A mineralogical analysis has shown that in the Hartebeesfontein ore studied, uranium is associated mainly with uraninite, sulphides such as pyrite and to a lesser degree carbonaceous material such as thucolite. Little could be learned from the literature regarding the mechanism of flotation of these uranium-bearing minerals. A wide variety of reagents were used so that conditions enhancing the flotation of either the sulphides, carbonaceous material, oxides like uraninite, or combinations thereof, were created. As could be expected, the xanthate based floats gave-better selective recovery of sulphides than oleic acid. A substantial fraction of the uranium is associated with pyrite, so that addition of oleic acid to a xanthate float did not enhance the recovery or grade of uranium. After a pre-leach with sulphuric acid in which the pH and Eh were controlled so as to destroy the uraninite, higher uranium recoveries were obtained for the combined float (xanthate, DTP and oleic) and the DTP float. This was most evident when iron was added before flotation.
Roasting, which destroyed the sulphides and thucolite, caused a significant decrease in uranium recoveries. The uranium liberated in this way was obviously not flotable in the same way as the uranium liberated from uraninite. A small amount of iron (2 kg/t) added before milling resulted in slightly higher grades and recoveries of sulphur for xanthate based floats. Higher iron additions had a detrimental effect on sulphur recoveries. Even in the case of oleic acid the addition of small amounts of iron had a positive effect on the recovery of sulphur and uranium.