Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A study of 300 diamonds in the 2–4 mm size range revealed that X-ray transmission demonstrated a predictable relationship for detecting diamonds, with all diamonds being identified. In contrast, X-ray luminescence showed no consistent relationship between diamond characteristics and detection, and not all diamonds were identified using this method. When comparing the X-ray transmission response of diamonds to common gangue minerals found in dense media separation concentrates, X-ray transmission was found to incidentally detect small amounts of gangue particles. However, no such gangue detection occurred with X-ray luminescence, which responded only to diamonds. In pilot-scale tests, a belt-fed X-ray transmission sorter with a pressurized air ejection mechanism and a chute-fed X-ray luminescence sorter with a mechanical paddle ejection system were evaluated. The X-ray transmission sorter produced an average of 0.28 kg of concentrate per gram of diamonds separated, while the X-ray luminescence sorter generated 0.37 kg of concentrate per gram of diamonds separated. The X-ray transmission sorter achieved 99% diamond recovery, whereas the X-ray luminescence sorter achieved 91% diamond recovery. The higher concentrate mass obtained from the X-ray luminescence sorter is attributed to the ineffectiveness of the mechanical paddles, despite the superior contrast between gangue and diamonds in detection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: