Modeling the Liberation of Comminuted Scheelite Using Mineralogical Properties

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper is interesting but requires major revisions.

Fiest of all the english needs extensive editing and the style must be improved. 

There a number of incóherent data (Table 3 in particular) and a lot of imprecisions regrding some of the results (Figure 3 and 5 in particular)

The author did use bith XRD and MLA for modal mineralogy but onlyt presented partial results for both techniques without any comparison between the two.

The title of the paper emphasise modelling of scheelite liberation but the modelling results are just a minor contribution of the paper and are not really discussed in the paper.

There is no mention of duplicate results and it seems that that the whole study is just based on one sample and one gravity test.

I have made comments dirrectly on the pdf and I've also edited some of the grammar mistakes directly but the englishs and style still need to be revised.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I see that the authors presented their results very well. However, I can’t see deep analysis to discuss their results with literature. As a reader, I would like to see differences between the sample used in this study and other samples in literature so that I can make a clear conclusion. Otherwise, this paper can be accepted as a technical note rather than a research article. Regarding the manuscript, it is well written, however, the authors must correct/revise the manuscript based on my comments (Please see the attached file). The manuscript can be accepted after moderate correction/revision.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I see that the authors have some made corrections on the manuscript, and revised it. However, there is need minor correction to be accepted. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your review.

All minor corrections was done directly in the manuscript directly.

To your question: What is the concentrate or tailings minerals for the shaking table separation?

Overall, 55 minerals were identified.The averaged results of XRD and MLA measurements in the feed, shaking table concentrate, and shaking table tailings are presented in direct comparison (Table 3).

Please see the attachment which is after minor correction.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf