Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:49:55.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dissolution of aluminium from metakaolin with oxalic, citric and lactic acids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2019

Danyal Karbalaei Saleh ,
Hadi Abdollahi Open the ORCID record for Hadi Abdollahi [Opens in a new window] ,
Mohammad Noaparast  and
Alireza Fallah Nosratabad
Danyal Karbalaei Saleh
Affiliation:
School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, PO Box 1439957131, Tehran 1417466191, Iran
Hadi Abdollahi*
Affiliation:
School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, PO Box 1439957131, Tehran 1417466191, Iran
Mohammad Noaparast
Affiliation:
School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, PO Box 1439957131, Tehran 1417466191, Iran
Alireza Fallah Nosratabad
Affiliation:
Soil and Water Research Institute, The Research, Education and Agricultural Extension (AREEO), PO Box 31785-311, Karaj 31779-93545, Iran
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the leaching of aluminium from calcined kaolin (metakaolin) with citric, oxalic and lactic acid and binary combinations of these organic acids. The investigated parameters were the pulp density, acid concentration, pH, agitation speed, temperature and contact time. The kinetics of aluminium dissolution from metakaolin in binary organic acid mixtures were determined and scanning electron microscopy examination and energy-dispersive spectrometry mapping of Si and Al of untreated kaolin and residual solids were also carried out. Aluminium dissolution increased with temperature, time, acid concentration, pulp density and acidity. At maximum dissolution, citric–oxalic (1:4 w/w) and lactic–oxalic (1:4 w/w) mixtures dissolved 77% and 78% aluminium, respectively, from metakaolin in 11 h. The activation energy ranged from 57.8 to 74.6 kJ/mol. The most effective parameter in the dissolution of aluminium was the temperature, indicating that the reaction was not diffusion-controlled. It was concluded on the basis of the activation energy values and the sensitivity of the reaction to temperature that the dissolution was under chemical-reaction control.

Keywords

aluminium dissolutionleaching kineticsmetakaolinorganic acids
Type
Article
Information
Clay Minerals , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , June 2019 , pp. 209 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Joao Labrincha

References

Aghaie, E., Pazouki, M., Hosseini, M.R., Ranjbar, M. & Ghavipanjeh, F. (2009) Response surface methodology (RSM) analysis of organic acid production for kaolin beneficiation by Aspergillus niger. Chemical Engineering Journal, 147, 245–251.Google Scholar
Ajemba, R.O. & Onukwuli, O.D. (2012) Application of the shrinking core model to the analysis of alumina leaching from Ukpor clay using nitric acid. International Journal of Engineering, 1, 1–13.Google Scholar
Aldabsheh, I., Khoury, H., Wastiels, J. & Rahier, H. (2015) Dissolution behavior of Jordanian clay-rich materials in alkaline solutions for alkali activation purpose. Part I. Applied Clay Science, 115, 238–247.Google Scholar
Altıokka, M.R. & Hoşgün, H.L. (2003) Investigation of the dissolution kinetics of kaolin in HCl solution. Hydrometallurgy, 68, 77–81.Google Scholar
Bauer, A. & Berger, G. (1998) Kaolinite and smectite dissolution rate in high molar KOH solutions at 35° and 80°C. Applied Geochemistry, 13, 905–916.Google Scholar
Bellotto, M., Gualtieri, A., Artioli, G. & Clark, S.M. (1995) Kinetic study of the kaolinite–mullite reaction sequence. Part I: Kaolinite dehydroxylation. Physics and Chemistry of Minerals, 22, 207–217.Google Scholar
Cama, J. & Ganor, J. (2006) The effects of organic acids on the dissolution of silicate minerals: a case study of oxalate catalysis of kaolinite dissolution. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 70, 2191–2209.Google Scholar
Cama, J. & Ganor, J. (2015) Dissolution kinetics of clay minerals. Developments in Clay Science, 6, 101–153.Google Scholar
Chin, P.K.F. & Mills, G.L. (1991) Kinetics and mechanisms of kaolinite dissolution: effects of organic ligands. Chemical Geology, 90, 307–317.Google Scholar
Cuadros, J. (2017) Clay minerals interaction with microorganisms: a review. Clay Minerals, 52, 235–262.Google Scholar
Ganor, J. & Lasaga, A.C. (1994) The effects of oxalic acid on kaolinite dissolution rate. Mineralogical Magazine, 58, 315–316.Google Scholar
Gharabaghi, M., Noaparast, M. & Irannajad, M. (2009) Selective leaching kinetics of low-grade calcareous phosphate ore in acetic acid. Hydrometallurgy, 95, 341–345.Google Scholar
Groudev, S.N. & Groudeva, V.I. (1986) Biological leaching of aluminum from clays. Biotechnology and Bioengineering Symposium, 16, 91–99.Google Scholar
Habashi, F. (1999) Kinetics of Metallurgical Processes. Métallurgie Extractive Québec, Québec, QC, Canada.Google Scholar
Hosseini, S.A., Niaei, A. & Salari, D. (2011) Production of γ-Al2O3 from kaolin. Open Journal of Physical Chemistry, 1, 23–25.Google Scholar
Hulbert, S.F. & Huff, D.E. (1970) Kinetics of alumina removal from a calcined kaolin with nitric, sulphuric and hydrochloric acids. Clay Minerals, 8, 337–345.Google Scholar
Levenspiel, O. (1972) Chemical Reaction Engineering. Wiley, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Lima, P.E.A., Angélica, R.S. & Neves, R.F. (2014) Dissolution kinetics of metakaolin in sulfuric acid: comparison between heterogeneous and homogeneous reaction methods. Applied Clay Science, 88, 159–162.Google Scholar
Lima, P.E, Angélica, R.S. & Neves, R.F. (2017) Dissolution kinetics of Amazonian metakaolin in hydrochloric acid. Clay Minerals, 52, 75–82.Google Scholar
Metz, V. & Ganor, J. (2001) Stirring effect on kaolinite dissolution rate. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 65, 3475–3490.Google Scholar
Olsen, R.S. (1983) Leaching Rates for the HCl Extraction of Aluminum from Calcined Kaolinitic Clay. Report of Investigations 8744. Bureau of Mines, US Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Phipps, J.S. (2014) Engineering minerals for performance applications: an industrial perspective. Clay Minerals, 49, 1–16.Google Scholar
Pohl, W. (2011) Economic Geology: Principles and Practice: Metals, Minerals, Coal and Hydrocarbons – Introduction to Formation and Sustainable Exploitation of Mineral Deposits. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
Safarzadeh, M.S., Moradkhani, D. & Ojaghi-Ilkhchi, M. (2009) Kinetics of sulfuric acid leaching of cadmium from Cd–Ni zinc plant residues. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 163, 880–890.Google Scholar
Souza, A.D., Pina, P.S., Lima, E.V.O., da Silva, C.A. & Leão, V.A. (2007) Kinetics of sulphuric acid leaching of a zinc silicate calcine. Hydrometallurgy, 89, 337–345.Google Scholar
Tang, A., Su, L., Li, C. & Wei, W. (2010) Effect of mechanical activation on acid-leaching of kaolin residue. Applied Clay Science, 48, 296–299.Google Scholar
Uçar, G. (2009) Kinetics of sphalerite dissolution by sodium chlorate in hydrochloric acid. Hydrometallurgy, 95, 39–43.Google Scholar
Wang, H., Feng, Q. & Liu, K. (2016) The dissolution behavior and mechanism of kaolinite in alkali-acid leaching process. Applied Clay Science, 132, 273–280.Google Scholar
Wang, X., Li, Q., Hu, H., Zhang, T. & Zhou, Y. (2005) Dissolution of kaolinite induced by citric, oxalic, and malic acids. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 290, 481–488.Google Scholar
Zhao, J., Gao, W., Tao, Z.-G., Guo, H.-Y. & He, M.-C. (2018) Investigation, using density function theory, of coverage of the kaolinite (001) surface during hydrogen adsorption. Clay Minerals, 53, 393–402.Google Scholar
Zinder, B., Furrer, G. & Stumm, W. (1986) The coordination chemistry of weathering: II. Dissolution of Fe(III) oxides. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 50, 1861–1869.Google Scholar