting the treatable par- the magnetic field region a wash stream removes the magnetic
ticle size to about 100 pm or less. Other filamentary materials particles. A continuousseparationfrom a slurrycontaining
have been used with larger diameters and interstand distances 400/0 solids process rates of 100 Q/m2s is achieved.
to accomodatelarger particles. The use of superconducting magnets forthese devices is not
presently indicated. Fields up to 20 kilogauss in volumesas
This separator differs in several respects from the separators
large as 1 0 m3maybeproducedeconomically using the
discussed previously. The use of a matrix of fine filamentary
proper magnetic circuit design. Forsubstantially larger vol-
magnetic materials produces very high magnetic field gradients.
umes and higherfields, superconducting systems do become
Their large effective surface area insures a high capacity for a
attractive. It may be that magnetic separation will provide the
given magnetized volume. The void volume of the matrix is
great so that fluid flow is not impeded. The resultingeffective-
fust industrial applicationof superconductivity [ 551 .
ness in trapping even very weakly magnetic, micron-size par-
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
ticles at high flow rates makes it applicable to a wide range of
separations. Strong applied magnetic fields are utilized to mag- The author would like to thank H. H. Kolm, E. Maxwell,
netizethefibers usually to saturation.The magneticfield D. Kelland, C. de Latour, and J. J. Nolan for useful discus-
gradient of a fiber placed in a homogeneous background mag- sions and suggestions on this work. The support of the RANN
netic field theoretically increases until the background field (Research Applied to Nationd Needs) Division of the NSF. for
equals the bulk magnetization of the fiber. For magnetic stain- magnetic separation research atthislaboratory is gratefully
less steel this number may be 20 kgauss. In practice,satura- acknowledged.
238

REFERENCES [30] J. M. W. MacKenzie,“Zeta-PotentialStudies inMineral Proces-

sing: Measurement, Techniques, and Applications”,
.. A4inerak Sci.
Engng., vol. 3, p. 25, July, 1971.
F. Langguth, Handbuch der Elektrochemie EZektromagnetische B. Yarar and J. A. Kitchener, “Selective Flocculation of Min-
Aufbereitung, Halle AS., 1903. erals”, Inst. Min. and Met. Trans. C p. C23, March, 1971.
D. Korda,LaSeparationElectrornagnetiqueetEketrostatique W. J. D. Stone, “Determination of the Basic Characteristics of a
des Mineraux, L’Eclairage Electrique, Paris 1905. Multi-Pole Coilecting Sdrface for Strongly Magnetic Particles of
C. G. Gunther,Electro-magneticOreSeparation,McGraw-Hill Small Dimensions”, 7th Inter. Minerals Processing Cong.Proc.,
Publishing Co., New York, 1909. New York, p. 415, 1964.
R. S. Dean and C. W. Davis, Magnetic Separation of Ores, Bureau V. Henel, M. Horacek, 0. Kolar, “New High-Intensity Wet Mag-
of Mines Bulletin 425, U. S. Department of the Interior, 1941. netic Separator for Treatment of Fine Fractions of Weakly Mag-
Magnetic Separation of Non-Ferrous Metals, Annual Report, De- netic Ores’’, 9th Inter. Minerals Processing Cong. Prague, p. 69,
partmentofPhysicsandAstronomy,VanderbiltUniversity, I 07n
A/,”.
Gashville, Tennessee, April, 1971. [34] L. Ivanier and M. Boucract, “Concentration a Sec des Mineral de
161 A. F. Taggart, Elements of OreDressing, John Wiley and Sons, FeraLimoniteetaHematite par SeparationMagnetiquea
Inc., New York, 1951. HauteIntensiteetSeparationaHauteTension”,9thInter.
[7] N. F. Schulz, “Separation Efficiency”, SOC. of Min. Eng. AIME, Minerals Processing Cong. Proc. Prague, p. 69, 1970.
Trans. vol. 247, March, 1970. [35] J. H. Perry, ed., ChemicalEngineers’Handbook,McGraw-Hill
[ 8 ] J. A. Oberteufferand D. R.Kelland, Eds., Proceedingsofthe Book Co., New York, p. 21-63-67, 1963.
HighGradient Magnetic SeparationSymposium, M.1.T. Francis [36] A.M. Gaudin,principles of MineralDressing,McGraw-HillBook
BitterNationalMagnetLaboratory,Cambridge,Massachusetts, Co., New York, Chap. 18, 1939.
1973. [37] E. J. Pryor,Mineral Processing,Elsevier Publishing Co., Ltd,
[9] H. H.Kolm, et al, “HighIntensity Magnetic Filtration”, Mag- New York, Chap. 19, 1965.
netic Materials, Conf. Proc., p. 949, 1971. (Abstract Only). [ 38 J R. Richard and C. E. Locke, Textbook of Ore Dressing, McGraw-
[ 101 J. A. Oberteuffer,“HighGradientMagneticSeparation”,IEEE Hill Book Co., New York, Chap. 14, 1940.
Trans. Magnetics, vol. MAG-9, p. 303, Sept. 1973. [39] P. G. Kihlstedt and B. Skold, “Concentration of Magnetite Ores
[ l l ] “How 278 Processing Problems were Solved with an Assist from with Dry Magnetic Separators of the Mortsell-Sala Type”, 5th
MagneticForces”,bookletdistributedbytheEriezMagnetics Inter.Minerds ProcessingCong. Instit. of Min. and Metall.,
Company, Erie, Pa. London, p. 69,1963.
[12] BureauofMinesStaff,MineralFactsandProblems,Bureauof [40] J. Suleski,“NewMagnetsandTank Designs for Wet Magnetic
Mines Bulletin 650, U. S. Department of the Interior, 1970. Drum Separators,” World Mining, p. 44, April, 1972.
[13] A. F. Taggart,Handbook of Mineral Dressing, John Wiley and 1411 J. E.ForcieaandR. W. Salmi,“PrimaryMagneticSeparator
Sons, New York, 1945. Specifications”, SOC.Min. Eng. Trans. AIME, p. 339, December,
[14] D. N. Skillings,Jr.,“Cia. Vale do Rio Doce”, Skillings’Mining 1965.
Review, vol. 61, p. 12, October 1972. [42] F. Fraas,“TheMatrix-Type Magnetic Separator”,Bureauof
[15] D. A. Brobstand W. P. Pratt, eds., UnitedStatesMineralRe- Mines Report of Investigations 6722, U. S. Department of the
sources,GeologicalSurvey ProfessionalPaper,820, U. S. De- Interior, 1966.
partment of the Interior, 1973. [43] F. Fraas, “Magnetic Separation of Minerals of Low Susceptibility
[16] D. R. Kelland,“HighGradientMagneticSeparationApplied to and Small Particle Size”, Bureau of Mines Report of Investiga-
MineralBeneficiation”, IEEE Trans.Magnetics,vol.MAG-9, tions 7292,U. S. Department of the Interior, September, 1969.
p. 307, Sept. 1973. [44] J. deRobertand L. Casnabet,“TheForrerSeparator:ANew
[17] W.M. Kester, J. W. Leonard,and E. B. Wilson, “Reduction of Apparatusfor Wet SeparationofWeaklyparamagneticMater-
Sulfur from Steam Coal by Magnetic Methods”, Mining Congress ials”, International Minerals Processing Cong., London, p. 745,
Journal, p. 70, July, 1970. 1960.
[ l 8 ] S.C. Trindadeand H. H. Kolm,“MagneticDesulfurizationof [45] N. F. Schultz, “Determination of
the Magnetic Separation
Coal”, IEEE Trans. Magnetics, vol. MAG-9, Sept. 1973. Characteristics with the Davis Magnetic Tube”, SOC. Min. Eng.
[19] R. A. Wyman, W. J. D. Stone, and F. H. Hartman, “Illustrative Trans. AIME, p. 211, June 1964.
ApplicationsoftheJones Wet Magnetic Mineral Separator”, [46]“Frantz-IsodynamicMagneticSeparator”, Advertising Brochure
Technical Bulletin TB36, Department of Mines and Tech. Sur- of S. G. Frantz Co., Trenton, N.J., 1972.
vey, Ottawa, June, 1972. [47] J. H. Carpenter,“Carpco-AmaxHighIntensity Wet Magnetic
[20] W. J. D. Stone, “BaseMetals and HighIntensity Wet Magnetic Separator”, 7th Inter. MineralsProcessingsCong. Proc. p. 399,
Separation”, Can. Min. J., p. 56, June, 1970. 1964.
[21]. C. de Latour, “Magnetic Separation in Water Pollution Control”, [48] J, E. Lawver, J. L.Wright and H. R.Kokal,“The Behavior of
IEEE Trrm. Magnetics, vol. MAG-9, Sept. 1973. Mesabi IronandSilicate Minerals in 20-Kilogauss Magnetic
[22] M. J. McNallan, J. B. See, and J. A. Oberteuffer, “Treatment of Fields”, Trans. SOC. Min. Eng. AIME, p. 194, June 1968.
Steel Mill Process and Waste Water by High Gradient Magnetic [49]
“Frantz-FerrofiiterElectromagneticSeparators”,
Advertising
Separation”, EMD Water Quality and Metals Extraction Session, Brochure from the S. G. Frantz Co., Trenton, N.J., 1973.
AIME Annual Mtg Dallas, 1974, (Abstract Only). [50] “Here’s aTotallyNewMethodofSewageTreatment”,House
[ 2 3 ] G. Bitton, R. Mitchell, C. deLatourand E. Maxwell, “Phos- and
Home, McGraw-Hill,Inc. 1972.
phateRemovedby Magnetic Filtration”, tobe publishedin [51] G. H. Jones,“Wet Magnetic SeparatorforFeeblyMagnetic
Water Research. Minerals I, 5th Inter. Minerals Processing Cong. Institut. of Min.
[24] D. A. Himmelblau,ObservationandModelingofParamagneticand Metall., London, p. 717,1963.
Particle Entrapment in a Magnetic Field”, Master’s Thesis, De- [52] G . H. Jones,“TheSeparationofStrongly Magnetic Particles
partment of Chem. Eng., M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass., 1973. Particularly Those of Small Dimensions”, 7th International Min-
[25] E. C. Stoner,MagnetismandMatter,MethuenandCo.,Ltd., erals Processing Congress, Proc. p. 405, 1964.
London, p. 36,1934. [53] W. J. D. Stone,“WetMagneticSeparatorforFeeblyMagnetic
[26] J. A. Stratton,“Electro-magneticTheory”, McGraw-Hill,Inc., Minerals 11, 5th Inter. Minerals Processing Cong. Proc. Instit. of
New York, 1941. Min. and Metall. London, p. 733, 1963.
[27] A. Gardini, G. Perona and R. Sesini, “Magnetic Filter for Small [54] H. H. Kolm, F. Villa, and A. Odian, “Search for Magnetic Mono-
Particles”, NUC.Eng. and Design, vol. 1, p. 199-206, 1967. poles”, Phys. Rev. D. Vol. 4, pp. 1285-1296, September, 1971.
[28] S. J. Michell, FluidandParticle Mechanics, Pergamon Press, [55] D. Kelland,E. Maxwell, and J. A. Oberteuffer,“HighGradient
New York, 1970. Magnetic Separation: An Industrial Application of Magnetism”,
[29] A. W. Hamiltonand F. S. Twichell,“HighGradientWet-Drum ProceedingsofNATOInstituteonSuperconductingMachines
SeparatorsOptimizetheUseofMagneticEnergy”, Eng. and and Devices: Large System Applications, Francis Bitter National
Min. J.,Sept.
Laboratory,
Magnet
Cambridge,
1971.
Massachusetts,
p. 142,
1974.