NCP's 2018 Tech / Resource report Page 24 https://s21.q4cdn.com/491660439/files/doc_downloads/2018/181109_Nickel_Shaw_43-101-Resource-Upate.pdf 16.3% Magnesium values
These are magnesium values
across all zones /
all geologies An accumlative compilation of numerous assays over many yrs.
Which creates an
accurate mineral percentage comparable. No iron values reported
Which is quite
important for MET test and
future mine payables CHART LINK ( if image doesn't show in post )
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53241372584_21cd30a2fc_b.jpg Anyone notice anything as per Magnesium ? You would've had you read my former post.
I've underlined the categories to help the viewer. Magnesium values based on Balanced Head =
Mg 35% More than double the Mg values across all zones.
Even more Mg % ended up in 1st Scavenger =
37.4% https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53241269688_14fbe29879_z.jpg
QUESTION
If Mg values across all zone have an avg 16.3%
How can the 151.4g sample have more than double ?
Such would create double the difficulty addressing Mg separation.
Might''' fuddle the junior to keep drilling - looking for more sulphides
or Iron ( ni, cu, pt, pd, au, co, ) and as a causative project sits for yrs
due to reflection on - MET studies - hence - always good to have several MET
comparables - by diff companies - right ?
IRON -
No iron reported in over all geology zones
Why not report iron values at the phase of, mineral % zone tonnages ?
Iron shows up later in - MET tests
OTHER PEERS
Deal with irons in very first phase of extraction.
We may not know the Iron values across all zones / tonnages of deposit.
But we can roughly gain a value using the XPS chart
Adding each of the phases where iron reports
39.2% Iron = Bulk Cleaner concentrate
Why did i say gain a rough iron value ?
Because the Magnesium values are 2x greater therefore the iron
might also have a 2x greater value.
HUNCH
Seperpentines were used ( preconcentrate sample creating 2x more )
Versus assay values or composite ore across all zones = 16.4% Mg.
THE FIX ?
Use a sample composite ore that has 16.4% Mg
Not hard to do.
ORE CHARACTERZATION
I've circled all other minerals with ( iron bonds )
These are iron minerals ( cu, ni etc... ) that are in addition of magnetite.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53197043368_081a8903e4_c.jpg
IRON FIX ?
Pull all magnetite out
Heat / Roast ores to convert other irons to magnetic pull remaining iron.
= Perform a mineral value ( other minerals that tagged along )
= Same MET studies stated upto 40% PGM's were with the magnetites.
= if first ( iron extraction phase ) has lots of iron and decent values of other minerals
= what concentrate could be produced running processing 9 -10 raw ore tones ?
= review my former post
= rest of ores in circuit are pushed through - other extraction phases.
To think....
The power and impression of 151.4/g sample.
Tease.
Now ask the question...
How easy would it be to create a 1.8% Ni Iron concentrate ?
Focusing on... 1st phase + roasting ?
Lastly....
Last time i checked.... Mgo is non magnetic.
Why so much Mg reporting in 1st phase Mag Scav ?
Magnetite reports there.
Hunch - 2x the Mg values in sample...
Most likely.
Why so much iron escapes 1st phase ?
lol
