Terminology

[Fathi Habashi]

I appreciate if hydrometallugists would abstain from using the term "preg robbing". I propose "adsorption losses" as a substitute. For more details, readers are invited to see the correspondence in Minerals Engineering 14(9), 1121-1122(2001)

[James Travis]

Why change a phrase (preg-robbing) which is well known in industry?

[Gary Thundercliffe]

Happy New Year to all

Talking of "Preg Robbing" I'd be very interested to hear estimates of just how much "Preg Robbing" is costing the mining industry and what techniques and practices are being implemented to mitigate the problem/costs?

[James Travis]

James said:

Why change a phrase (preg-robbing) which is well known in industry?

Thanks. This is a typical conservative response.

[Gary Thundercliffe]

Do you mean "adsorption losses" ?

[Amanda Wills]

Yesterday at 12:31pm, James Travis wrote:Why change a phrase (preg-robbing) which is well known in industry?



Thanks. This is a typical conservative response

Is it?

Personally, I haven't read the correspondence in Minerals Engineering 14(9), 1121-1122(2001), as I'm sure many other people haven't, and as a chemical engineer who has come over to the dark side, sorry, I mean, minerals engineering, I would be interested to know the reasons for wanting swap terms.

Maybe you could elaborate a little on the subject Fathi? It would be much appreciated.

[James Travis]

Assume you mean aBsorption losses?

[James Travis]

Re Amanda;s message. Fathi, maybe you could reproduce the letter that you published in Minerals Engineering. Would be good to see it here, rather than having to search for it on a shelf

[Fathi Habashi]

Here is the correspondence published in Minerals Engineering 14(9), 1121-1122(2001)[/color]
==============================================================
Dear Sir
I am shocked to see the meaningless expression "preg-robbing" in the title of a paper published in Minerals Engineering (Rees and van Deventer, 14(7), 753-773 (2001). This expression has been introduced in the gold industry for sometime now to indicate the loss of gold from leach solution by sorption on certain minerals in the ore. It is non scientific and should not be used in any scientific communication. I am wondering what the abstractors in Chemical Abstracts will think about mineral engineers!
Sincerely,
Fathi Habashi
5 July 2001
==================================================================
Dear Sir
I respond to the comments by Prof Fathi Habashi on the use of the term "preg-robbing". As with the use of many technical or industry specific terms, it is always a question as to whether an author should use a term that is widely understood by industry, or whether a more academically defined term that is the proud creation of the author should be used. The term "preg-robbing" is not one of the most well sounding terms in mineral processing, but it is widely understood in the gold industry. Alternative terms could be adsorption", "re-sorption" or "solution depletion".
However, none of these terms describes in widely understood language what happens. It is disappointing that Prof Habashi does not suggest a simple alternative either. If "preg-robbing" could be upgraded to a more scientific level, then Prof Habashi should also suggest more scientific alternatives for "rougher", "scavenger" and "cleaner", because most dictionaries have problems explaining these terms and do not even recognise their relevance to flotation. Ask most scientists what a "scavenger" or "cleaner" is, and they refer to a meaning far removed from flotation. I share Prof Habashi's dissatisfaction with an industry term like "preg-robbing", but if we want to criticise, we should also propose widely accepted and understood alternatives.
Prof. Jannie S.J. van Deventer
Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
Email: jannie @unimelb.edu.au
6 July 2001
===================================================================
Page 1122 - Correspondence
Dear Sir
I do not think it is waste of time to think about our terminology and choose the scientific terms that are agreeable to most of those in the profession. Proposals should be solicited by professional organizations and/or journal editors, and discussed in committee meetings. Faraday who did not have a university education, gave us a wealth of scientific terms in electrochemistry that are used world wide today without any contest - - anode, cathode, etc. Chemists met many times in the past century in international gatherings just to discuss naming new and old compounds. Why should we not try to improve our written language so that it becomes comprehensible to everyone? It is a pity that not only in mineral processing but also in pyrometallurgy many Middle Age terms are still in use, e.g., smelting which is a corruption of the German "Schmeltzen", i.e., melting. Even modern metallurgists in the nickel industry use "bessemerized matte" for a product that has nothing to do with Henry Bessemer. I certainly welcome Prof. Van Deventer's proposal to find new terminology for "rougher", "scavenger", and "cleaner". It seems to me that the plant operator who invented the term "Preg-robbing" reads a lot of comic books.
Sincerely,
Prof. Fathi Habashi
Email: Fathi.Habashi @arul.ulavai.ca
6 July 2001
================================================================

[Amanda Wills]

Thanks for posting the correspodence above Fathi, it makes the debate a lot clearer.

[Mike Adams]

Consider that "preg-robbing" has been around for about as long as the (equally simple yet eloquent) term "carbon-in-pulp" (see quotation from "Advances in Gold Ore Processing", cited below). Some words disappear from use and others become introduced. The reason why these more descriptive terms have become successful on minesites is probably partly because of the difficulty in attracting people to work in the minerals processing industry. These terms allow the rapid conveyance of concepts to operators with little or no formal training in extractive metallurgy.

I think that "preg-robbing" is useful because it quickly communicates a description of the effect in practice. More interpretive or mechanistic terms like "adsorption losses" make assumptions about the processes involved, not all of which are adsorption processes (for example, cementation of metallic gold on to native copper or chalcopyrite under cyanide-deficient conditions).

"While they could be termed refractory carbonaceous ores, being refractory in the sense that gold recovery is made difficult by the adsorption losses that occur, this may be confused with cases of gold encapsulation within carbonaceous materials such as kerogen (solid hydrocarbons formed from deposits of spores, pollen or algae). Smith first used the term preg-robbing in 1968 and later it was used by others (Hausen and Bucknam, 1985; Stenebråten, 1998; Stenebråten, et al, 1999). It is now in common use in the gold industry." - Advances in Gold Ore Processing, p. 937 (Chapter 38, J.D. Miller et al).

[James Travis]

Thanks Dr. Adams for a clear and sensible answer. Lets continue to use the term 'preg-robbing'. It is meaningful and practical, even if it does not satisfy some academics

[mutassim]

Dear Dr Habashi
Sorry that I am late in reading the subject but my contribution is that the tearm preg-robbing is meaningfull and describe the action immediately , that there is someway or another a gold disappeared from the circuit which indicate stolen gold,then the metallurgist has to look for the element that causes this robbing of gold.
Mutassim

[Fathi Habashi]

Thanks - - it sounds like a science fiction.

[feralmet]

I am sympathetic of Mutassim's point of view. When dealing with company executives and accountants (who have zero understanding of natural laws) it is sometimes necessary to adopt dramatic descriptors.

Yet like Fathi, I yearn for descriptive truth. Sometimes our liberal use of descriptors can have unintended and destructive consequences.

Hence we say that banks "make" a profit. We allow insurance companies to peddle their deals as "products" and permit all manner of unproductive endeavours to be described as "industries".

- but that is probably a topic for a different forum.

Chris Shaw
Australia