S Ross Thesis

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry
October 27, 2000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
1.2
Granulation of Fertilizer
1.3
Objectives
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Factors Affecting the Growth of Fertilizer Granules
2.1.1
Growth Mechanisms
2.1.2
Liquid Phase Content
2.1.3
Initial Particle Size Distribution
2.1.4
Circuit Performance
6
6
10
12
13
2.2
Dynamic Modelling of Fertilizer Granulation Circuits
2.2.1
Population Balance Modelling
2.2.2
The Coalescence Kernel
2.2.3
Crusher, Dryer and Screen Modelling
14
15
16
18
2.3
19
Scope of Inquiry
3.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

3.1
21
Data Collection
21
3.2
Sampling
3.2.1
Sampling Regime
3.2.2
Sampling Equipment
3.2.3
Reduction of the Bulk Sample
22
25
26
27
3.3
Size Distribution Analysis
27
3.4
Moisture Content Analysis
29
3.5
Model Validation
29
4.0 RESULTS & DISCUSSION
31
4.1
Data Collection
4.1.1
Sampling Errors
4.1.2
Analysis Errors
31
31
33
4.2
Plant Audit Results
35
4.3
Data Consistency
38
October 27, 2000
4.4
Circuit Analysis
4.4.1
Analysis of the Drum Granulator
4.4.2
Analysis of Dryer
4.4.3
Analysis of Samples Obtained from the Screens
4.4.4
Analysis of the Crusher
4.4.5
Analysis of the Recycle Stream
39
39
43
45
47
48
4.5
Model Validation
4.5.1
Granulator
4.5.2
Dryer
4.5.3
Screens
4.5.4
Crusher
4.5.5
Mixer
4.5.6
Complete Circuit
49
50
54
55
57
57
57
5.0 CONCLUSION
59
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
58
7.0 NOMENCLATURE
61
8.0 REFERENCES
63
APPENDIX A - RAW DATA AND CALCULATIONS
63
APPENDIX B - OPERATING DATA
124
APPENDIX C - DAESIM CODE
125
October 27, 2000
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
This individual inquiry investigates the use of population balance to model
granulation drums, as a part of a general model for an entire granulation circuit. It
aims to show how modelling can be beneficial to industrial granulation processes such
as fertilizer production. To support this idea, a plant audit was carried out on Incitecs
ammonium sulphate granulation plant located at Gibson Island in Brisbane during
July 2000. The analysis and subsequent modelling of this data formed the basis for
this thesis.
1.2 Granulation of Fertilizer
Granulation is a broad term referring to many size enlargement processes where small
particles are combined into larger more permanent masses. Granulation is widely used
to improve the storage, handling and transportation qualities of materials such as food,
pharmaceuticals, ceramics and chemicals such as fertilizers by reducing dust losses
and obtaining free flowing material that is resistant to caking. Other benefits are that
the appearance of these materials is improved and greater control over the physical
and chemical properties is achieved.
Fertilizers such as ammonium sulphate are processed in a rotary drum or mixer

granulator, which forms part of a granulation circuit as shown in Figure 1. In this flow
diagram, a liquid binder feed is dispersed throughout a solids feed in the granulation
drum. Encouraged by collisions due to the rotation of the drum, these particles
agglomerate. The material is then dried in a rotary dryer and screened to remove
oversize and undersize material from the product. The oversize material is then
crushed and recombined with the undersize material to form the recycled feed to the
granulator.
October 27, 2000
Figure 1: Typical Granulation Circuit (Zhang et al, 2000)
Adetayo et al (1993) suggests that the successful operation of granulation circuits is

often hindered by three major problems. These are:
1. Product size specifications are very strict and as a result only a small
proportion of the total solids flow actually leaves the process. Recycle ratios
of up to 6:1 are common.
2. Control of granulation processes is quite difficult due to surging and drifting
phenomena coupled with large dead times.
3. The product properties are sensitive to process variables such as moisture
content, binder properties and the product size distribution of the feed.
In addition to these problems, fertilizers (such as ammonium sulphate) generally have

their own very unique properties that makes granulation challenging.
The material is often soluble so the chemical composition and moisture

content of the granule significantly affects granulation.
The size distribution of the feed is generally very broad, overlapping the
product specifications.
The recycled granules that form the feed to the granulator are hard and not
easily deformable which makes agglomeration difficult in some cases.
October 27, 2000
A validated model for an operational granulation circuit that accurately predicted

circuit dynamics would vastly improve the control and operability of the plant,
decrease the energy consumption, aid significantly in maintaining a stable operation
and allow a better understanding of the granulation process.
1.3 Objectives
The aim of this inquiry is to show that a dynamic simulation or model can be used to
great effect in improving the efficiency at industrial granulation plants. This will
include:
Demonstrating how population balance modelling of rotary granulation drums

can be used to simualte actual processing scenarios of industrial fertilizer
granulation circuits, particularly for ammonium sulphate.
Illustrating how these simulations can be used as a powerful tool in identifying

the actual cause of major processing problems in these circuits as opposed to
identifying and treating the symptoms.
Displaying how population balance simulations can be used to assess the

impacts of possible improvements to a granulation circuit, without using the
costly plant trial and error approach.
Identifying possible scale up improvements to current granulation circuit

models derived from experimental studies to make the implementation of plant
data into the model for simulation more accurate.
Recommending improvements that may be made to Incitecs ammonium

sulphate granulation circuit to improve the control and operability of the
planbt and make the process more efficient.
The completion of a plant audit of the Incitec plant and subsequent validation of a
recently developed granulation circuit model (Cameron and Balliu, 2000) will help to
achieve these inquiry objectives.
October 27, 2000
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Granulation is an important process in the fertilizer industry. It achieves a product that
is easier to handle, store and disperse and apply to soil. Two major problems exist
with the operation of fertilizer granulation plants (Adetayo et al, 1993).
Due to the wide size distribution of the recycle seed granules only a small
proportion of the granules exiting the granulator are actually of product size.
Large recycle ratios of up to 7:1 are common.
Surging and drifting problems coupled with slow response makes controlling
granulation circuits quite difficult.
The understanding of the granulation process is still quite limited. The commercial
interest in decreasing capital and operating costs and maintaining the stability and
reliability of the process has ensured that much literature has been published in the
last thirty years to improve the understanding of the granulation process. Generally
this literature has focused on two major areas. These areas are:
1. Factors affecting the effectiveness of the granulation process
2. The dynamic simulation and modelling of fertilizer granulation circuits.
2.1 Factors Affecting the Growth of Fertilizer Granules

2.1.1 Growth Mechanisms
Within a granulator many mechanisms of size enlargement (and reduction) of
granules may occur such as those outlined in Figure 2. These mechanisms have been
used widely in conjunction with experimental observations to attempt to explain
growth behaviour in many different size enlargement processes. This presents
problems because usually these mechanisms have been applied to fit experimental
data and in most cases the results are unique to specific classes of materials and
processes (Adetayo and Ennis, 1997).
October 27, 2000
Figure 2: Growth Mechanisms (Adetayo et al, 1993)
Much work has been completed to explain the particle growth experienced during the
drum granulation of fertilizer. This process is unique largely due to three reasons:
The initial size distribution fed into the granulator is generally very broad,
overlapping the product size distribution (Adetayo et al, 1993).
The recycled particles, which form majority of the feed to the granulator, are hard
and not easily deformable. This means that any given two colliding particles are
less likely to agglomerate and lower growth rates are experienced (Adetayo et al,
1993).
The total liquid phase is greater than the moisture content alone because fertilizer
is soluble meaning that the processing conditions and chemistry of the fertilizer
has a significant affect on granulation (Bathala et al, 1998).
October 27, 2000
Using experimental data based on three fertilizers including ammonium sulphate

(AS), mono-ammonium phosphate (MAP) and di-ammonium phosphate (DAP),
Adetayo et al (1993) proposed a two-stage granulation mechanism that was explained
using the granulation regimes described by Ennis et al (1991).
In the first of these stages, majority of all collisions between particles cause successful
agglomeration and the growth of particles occurs by random coalescence. The initial
size distribution narrows due to collisions between fine and large particles present in
the recycle causing rapid removal of majority of the fines. This means that the first
stage is completed quite rapidly as it continues until equilibrium is reached at a point
where the smallest granules in the size distribution reach a critical size. At low
moisture contents this is the only stage of granulation.
The second stage of this granulation mechanism only occurs for deformable granules
with high moisture contents. The size distribution of the particles widens due to a
preferential growth mechanism. In this stage not all collisions between particles
result in successful coalescence. This is dependent on collisions causing compression
and forcing liquid to the surface of the particle and deformation occurring at the
collision surface of each particle. As a result, the second stage of the granulation
mechanism proposed by Adetayo et al (1993) progresses quite slowly and is
dependent on the kinetics of granulation.
The two-stage granulation mechanism was validated, for all three fertilizers, using
experimental results from a laboratory scale batch drum in a further study by
Adetayo et al (1995). It was found that DAP and MAP demonstrated both stages of
the two stage granulation mechanism, whilst ammonium sulphate (the fertilizer used
for this study) only exhibited the first stage of the mechanism.
The extent of granulation that can occur by each of the stages in this mechanism is
governed by the balance between the kinetic energy of the colliding particles and the
binding effect of the viscous and capillary forces of the binder and particle
respectively. Ennis et al (1991) investigated these forces and defined the viscous
Stokes number, Stv (1), and the critical viscous Stokes number, Stv* (2), to quantify
the relationship between them.
v
October 27, 2000
St v =
8 g r V
(1)
1 h
*
St v = 1 + ln
e ha
(2)
Where,
Stv
= Viscous Stokes Number (dimensionless)
Stv*
= Critical Viscous Stokes Number (dimensionless)
= Granule Density (g/cm3)
= Binder Viscosity (Pa.s)
= Effective Granule Size (mm)
= Velocity of granule collision (m/s)
= Coefficient of Restitution
= Binder Layer Thickness
ha
= Asperity Height
During the first stage of granulation, the non-inertial regime is prevalent or when
Stv << Stv*. In this regime all collisions cause successful coalescence. This growth
however increases the value of Stv as the effective granule size increases. Equilibrium
is soon reached as Stv approaches Stv*.
The inertial granulation regime exists when Stv Stv* and can be compared to the
second stage of the granulation mechanism. In this regime only some collisions are
successful. Ennis et al (1991) also suggested that a third regime exists when the
viscous Stokes number is higher than the critical Stokes number. This is a coating
regime that has little effect on fertilizer granulation due to its non-deformable nature.
October 27, 2000
The importance of using an the micro-level based approach of Ennis et al (1991), ain
conjunction with experimental validation of a proposed growth mechanism with a
model was stressed by Adetayo and Ennis (1997). The choice of which growth
mechanism is prevalent is usually based upon observed trends in experimental size
distributions such as gelling or non-gelling behaviour or in this case narrowing or
widening of the size distribution.
Using this approach as the sole basis for the selection of a growth mechanism for a
specific process can lead to misleading conclusions as shown by the wide array of
granule growth mechanisms experimentally observed (Figure 2). Explaining the
experimental observations of granule growth, with a concept such as the Stokes
regime) that can be applied in all situations is a good method of analysis to ensure
misleading conclusions about the type of growth occurring are not developed.
2.1.2 Liquid Phase Content
There is a very strong relationship between relationship between the liquid phase
content of a granule and the average granule size. The contact between the agitated
bed of solids and liquid components in a granulator causes mobile liquid binding. This
produces agglomerates or clusters, held together by surface tension or capillary
forces. The relative amount of liquid components present determines which state of
capillary force exists between the liquid and solid phases. These states are outlined in
Figure 3.
Figure 3: States of Mobile Liquid Bonding (Brooker, 1999)
October 27, 2000
The pendular state refers to when small amounts of liquid are held discretely at the
point of contact between the solid and liquid. The capillary state occurs when all of
the air space between each of the solid particles in the cluster is replaced with the
liquid phase. The funicular state refers to the stage where air and liquid are both
dispersed among the pores of the cluster.
As the particles are dried the surface tension or capillary forces are replaced with solid
crystal bridges. This consolidates the granule. The strength of this crystal bridge is
dependant on the state of the capillary force between the solid and liquid phases and
the viscosity of the binder between each phase. The extent to which granulation
occurs is then not only dependent on the amount of binder present but also on:
How well the liquid phase is dispersed amongst the solid phase
How quickly the liquid phase (binder) can penetrate into the pores of the clusters
If the mixing of the phases is not sufficient caking or pooling phenomena can occur.
Caking occurs when a limited amount liquid phase is present in an area and very large
weakly bonded clumps of material are formed. Pooling occurs when the liquid phase
is not dispersed well or a particular area in the drum becomes supersaturated. This
will cause bonds to redisperse.
Sherrington (1968) was the first to propose that volume of the liquid phase present
during granulation determined the extent of granulation. From this the concept of a
solution phase ratio (y) was developed to relate the volume of solution to the volume
of solid in a granule. This is defined in Equation 3.
y=
g (1 + s ) f
(1 gs ) l
Where,
y
= Solution Phase Ratio
= Mass Fraction of Water in the Granule
= Solubility of the Fertilizer Salt in Water (gsalt/gwater)
= Density of Fertilizer Salt (g/cm3)
= Density of Fertilizer Solution (g/cm3)

v
(3)
October 27, 2000
The importance of this definition is highlighted by a simulation completed by

Adetayo et al (1994) that considered the effect of the solution phase ratio on various
processing parameters. This simulation used a combination of plant and experimental
data for di-ammonium phosphate fertilizer (DAP) to find that the extent and rate of
granulation increased with greater binder content and as a result the recycle ratio of a
granulation circuit can be optimised with the binder content. The results found by
Adetayo et al (1994) are summarised in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Effects of Binder Content and Crusher Efficiency on Granulation

(Adetayo et al, 1995)
2.1.3 Initial Particle Size Distribution
The effects of the initial particle size distribution were studied by Adetayo et al (1993
& 1995). It was found that the initial size distribution (that is of the recycle / feed
stream) has a strong and complex effect on granulation. The removal of all the
oversize was found to cause significant reduction in the effects of the second stage of
the two-stage granulation mechanism. The addition of fines (< 1mm) material was
also examined (Figure 5). As not many data points were taken it is difficult to fully
assess the effects, however it would appear that an optimal level of fines might be
used to increase the growth rate. For DAP it was found to be at 30%.
October 27, 2000
Figure 5: Effect of fines content of the feed on Granulation (Adetayo et al, 1993)
2.1.4 Circuit Performance
A granulation circuit is also heavily influenced by the performance of the other unit
operations within it. This is an important consideration because in most circumstances
the efficiency of these processes is difficult to manipulate quickly. The performance
of the dryer in relation to an entire granulation circuit has not been widely discussed
in literature, however it will have a direct affect on the consolidation of bonds
between particles during the formation of the crystalline bridges as discussed in
Section 2.1.2.
The performance of the screen and crusher and the effects on the entire granulation
circuit were examined using a dynamic simulation by Adetayo et al (1995). This
simulation was based on both experimental and plant data. The use of a more efficient
crusher was found to vastly improve the recycle ratio allowing higher growth rates
and moisture contents as shown in Figure 4. In this diagram, Case 1 (the solid line)
represented a circuit with a low efficiency crusher. Case 2 (the dotted line)
represented a high efficiency crusher. As can be seen a higher efficiency crusher
allows a greater moisture content causing higher volumes of rapid growth of fines into
the product size range, whilst reducing the recycle ratio.
October 27, 2000
Figure 6: Effect of Screen Efficiency on Circuit Performance

(Adetayo et al, 1995)
The analysis of the screens found that the efficiency of the screens has a defining
effect on the performance of the circuit especially for the recycle ratios, however it
did not affect the stability of the circuit. It merely determines the recycle ratio without
affecting the operating range or circuit stability. For example Figure 6 outlined the use
both a low efficiency (dotted line) and high efficiency screen (solid line). Whilst the
use of a lower efficiency screen did affect the recycle ratio, it did not affect the
optimal moisture content of the granulator.
2.2 Dynamic Modelling of Fertilizer Granulation Circuits

Bathala et al (1998) developed a model for rotary drum granulation of fertilizers using
a mass balance as the basis for the constitutive equations used. It was developed
mainly for use in the control of fertilizer granulation circuits. It considered only the
growth of particles by layering and the death of particles by breakage due to
collisions. The model was validated using a nitrogen-potassium fertilizer.
This approach was used mainly because a control model is required to relate the
behaviour of output variables to specified input variables. At the time the work of
Bathala et al (1998) were completing their work, very little literature was readily
available on suitable population balance models for control purposes. With the
exception of this study all other attempts have used population balance equations as a
basis for the modelling and simulation of fertilizer granulation circuits.
October 27, 2000
2.2.1 Population Balance Modelling

A population balance is a powerful statement of continuity used to describe how a
particle size distribution (PSD) changes with time and space. It follows the change of
a PSD throughout a process due to birth, death and growth mechanisms. It was
introduced as a general equation for particulate systems by Hubert and Katz (1964)
and Randolph and Larson (1962) and has been used to model the formation in a
number of processes including crystallisation, pelletization and granulation. The
general form of the population balance for granulation is shown below.
Q
(G * A*)n(v, t )
n(v, t ) Qin
+ Bnuc (v)
=
nin (v) + ex n ex (v )
v
t
V
V
1 y
+
(u , v u, t )n(u , t )n(v u , t )du
2 N t 0
1
Nt
(4)
(u, v u , t )n(u, t )n(v u, t )du
Where,
V
= Volume of the Granulator
= Inlet and Outlet Flowrate of the Material
G*
= Layering Rate
A*
= Attrition Rate
N(v,t)
= Number of particles in each size fraction
Bnuc(v)
= Nucleation Rate
B(u,v,t)
= Coalescence Kernel
Nt
= Total Number of Particles per unit volume
This balance can be simplified by making assumptions to suit particular situations.

For example Adetayo et al (1994,1995) defined the population balance for a well
mixed batch system with growth occurring by coalescence only as
n(v, t )
1
=
t
2N t
1
Nt
(u , v u , t )n(u , t )n(v u, t )du
(5)
(u, v u , t )n(u, t )n(v u, t )du
October 27, 2000
In most cases the population balance for particulate systems cannot be solved
analytically. Therefore to solve models derived from population balances numerical
methods are required. A numerical method was developed by Hounslow et al (1990).
This method is used widely in solving population balance models for fertilizer
granulation simulations. This method, using a volume basis, discretizes or divides the
particle size range into geometric sections (vi=2vi-1) giving the following result for the
population balance above.
i 2
1
N i 1 2 j i +1 i 1, j N j + i 1,i 1 N i21
2
dN i
1
j =1
i 1
dt
Nt
N i 2 j i +1 i 1, j N j N i i , j N j
j =1
j =i
(6)
2.2.2 The Coalescence Kernel

The most significant parameter in the population balance models and simulations, as
discussed previously, is the coalescence kernel Bi,j. This term is combines the birth
and death terms of the population balance into a variable explaining the growth due
coalescence in time and space. It is generally assumed that the coalescence kernel can
be divided into two sections as shown below.
i , j = 0 ( i , j )
(7)
The first section 0 is the coalescence rate constant and is a function of the operating conditions
such as moisture content, binder viscosity and drum speed. The second section (i,j)
determines the shape of the particle size distribution. As two stages of granulation were identified
by Adetayo et al (1993), it follows that the coalescence kernel should have two stages to
adequately describe the granulation behaviour. Adetayo et al (1995) validated the following two
stage granulation kernel for a well-mixed batch system.
i, j
k1 = A1 S sat
= 0;
k = A (v + v );
2
i
j
2
t t1
S sat S crit
S sat > S crit
(8)
t > t1
S sat =
October 27, 2000
X w f (1 p )(1 + S s )
l p(1 X w S s )
(9)
Where,
K1
= The first stage granulation rate constant
K2
= The second satge granualtion rate constant
Ssat
= Fractional saturation of granules
Scrit
= Critical saturation of granules
A1
= Parameter for the random size-dependant coalescence kernel
A2
= Parameter for the preferential size-independent coalescence kernel
= Density of Fertilizer Salt
= Density of Fertilizer Solution
= Porosity of Granule
Xw
= Moisture Content
Ss
= Solubility of Fertilizer Salt in Water
The first part of this kernel (up until t1) represents the non-inertial growth regime
discussed in Section 2.1.1. In this stage the chance of coalescence is not dependent on
the collision velocity or binder viscosity rather the likelihood that binder is present at
the collision site. The kernel assumes that the binder is well distributed and the
probability of collision is size independent. As a result the growth rate in the first
stage is constant.
After t1 (the point at which the viscous Stokes number and the critical viscous Stokes
number are equal), growth is size dependent, as deformation is required to release
binder. Therefore the second stage growth rate constant generally only applies in
collisions involving large particles of high inertia, which increase the value of Ssat
above the critical value for coalescence.
Adetayo et al (1995) published results of an experiment completed using a laboratory

scale batch granulator examining the granulation rate constants for three different
fertilizers including ammonium sulphate, mono-ammonium phosphate and di-
October 27, 2000
ammonium phosphate. The result of these experiments (at 4% moisture content) are
summarised in Table 1.
Table One: Granulation Rate Constants for some Fertilizer Types (4% Binder)
Variable
A
y
Ssat
Scrit
k1
k2
Ammonium
Sulphate
27.7
0.106
Mono-ammonium
Phosphate
25.8
0.090
0.36
2.85
0.0002
0.20
1.70
-0.016
Di-ammonium
Phosphate
39.9
0.092
0.150
0.13
3.39
0.0043
It was found that at low moisture contents that the value of k2 was zero for all
fertilizers. Due to the relatively high critical saturation of ammonium sulphate even at
higher moisture content values (up to 8%) the fractional saturation of the granules
remained low and the value of k2 remained at zero. The outcome of this is that
modelling of ammonium sulphate granulation should only require the use of the first
size independent coalescence kernel.
2.2.3 Crusher, Dryer and Screen Modelling
There modelling of other units in the granulation circuit are much simpler as results
from other applications can be applied, unlike the granulator. A brief description of
models generally used for fertilizer granulation circuits is included below:
Screen models used have generally been based on the screen model of Whiten
(1974). This model is based on the probability that a particle will pass through a
specific aperture or size fraction.
October 27, 2000
Crusher models including that of Adetayo (1993) are generally based on one
equation describing the flow of material into the crusher and three other functions.
A selection function is used to describe the probability of breakage in each stage;
a breakage function gives the relative distribution of the broken particle and a
classification function describes the differential movement of the particles. In the
case of fertilizer granulation circuits a perfect mixing assumption is used, as
hammer mills are quite common.
Dryer models have generally been based on the assumption that they only act to
reduce the moisture content of the granules.
2.3 Scope of Inquiry

The scope of this thesis can best be defined as the continuation of work completed by
David Brooker and Jang Zhang in the past year at The University of Queensland.
Zhang et al (2000) developed a model of a typical granulation circuit based on a
sound understanding of granulation mechanisms as developed by Adetayo et al (1993,
1995) and others developed recently. The model used a multi-phase heat and mass
transfer model for the rotary dryer. In addition pseudo steady state models were used
for the screens and crushers as the kinetics of these processes were fast and did not
have a large effect on the system dynamics.
The work of Zhang et al (2000) used the NIMBUS simulator to evaluate control
strategies for industrial granulation of di-ammonium phosphate fertilizer and found
that using a crude measurement of the recycle size distribution defined by the fraction
of oversize and undersize material in the stream. It was found by using three case
studies such as a disturbance in the binder flow rate that recycle ratio control
strategies could be proposed and developed using the granulation circuit model.
Brooker (1999) attempted a model validation of the Zhang model using data obtained
by way of a plant audit of the granulation circuit at Incitec producing N-Gold
fertilizer. Using the plant audit Brooker analysed the granulation circuit and proposed
October 27, 2000
strategies of how the operation of the granulation circuit with respect to N-Gold
production could be improved. His work also focused on attempting to validate the
Zhang model using the NIMBUS simulation. It was found that there were many
limitations in validating this model due to the unstable operation of the Incitec plant
during sampling, sampling issues and limitations with the model.
This inquiry is similar in nature to that of Brooker (1999). Like the Brooker thesis this
inquiry is aimed at analysing achieving a detailed analysis of a granulation circuit,
although in this case the granulation of ammonium sulphate will be examined. Also
like the Brooker thesis this inquiry will attempt a model validation.
The Zhang model produced in the NIMBUS simulator will not be used. The NIMBUS
simulation package has been super ceded by Daesim an improved version of the
NIMBUS simulator. Cameron and Balliu (2000) are currently finalising a new
granulation circuit model based on the same principles as Zhang, in the Daesim
simulator and this investigation help to finalise some of the details.
This inquiries scope has also gone beyond the Brooker thesis in that it attempts to
validate each unit of the granulation circuit with the plant data rather than solely
dealing with the validation of the granulator drum.
October 27, 2000
3.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

This section outlines the procedure used to sample and analyse the material obtained
from the four plant audits completed at the Incitec Plant. It qualitatively assesses each
of the procedures taken during the plant audit to determine the major areas where
experimental error may have significantly affected the results.
3.1 Data Collection
To best assess the data obtained from the plant audit as much information as possible
was required. Information was to be obtained from three sources around the plant.
The first is through sampling of material (s), which is discussed in Section 3.2. The
other two are the information obtained from the operators from the control panel and
daily plant measurements in the plant (o) and a mass and energy balance package used
by Incitec to determine flow information around the plant (m). Table 2 presents a
summary of the data available from the plant audit and the source it was obtained
from.
Table 2: Data Obtained During the Plant Audit
Stream
Recycled AS Feed to
Granulator
Binder Feed to
Granulator
AS Flow to Dryer
Air Flow into Dryer
AS Flow to Oversize
Air Flow out of
Dryer
Oversize
Product Size
Undersize
Polishing Screen
Undersize
Crushed Material
Product
Particle Size
Distribution
X (s)
Moisture
Content
X (m)
Flow
Temperature
X (c)
X (c)
X (c)
X (s)
X (s)
X (m)
X (s)
X (s)
X (m)
X (c)
X (c)
X (c)
X (s)
X (s)
X (s)
X (s)
X (s)
X (s)
X (c)
(s) data obtained from sampling
(o) data obtained from operators (control panel & daily measurements)
(m) data obtained from mass and energy balance package
October 27, 2000
Due to problems with the mass and energy balance program, the information obtained
from this source was not available for the plant audit. The major implication of
missing this data is that the consistency of the data could not be fully assessed. This is
discussed in Section 5.2. In most cases the information obtained for the flowrate and
temperature from the operators was obtained using on-line measurements, however in
some cases the temerature was measured by taking a measurement with a
thermometer of a sample in a bucket. Infra-red sensors were not used due to their
innaccuracy for this application
3.2
Sampling
Sampling was completed at 9 major sample points around the plant with 15 separate
samples taken during each run to take into account the sample points where the stream
had been divided into two separate flows. The sampling points have been identified in
Figure 7.
2
Rotary Dryer
3
9
4
7
Screens
Polishing Screen
6
Rotary Granulation Drum
5
Crusher
Figure 7: Sampling Points at the Ammonium Sulphate Granulation Circuit
October 27, 2000
One of the limitations in validating the model is the quality of the samples obtained
from the plant audit. A number of measures were taken to ensure that the sampling
error was minimized, however in some circumstances, high error was inevitable.
Table 3 outlines the features of each sampling point that were not conducive to
accurate sampling.
When sampling particulate matter there are two major sources of error that must be
prevented. These are delimitation errors and extraction errors (Gy, 1983).
Delimitation errors occur when not all the particles in a stream have an equal
probability of being sampled. Extraction errors occur when the chance of particles on
the edge of the cutter being included is size dependant. Both of these errors must be
avoided to ensure that a representative sample is obtained.
Table 3: Sample Point Characteristics

Ref #
Name
Description
Recycle / Feed
Constant, high velocity stream of many fine particles.

Difficult to sample across the entire length of the stream
due to the small chamber and high speed.
Granulator Exit
Material falls at an intermittent rate due to the motion of

the drum in a 2 metre wide curtain. The sample point was
a door approximately 500 mm from the start of the curtain.
Difficult to sample to entire cross-section (causing
delimitation errors) and length of the stream. A shovel was
used to sample causing extraction errors due to larger
particles falling from the edge.
Dryer Exit
Stream divided into two causing the need for two samples
(2 Samples)
to be taken. Relatively easy sample point to take the entire

cross section and width of the flow. The major cause of
sampling error in this stream is the segregation cause by
the intermittent flow due to the screw feed.
October 27, 2000
Oversize
The sampling from all the screens could not be taken from
(2 Samples)
a free-falling flow due to their arrangement. However a

reasonably accurate sample was taken using a cutter on the
surface of the screen across its entire length. Very minimal
extraction would have been experienced due to this
sampling method. Large delimitation and extraction errors
would be present. It is assumed that the sample would
have a distinct under-representation of fines due to this.
Crusher Exit
This sample point obtained quite possibly the most
(2 Samples)
erroneous sample. The point was a small opening in a

large chamber directly underneath the crusher. A small
cutter had to be used. In addition, high volumes of dust
escaped from the sample opening indicating that the
movement of particles within the chamber were random
and unpredictable.
Undersize
The undersize sample was taken from a constant, high
(2 Samples)
capacity free-falling stream of narrow width and length.

Relatively easy to take a representative sample from.
Product Size
See description for the oversize stream.
(2 Samples)
Polishing Fines
Constant, free falling, low velocity stream of particles with

a very small spread. Would be ideal for sampling except
the pipe containing the flow is cylindrical with a small
diameter, which makes sampling of the entire stream
difficult. Sampling was completed with the smaller of the
two cutters shown in Figure X.
Product Sample
A mechanical sampler was present at the end of the

product conveyor belt across a constant flow falling freely
from the conveyor belt. This resulted in relatively small
errors.
October 27, 2000
The underlying reason that particulate material is difficult to sample is that unlike a
liquid homogeneous samples cannot be produced via mixing due to the nature of
solids. Vibrations occurring in processing equipment and on conveyor belts as well as
the storage of particulate materials on stockpiles or in hoppers leads to segregation
effects where particles of similar size and density converge in the same region of the
sample. In this case, segregation is not attributable to the storage in stockpiles or
hoppers, however extensive use of conveyor belts means this must be considered.
3.1.1 Sampling Regime
The best technique of avoiding errors due to segregation is to move the sample cutter
at constant speeds at right angles to the stream completely through the entire cross
section of the flow while the stream is in a state of free fall (Goldberger et al, 1984).
In addition it is desirable to sample the stream over many short time intervals to form
a larger sample rather than taking a single sample over a longer time period. This is to
allow for variation in the flow.
There are no set guidelines to determine the size of sample that should be taken to get
a representative sample of the total flow of particulate materials. Some standard
industry guidelines and Gys theory can be used to determine the sampling regime
required to meet these requirements, however in this case they were not considered.
To compensate for this an error analysis for sampling using Gys Theory was
completed, so the effect of sampling error can be quantified.
The actual methodology used to sample the fertilizer from the granulation circuit
considered the total flows and variability of the flows. It involved taking bulk samples
of 2.5 +/- 0.5 kg samples. These samples were collected in two increments
approximately 90 minutes apart. Where possible the samples were collected manually,
directly cutting across the entire length of the stream. The cases where this was not
possible are highlighted in Table 3.
October 27, 2000
3.1.2 Sampling Equipment

The design of the sampling equipment is also another major consideration of when
attempting to reduce the sampling error. With the exception of the product sample,
where an automatic mechanical sampler was present, manual sampling was used for
all streams. Snow et al (1997) presents the following criteria for the design of a
traversing sampler for gravity flow:
The sampling device moves at a constant speed as it traverses across the entire
flow of the material. The cutter should also move far enough past the flow of
material so nothing is collected whilst the cutter is stationary.
The cutter length should be at least 10mm or three times the diameter of the
largest particle in the stream.
The cutter width should be three times the diameter of the falling stream.
After the sample is taken, the sampler shouldnt be more than half full.
These criteria were fulfilled in most circumstances throughout the sampling process.
In some cases the sample point was not wide enough to extend past the edge of the
flow. This same problem was met in ensuring the cutter width was three times the
diameter of the falling stream. The configuration of the two sampling devices used is
shown in Figure 8 below.
Figure 8: Configuration of the Sampling Devices
October 27, 2000
3.1.3 Reduction of the Bulk Sample

To obtain an acceptable sampling error level the sample from the plant taken is quite
large (2.5 kg), however for sieving purposes this sample needs to be reduced to about
100 to 300 grams. To ensure the representative nature of the sample is not
compromised a Jones riffle was used to split the sample several times. The material
was distributed into the feed hopper of the riffler to ensure each division had an equal
amount of material flow to reduce error. Figure 9 shows an example of a Jones riffle
sampler.
Figure 9: Jones riffle sampler
3.3 Size Distribution Analysis

The particle size distribution of the samples was analysed using standard dry sieving
methods. A 2 sieve series was used ranging from 63 microns to 8 mm aperture was
used. In addition extra sievc eizes were used to obtain more data points for the
frequency distribution plots. These extra sizes were 106 micron, 1.18mm, 2.36mm,
3.35mm, 4.75mm and 6.7mm apertures. The resulted in having much more detailed
size distribution data for analysis.
October 27, 2000
An analysis of the accuracy of the sieving procedure is included in Section 5.1. The
factors considered in designing an appropriate sieving regime are listed below:
Sieving Time
Particle Shape
Sieve Load
Agitation Method
Blinding
Breakage of Granules
The overall method of attaining minimal variance in the results was to maintain a
constant sieving conditions such as sieving time, agitation method and rate. Taking all
these factors into consideration the following sieving methodology was used for the
anaysis. A mechanical sieve shaker as shown in Figure 6 was used for the analysis.
1. A sample of approximately 150 to 250 grams was taken from the bulk sample
from the plant using a sieve shaker. This introduces an error of approximately
3.4 % (Brooker, 1999).
2. The fertilizer was sieved in three separate stages due to the size of the sieve
shaker and the total number of sieves. In each of these stages the fertilizer
weas sieved for a total of 5 minutes. The first stage included to sieves from
8mm to 2.36mm. The second was from 2mm to 0.5mm and the third form 355
microns to the collection tray.
3. Each size fraction was weighed and the results were plotted on a frequency
distribution graph.
October 27, 2000
Figure 10: Sieve Shaker
3.4 Moisture Content Analysis

The critical issue in moisture content analysis is avoiding changes in the moisture
content between the point in time at which the sample is taken and the time the
analysis is completed. Goldberger et al (1984) recommended closed chute work and
sealed sample containers. The analysis of the moisture content for fertilizer must also
consider the solubility. In this case the moisture content was only recorded for the
granulator exit sample. The procedure was as follows:
1. Immediately after taking a separate sample than the size analysis sample recording
the weight.
2. Placing the sample in a sealed bag.
3. Drying the sample in an oven at 60C for 24 hours.
4. The final mass is recorded
The moisture content is then calculated using the following equation:
% moisture =
wet weight dry weight

wet weight
3.5 Model Validation

A model validation was attempted on a model developed by Cameron and Balliu
(2000). This model was constructed in Daesim, a simulation package developed by
v
(8)
October 27, 2000
Cameron and Newell. The approach to the model validation was to first validate each
of the individual units of the circuit and then to combine them into a validation for the
completed circuit
This model (shown in Appendix C) was fitted to the plant data using the following
procedure:
1. Defining the size distribution of the feed to the process.
2. Defining the physical constants such as density and solubility appropriate to
ammonium sulphate granulation circuits.
3. Adjusting the empirical model fitting parameter (only for the granulator)
October 27, 2000
4.0 RESULTS & DISCUSSION

4.1 Data Collection
A successful model validation can only be achieved when it is ensured that the
experimental error in sampling and analysis is of sufficiently small magnitude and it
is found that the data gives consistent results. To ensure that the data obtained during
the plant audit was reliable an error analysis was performed on the experimental
procedure including sampling, sieving and moisture content analysis. In addition data
reconciliation was used to compare the results obtained from each data point to ensure
they were consistent with the next. This section presents the results of both the error
analysis and data reconciliation techniques used to ensure that this was the case.
4.1.1 Sampling Errors
The sampling of particulate material will always be erroneous to a certain degree
despite measures being taken to reduce it. Gy (1983) devised an equation that could
be used to size of sample required to obtain a certain error level. In this case, this
equation has been used to determine the amount of error, a3s the sample size was
arbitrarily chosen for the plant audit.
1 1
2 = x(100 x ) l v hd 953
L M
(10)
Where,
= granule density (units)
= mass fraction being sampled
= sample weight (g)
= mass of total sample (g)
= liberation factor
= shape factor
= spread of size distribution (mm)
D95
= 95% passing size of the distribution (mm)
Table 4 shows the maximum and average maximum error value for the sampling at
each point using Gys theorem.
October 27, 2000
Table 4: Sampling Error using Gys Theorem

Sample
Granulator Exit
Dryer Exit
Oversize
Product Size
Undersize
Crusher Exit
Polishing Screen Feed
Polishing Screen Exit
Product
Recycle
Maximum Calculated
Error (%)
63.80
85.42
15.57
0.40
71.05
3.47
0.19
3.62
7.88
Average Maximum
Calculated Error (%)
20.48
39.85
5.07
0.14
41.50
1.32
0.07
1.04
2.59
The theory proposed by Gy (Equation 8) assumes that unbiased samples are taken at
random. Therefore the results obtained from this error analysis will not give the actual
error experienced in the sampling, but the minimum attainable error with the sampling
regime used.
Many of the samples had a large bias due to the characteristics of the sample points
they were taken from. The error introduced by the biased sampling techniques cannot
be determined without much more extensive and accurate sampling techniques to
assess what the true values for the size distribution and moisture content are.
A qualitative assessment of the expected error can be determined by looking at Table

3. This table gives the details of the major features of each sampling point and the
problems associated with taking samples. From this table it can be said that the
granulator exit and crusher exit streams have a high bias error, whilst the dryer exit,
polishing screen fines and recycle streams have a moderate bias error. For the
remaining samples, a low error could be assumed meaning that Gys theorem gives an
accurate measurement of the sampling error.
Using this information and the error value calculated by Gys Theorem, an assessment
could be made about the sampling regimes and how they may effect the results of the
model validation. The granulator exit, crusher exit and dryer exit samples cause the
most concern. Any analysis over the crusher, dryer or granulator is severely limited
by the high sampling errors experienced during the plant audit.
October 27, 2000
There are improvements that need to be made to the sampling process for any future
work aimed at validating a model based on plant data obtained from Incitec. These
include:
Taking smaller, more frequent bulk samples, especially of streams containing

larger material. For example changing the sampling regime from 2 x 1.25 kg
samples to a regime of 8 x 300 gram samples would reduce the maximum
error of the crusher outlet sample to 13.15%. The only consideration is that the
size of the samples may be too small to sample the entire width of the stream.
Modifying some of the equipment at Incitec to incorporate some more

accurate sampling points. This is particularly with reference to the crusher,
which not only has a poor sampling point, but also is also hazardous and
messy to take samples from due to the large amounts of hot fertilizer dust
escaping from the opening.
4.1.2 Analysis Errors

There are three areas, where errors may have occurred in the analysis of the samples.
These are in the riffling, sieving and drying of the material. Several tests were taken
to quantify the error associated with the analysis in these cases.
Figure 10 assesses the performance of the Jones riffle used to reduce the samples
appropriate for sieving . The recycle sample from the first plant audit was split into
two samples of approximately 200 grams. The recycle sample was used as it contains
the broadest size distribution and is most likely to show up the any error involved in
riffling the samples. Each sample was then sieved at a frequency of 50 Hz for 5
minutes to obtain the results in Figure 10.
October 27, 2000
Figure 10: Analysis of Riffling Error

As can be seen from the results the error associated with poor representation from
riffling the material is quite insignificant and is not a consideration in the successful
validation of the model.
The precision of the sieve was also tested to ensure that it was giving consistent
results and to analyse the amount of error associated with choosing the parameters for
sieving such as the sieving time and vibration frequency was minimal. Brooker (1999)
completed a similar test for N-Gold Fertilizer and found that the effects of the sieving
time were insignificant in the correct analysis of size distribution and that minimal if
any breakage occurred on the sieve trays.
The error analysis completed aimed to verify this result for ammonium sulphate. One
of the samples used for the riffling analysis was sieved for two further periods of five
minutes again at 50 Hz to ensure that:
1. Five minutes was sufficient time for all the granules to distribute to the
appropriate sieve trays.
2. The vibration frequency was small enough to ensure that no breakage of
material occurred on the sieve trays.
October 27, 2000
Figure 11 shows that both of these scenarios are also applicable to ammonium
sulphate granules as well as N-Gold. There is little variation at all between the three
plots.
Figure 11: Analysis of Sieving Error
The remaining consideration in the analysis errors is the accuracy of the moisture
content data obtained. Section 2 illustrates how moisture content is an important
factor in the operation of granulation circuits. The major errors in determining the
moisture content occur with the drying of the sample before it can be analysed and
weighing errors. It is expected that these results will be quite accurate and not have a
significant effect on the results of the model validation.
4.2 Plant Audit Results
A large amount of data was obtained from the plant audit and subsequent analysis
produced results useful for many applications. Some of these applications extend well
beyond the scope of this inquiry and have not been discussed as a part of this report
but have been appended (Appendix A). The most relevant and useful results have
been summarised in Table 5 and Table 6.
October 27, 2000
Table 5: Summary of the Size Distribution Results

Sample
Recycle/Feed
Granulator
Outlet
Dryer Outlet
Oversize
Product Size
Undersize
Crusher Outlet
Polishing
Screen Feed
Polishing
Screen Fines
Product
Run 1
4/07/00
Run 2
7/07/00
d50
1.67
1.87
Spread
D90-d10 d50
3.40
1.45
2.72
2.20
Run 3
15/07/00
Spread
Spread
d90-d10 d50
d90-d10
3.58
1.40 1.75
9.55
2.10 5.95
Run 4
16/07/00
Spread
d50
d90-d10
1.47 2.32
1.87 4.80
2.03
8.60
2.43
1.45
2.60
2.30
7.75
1.53
1.31
7.12
1.52
2.52
8.70
2.85
1.27
2.40
2.63
7.70
1.89
1.42
6.78
1.75
1.86
7.85
2.75
1.21
2.05
2.60
6.62
1.70
1.42
6.43
1.85
2.08
8.95
2.55
1.23
2.10
2.40
7.02
1.76
1.42
5.80
1.70
1.52
0.82
1.60
0.78
1.57
0.75
1.52
0.75
2.40
1.65
2.70
1.97
2.55
1.83
2.45
1.53
Table 5 summarises the changes in the size distribution over the plant four each of the
four sampling runs. For majority of these results a consistent mean size of the
distribution and the spread of the distribution are obtained with quite reasonable
results. The major deviation from this is the results for the granulator outlet. The
spread of the size distribution for this sample is erratic and in three of the four cases
the distribution widens over the granulator. This is inconsistent with the two-stage
growth mechanism suggested by Adetayo et al (1993).
Two ideas can be suggested for this anomaly. The first is that the accuracy of the
analysis for the larger sizes is quite poor due to the maximum sieve size used being
8mm. This means that for the larger sized distributions regression had to be used to
calculate the D90 size and even the D50 size for the oversize distribution in some cases.
This means that the accuracy of this result is reduced. It is also why the spread of the
size distribution for the oversize sample could not be calculated.
October 27, 2000
Other possibilities for these results can be attributed to the large particles present in
the recycle to the granulator. These grow quite quickly in the first stage of the two
stage growth mechanism. In addition to this they are quite a large proportion of the
total mass and small changes in this size range can cause large changes in the spread
of the size distribution.
The other feature of the results presented in Table 5 is the general trend for the size
distribution to widen over the dryer. In three of the four sampleing runs this has
occurred. This could be due to inconsistent sampling of the material or a widening of
the size distribution to to granule breakage in the dryer. This has been discussed in
more detail in Section 4.3.
Table 6 gives a summary of the operating conditions of each of the plant audit
sampling runs. As can be seen reasonably constant operating conditions were
maintained throughout each of the runs. Despite this as the plant is dynamic in its
operation the consistency of the data obtained during the plant audit must be assessed.
This is considered in the next Section.
Table 6: Summary of the Operating Conditions

Run
Granulator
Temp. (C)
Recycle
Ratio
Weather
Binder
Moisture Content (%)
Feed (L/s) Gran.
Gran.
Exit
Entrance
6.0
2.14
0.20
92
3.8
4.8
2.42
0.22
89
4.1
6.3
2.30
0.27
79
4.6
6.4
2.50
0.13
82
4.0
21 C
(Cold and
overcast)
18 C
(Showers)
27 C
(Hot and
Humid)
26 C
(Hot and
Humid)
October 27, 2000
The two major applications of these results that have been considered in this inquiry
include:
1. Analysing the performance of the ammonium sulphate granulation circuit and
suggesting areas where the operation of this plant may be improved.
2. Performing a model validation on the current model developed by Cameron
and Balliu (2000) and verification of the expected effects of these
improvements.
These applications involve the comparison between various samples. Before these
comparisons can be made, it must be ensured that the relationship between the
samples is consistent.
4.2 Data Consistency
To ensure the relationship between the samples is accurate the following factors must
be considered:
The error involved in sampling and analysis.
The precision of the sampling methods (reproducibility).
The surging, drifting and dead time phenomena of the granulation circuit.
The errors involved in sampling and analysis have already been discussed and
quantified; however the other two considerations have not. A qualitative method of
determining the sampling precision would have been to take a series of samples in
quick succession from the same sampling point. The samples could then be compared
and the variance calculated. This was not completed during the plant audits.
Due to this, the analysis of the precision of the sampling methods was very limited.
Using a similar method as described above Brooker (1999). The reproducibility of the
sampling of the exit from the granulator introduced an maximum error of
approximately 4.4%. As the sampling methods for the exit to the granulator and the
crusher exit are the least accurate by assuming that the precision of sampling NGold fertilizer is the same as the precision of sampling ammonium sulphate , it can
be assumed that the error due to the non-reproducibilty of the results is quite small.
October 27, 2000
The third consideration in the reliability of the data is the characteristic surging and
drifting phenomena and the large dead times associated with fertilizer granulation. To
ensure that these phenomena are not the cause of trends experienced within the size
distribution data. The best method of quantifying the effect of this error is to use data
reconciliation techniques to compare the flows of material. This involves using
overall and component mass balances to ensure that the data obtained is physically
acheivable.
Unfortunately due to problems with the mass and energy balance program at Incitec,
insufficient flowrate data was obtained to complete the data reconciliation techniques
adequately. As seen in the next section however each sample point gave consisitent
results over each of the four sampling runs. As the effects of drifting and surging
would cause random variances between the data, qualitatively it could be assessed
that the data is consistent, however this limitation must be considered when
completing further analysis of this data.
4.3 Circuit Analysis

4.3.1 Analysis of the Drum Granulator
Figures 12 to 15 show the change in the size distribution of particles over the
granulator for each of the four sampling runs. Each of these plots show a large
decrease in the fine particles in the granulator and a general shift of the size
distribution to the right.
It was expected that as the moisture contents obtained for each of the four runs were
quite small that the results obtained from the granulator would display the first stage
of the two-stage granulation mechanism proposed by Adetayo et al (1993) without
illustrating any of the effects of the second stage mechanism. In each of the four plots
the size distributions show a very large decrease in fines causing a distinct narrowing
of the size distribution. The right hand side of each plot shows a constant shift to the
right across the size distribution indicating the size dependent growth typical of the
outlined mechanism
October 27, 2000
Analysis of the larger granules also shows that the effects of the second stage or size
dependant mechanism are quite small. In Figures 12, 13 and 15 there is a negligible
increase in the frequency of the larger particles in the distribution. The second stage
growth mechanism would see these particles increasing in size proportionally faster
due to a layering mechanism of growth. As this does not occur it can be assessed that
by modelling the first stage growth mechanism a simulation should be able to fit the
data presented.
Figure 12: Analysis of the Drum Granulator (Run1)
Figure 13: Analysis of the Drum Granulator (Run 2)
October 27, 2000

Out of the other three effects mentioned in literature (initial particle size distribution,
moisture content and circuit performance) only the initial particle size distribution
varied for a significant analysis to be performed on how the growth of granules is
affected by this factor. Figure 16 compares the difference in the spread of the size
distribution between the samples and the growth of the particle size distribution
(defined by the change in the mean size or d50).
As expected due to the lack of information on the data points, no solid conclusions
can be made about the effect of the initial size distribution in this case. This is mainly
due to the fact that unlike experimental situations, this factor cannot be carefullly
controlled. In future work in may be beneficial to attempt to examine the effect of
these factors by controlling plant data.
October 27, 2000
Figure 16: Analysis of the Initial Size Distribution Effects on Granulation
Although in each of the samples the moisture content in the granulator did not vary
much at all a comparison has been the moisture content and amount of growth in the
granulator. This has been shown in Figure 17.
Figure 17: Analysis of the Moisture Content Effect on Granulation
Again due to a lack of data points from not being able to vary the operating conditions
of the granulation circuit it is difficult to verify any past literature with the results
obtained from the plant audit. Even if many data points had been taken many
erroneous results would be expected due to the large dead time effects experienced in
granulation circuits. This effect would be better examined by validating the model and
then simulating the effect of a changing moisture content.
October 27, 2000
4.3.2 Analysis of Dryer

The analysis of the dryer over each of the four runs (Figure 18 to 21) has shown that
the removal of moisture is not the only mechanism occuring in the unit. If this was the
case virtually no change would be experienced in the size distribution from the exit of
the granulator to the exit of the dryer. As can be seen there are large variations
between each of these size distributions.
There are a number of possible explanantions for this. The first is that there is no
variation at all and the high sampling errors experienced can explain the variation.
This idea obtains more merit when it is assessed from the plots that each of the
sampling points provides different distributions. This may be accurate, however if the
splitting of the stream from the dryer has a high bias error.
In Figure 11, the riffling and sieving errors are shown to be quite small and it is
assumed that this factor plays no major role in the results experienced. The other
consideration is that breakage of granules and/or removal of dusty fines in the air
stream maybe occuring in the dryer. The analysis of whether this is actually occuring
is difficult due to the two samples points giving different size distributions. The most
likely scenario is that these mechanisms are both occuring in the dryer and the
magnitude to which they occur is the unknown.
One additional factor that must be considered is the sampling of the damp granulator
exit stream. Although some measures were taken to ensure that this stream was not
affected by the moisture content of the sample such as spreading the sample out for
the period of sampling to dry before transporting the sample, this quite obviously may
have had a large affect on the comparison of the data between the dryer and
granulator exit samples.
To fully determine the magnitude of the effect of breakage in the dryer would require
more sampling and analysis however, the variation in the size distributions are quite
siginificant which would suggest that some level of breakage is occuring in the dryer.
Any model attempting to simulate the granulation circuit must therefore consider this
mechanism.
October 27, 2000
Figure 18: Analysis of the Dryer (Run 1)

v
October 27, 2000

4.3.3 Analysis of Samples Obtained from the Screens
The analysis of the material sampled from the screens provided more insights into
some of the problems experienced in the granulation circuit. Figure 21 and 22 show
the size distribution of the oversize stream. Like the dryer this flow was split and two
samples had to be taken to compare the overall oversize results. The results are quite
consistent between samples and sample points.
The major consideration in the analysis of the oversize is the large amount of
nuggets present. Particles were present in the size distribution that are 2 to 3 times
greater than the upper limit of the product size distribution.
Figure 22: Analysis of the Oversize Samples (Sample Point One)

The possibilities for this can be narrowed down to two options:
v
October 27, 2000
1. The crusher is operating inefficiently and a large proportion of the recycle to

the granulator is oversize material.
2. Poor binder distribution is occuring in the granulator causing clumps of
material to form.
The likelihood of both of these problems could be tested in a fully validated model.
Figure 23: Analysis of Oversize Samples (Sample Point Two)
Figure 24: Analysis of the Undersize Samples (SamplePoint One)

Figures 22 and 23 show the undersize distribution obtained from both of the sampling
points at the Incitec Plant. The most prominent feature of these two plots is the
v
October 27, 2000
inconsistency between the two samples. Figure 22 shows a trend of a slightly bimodal
size distribution, whilst Figure 23 showing the size distribution of the second stream
of the shows very little indication of this phenomena. The two most likely causes for
this are:
1. Breakage of granules on the screens of the leading to Crusher A.
2. A bias split of granules in the exit stream from the dryer.
To assess what is actually occuring in the granulation circuit more plant sampling will
need to be completed. The outcome however is that a method of modelling breakage
on both the screens and in the dryer now need to developed for an effective model
validation to be completed.
Figure 25: Analysis of the Undersize Samples (Sample Point Two)

4.3.4 Analysis of the Crusher
As discussed in Section 3, the analysis of the crusher is severely limited by the
sampling points used to obatain the data. For this reason the best method of analysing
the results is to look at them together so that individual sample bias does not affect the
analysis of the results. Figure 24 shows the combined analysis of all the samples taken
for both crushers at the Incitec plant.
October 27, 2000
Figure 26: Analysis of the Crusher

The results of the analysis for the oversize stream have been reinforced in this graph.
In some cases up to 30% of the oversize material entering the crusher also left as
oversize material. Adetayo (1995) has shown that crusher efficiency has a significant
effect on the recycle ratio due to the narrowing of the feed size distribution
experienced with high efficiency crushers. It is recommended that the modification of
the crushers to would significantly improve the efficiency of the process.
4.3.5 Analysis of the Recycle Stream
Figure 27: Analysis of the Recycle Stream
October 27, 2000
Figure 25 shows the composition of the streams forming the recycle or feed stream to
the granulator. The recycle stream consists of three types of flows including:
The crushed oversize stream
The undersize stream
The undersize stream from the polishing screens
Both the undersize streams can be seen to form quite a narrow distribution relative to
the crushed oversize stream. The only feed larger than the product size distribution is
from this stream. In addition to this the feed from the polishing screens only adds a
narrow distribution with very little fine material less than 1mm. This is the material
that is quickly removed in the granulator (Figure 12) facilitating fast growth rates.
Based on these observations there are two simulations that should be completed using
a validated model:
1. Using a high efficiency crusher to remove all the material above 4mm in size
before the granulator.
2. The possible use of a grinder to be used on the polishing screen fines to
increase the amount of (<1mm) fines in the feed to the granulator
4.3
Model Validation
The parameter estimation for the granulation circuit model in Daesim was first
attempted on a unit-by-unit basis. This is the most systematic and analytical method
of approaching a validation of a large and complex model. A successful validation of
each unit in the process will enable the complete granulation circuit to be built quite
easily with the addition of the recycle stream to replace the current granulator feed.
Daesim provided a user-friendly interface for completing this task. The model
developed by Cameron and Balliu (2000) was developed using the current solid-liquid
source, solid-liquid sink, solid-liquid stream/link, mixer and screen models previously
developed by Bob Newell and Ian Cameron, (2000) during the development of the
Daesim simulation package. These models were combined with the additional dryer
and drum-granulator models developed by Cameron and Balliu (2000) into a
complete granulation circuit as shown in Figure 26.
October 27, 2000
Figure 28: Granulation Circuit Model (Cameron and Balliu, 2000)
Once the modifications were made to the model, the parameters were selected on unitby-unit basis with the aim of validating the entire circuit. The results of this parameter
selection and model validation are included in the following five subsections.
4.3.1 Granulator
The granulator is the critical unit in the process and as a result was the first unit a
model validation was attempted on. The major assumptions made in the development
of this model are:
The model is based on the two-stage coalescence kernel developed by

Adetayo et al (1993).
Based on past work by Adetayo et al (1995) it has been found for ammonium
sulphate does not demonstrate the second stage of growth in this kernel, hence
the growth constant k2, for the preferential coalescence stage is zero, and the
model is based solely on the size dependant kernel.
The model uses a complete mixing assumption
October 27, 2000
A complete copy of the code for the granulation drum model can be found in
Appendix C. There were three types of data that needed to be placed into the
granulation model to adjust the model to fit the ammonium sulphate granulation
process. These are:
The initial particle size distribution
The physical properties of the fertilizer (ammonium sulphate)
The empirical growth constants.
The data for the initial particle size distribution had to altered slightly to be made
suitable. First the model is based on a geometric series of size fractions starting at an
initial diameter that was greater than zero. This meant that the data had to be
transformed to a geometric series, which was not used in the data analysis and the
material passing through the 63 micron sieve had to be neglected. This would have
introduced a small error into the validation.
The next step was to fit the physical properties of ammonium sulphate to the model
equations to determine a rate constant for the growth of the granules in the circuit.
The rate constant is defined by the physical properties of ammonium sulphate using
the size dependent kernel as follows:
i , j = A1 S sat
S sat =
(10)
X w f (1 p )(1 + S s )
l p(1 X w S s )
Where ,
A1
Ssat
= Fractional Saturation of the Granules
= Density of Fertilizer Salt
= Density of Fertilizer Solution
Xw
= Moisture Content
Ss
(11)
October 27, 2000
These physical properties as outlined in Table 7 were entered into the model to define
Ssat in the growth constant in the model. The moisture content was added indirectly by
making the moisture content of the feed 2%.
Table 7: Physical Parameters for Ammonium Sulphate

Physical Parameter
Density of Salt
Density of Solution
Solubility of Salt in Water
Porosity
Granule Density
Moisture Content
Value Used
1700 kg/m3
1300 kg/m3
0.58
0.38
1680 kg/m3
0.02
The model now can finally be fitted to the data with the use of the empirical constant,
A1. Initial trial and error fitting of this parameter found 0.05 to give the best fit of the
model to the data. This constant has been defined by Adetayo et al (1995) to be 27.3
+/- 3.0.
These results appear to contradict each other a lot, however this data by
Adetayo et al (1995) was discovered too late to test on the model during this thesis.
The effect of increasing A1, however was investigated by Brooker (1999) and
Adetayo et al (1993). It was found that increasing the empirical constant has the effect
of shifting the size distribution to the right. Looking at Figures 27 to 30, showing the
results of the model validation using an empirical constant of 0.05, it can be seen that
shifting the fines side of each of these distribution right would provide a much better
fit to the experimental data. This is one improvement that needs to be made to the
granulator model to provide a better fit.
Apart from the use of incorrect data for the model validation one other improvement
can also be suggested using the work of Adetayo et al (1995) as a basis. Using
experimental data based on a batch granulator, a very good fit was validation was
obtained for ammonium sulphate.
October 27, 2000
Looking at the results for the model validation in can be seen that at the base of the
right hand side of each distribution, a slightly higher production of oversize material
is produced consistently. As the continuous equivalent of a batch process is a plug
flow process, it would be useful to examine the effects of changing the model from a
completely mixed system to a plug flow system.
Figure 29: Model Validation Results Granulator (Run 1)
October 27, 2000

4.3.2 Dryer
As the model validation did not progress to the stage where the flow could be
recycled back to the granulator in a stable circuit, the function of the dryer became
quite redundant. The dryer model is developed using the following base assumptions:
The drying process can be described by a plug flow assumption.
The only to mechanisms considered in the dryer model are the removal of
moisture content from the granules and removal of fine dust particles in the air
stream. This is achieved on a mass balance basis.
October 27, 2000
The process of changing the drying rate was examined showing that based on this rate
the moisture content of the stream leaving the dryer could be altered very easily. This
would become important when the model validation reaches a stage where the recycle
stream could be connected to the granulator giving stable results.
This was not possible within this inquiry as due to major problems in validating the
crusher model due to the sampling accuracy of the data from the plant. The only
improvements that can be recommended thus far for the dryer model are:
The incorporation of an energy balance into the drying mechanism of the

model to enable the effect of processing temperature to be examined by
industrial granulation circuits.
A consideration of breakage or further coalescence that occurs in the dryer, In

this case, the breakage mechanism is probably the most important feature to be
considered as there are some indicators suggesting that extra fines may be
produced here or on the screens.
4.3.3 Screens
Figure 31, 32 & 33 show the model validation results for the oversize, undersize and
product size sample respectively. The screen model is based on the screen model by
Whiten (1974) and is basically a dynamic mass balance model based on the
probablility that a particle of a certain size fraction will pass through the aperture.
By examining the graphs it can be seen that there are two areas where the fit is not
ideal. The first is the oversize model fit. This can easily be explained by the high error
in the size distribution analysis due to the limited large sieve sizes available. The
second area is shown on Figure 32 where there is a large dip experienced by the
experimental results that cant be predicted by the model. Section 4.3 shows that this
result is more than likely attributable to granule breakge of particles on the screens. It
is recommended that in the future development of the mdoel, that this is considered.
Apart from these two anomalies the screen model could quite easily be fitted to the
experimental data and with the addition of a mechanism describing the breakage of
particles on the screen the model describes the situation well.
October 27, 2000
Figure 33: Model Validation Results Oversize (Run 1)
Figure 34: Model Validation Results Undersize (Run 1)
Figure 35: Model Validation Results Product Size (Run 1)
October 27, 2000
4.3.4 Crusher
Figure 36: Model Validation Results Crusher Outlet (Run 2)

In Section 2, the crusher model was described as being based on three basic functions
to descibe the attrition of particles in the crusher. These parameters were adjusted to
obtain the fit as shown in Figure 34. This model has been validated for previously by
Adetayo (1993) and others and in this case the validation is expected to only be
limited by the sampling problems experienced when collecting the data.
To properly validate the crusher model using plant data from Incitec, the sampling
method for the exit to the crusher has to be reassessed with the possibility of
modifying the crusher to obtain a better sampling point or modifying the old one so a
representative sample can be taken safely.
4.3.5 Mixer
The mixer model consists of simple mass balance to combine each of the streams
entering the granulator. Although a validation could not be attempted on this unit due
to problems in modelling the crusher and granulator, no problems are foreseen in the
successful validation of the mixer model.
4.3.6 Complete Circuit
Due to problems with the validation of the crusher and granulator models, it was not
possible to obtain a stable model of the complete granulation circuit including a
recycle feed to the granulator. To get to this stage the following changes should be
made to the model:
October 27, 2000
Breakage mechanisms need to be considered in dryer and screen models.
A full heat and mass transfer model needs to be considered for the dryer to
determine the effects of temperature on the granulation process.
The distribution of the binder in the granulator needs to be modelled to

account for variations to the two-stage granulation model due to poor binder
distribution.
A plug-flow assumption should be used to model the granulation regime.
October 27, 2000
5.0 Conclusion
This investigation into the industrial granulation of ammonium sulphate has found
that the growth of the granules during the process occurs by random coalescence as
described by the proposed two-stage growth mechanism by Adetayo et al (1993). The
growth is promoted by the rapid coalescence of fines predominantly less than 1mm in
size causing size independent growth.of the rest of the dsitribution. As a result a
narrowing of the size distribution occurs.
Although the mositure content and initial particle size distribution were investigated
no concrete conclusions could be made to support or refute the claims made in
literature about the effect of these variables upon granulation.
The analysis of the performance of the granulation circuit found that there were three
major improvements that could be made to granulation circuit to improve the
efficiency of the process. These were optimising the binder addition and distribution
in the granulator, increasing the efficiency of the crusher and grinding the fines from
the polishing screens before they are recycled to the granulator.
Despite coming up with these proposals a simulation could not be tested due to the
fact that that the model could not be validated using the palnt data obtained in this
inquiry. There weere three major reasons for this including:
Sampling inaccuracy due to the inherent nature of the sampling points

avaliable at Incitec.
Limited analysis due to number osf sieves available for the size analysis and
the problems experienced with the mass and energy balance program at
Incitec.
Wrong assumptions used in the model for the ammonium sulphate granulation
circuit.
The problems experienced can all be overcome with more research into the
mechanisms required by the model and more appropriate sampling and analysis
techniques. Some of these are discussed in the next section.
October 27, 2000
6.0 Recommendations
More work is recommended on this project. It is expected that once the improvements
suggested are made that the model will be validated and simulations can be performed
on the model to test the improvements suggested for the granulation circuit. These
recommendations include:
Revising the sampling regime used at the Incitec plant. This will involve
obtaining more flowrate data, conducting further precision analyses on the
sampling points to better assess their accuracy and taking more frequent but
smaller samples around the plant. In addition some of the sampling points will
need to be modified to obtain more representative samples.
Improving the use of the correct equipment in the analysis of particles including
obtaining larger sieve sizes for better analysis of the oversize particles.
Making the following improvements to the model
Consider breakage mechanisms need in the dryer and screen models.
Upgrade the dryer model to include a full heat and energy balance so that the
temperature of the process can be examined.
Modelling of the liquid distribution in the granulator to account for variations

to the two-stage granulation model due to poor binder distribution.
Use a plug flow model to model the granulation regime.
October 27, 2000
7.0 Nomenclature
v
= shape factor
A1
A2
= Parameter for the preferential size-independent coalescence kernel
A*
= Attrition Rate
Bnuc(v)
= Nucleation Rate
B(u,v,t)
= Coalescence Kernel
D95
= 95% passing size of the distribution (mm)
= Coefficient of Restitution
= Mass Fraction of Water in the Granule
G*
= Layering Rate
= spread of size distribution (mm)
= Binder Layer Thickness
ha
= Asperity Height
K1
= The first stage granulation rate constant
K2
= The second satge granualtion rate constant
= mass of total sample (g)
= liberation factor
= Binder Viscosity (Pa.s)
= sample weight (g)
N(v,t)
= Number of particles in each size fraction
Nt
= Total Number of Particles per unit volume
= Inlet and Outlet Flowrate of the Material
= Granule Density (g/cm3)
= Density of Fertilizer Salt (g/cm3)
= Density of Fertilizer Solution (g/cm3)
= Effective Granule Size (mm)
Stv*
= Critical Viscous Stokes Number (dimensionless)
= Solubility of the Fertilizer Salt in Water (gsalt/gwater)
Ssat
= Fractional saturation of granules
Scrit
= Critical saturation of granules
Stv
= Viscous Stokes Number (dimensionless)
October 27, 2000
Ss
= Velocity of granule collision (m/s)
= Volume of the Granulator
Xw
= Moisture Content
= mass fraction being sampled
= Solution Phase Ratio
October 27, 2000
8.0 References
1. Adetayo, A.A. & Ennis, B.J., Unifying Approach to Modelling Granule
Coalescence Mechanisms, AIChE Journal, 43(4), pp 927-934, (1997).
2. Adetayo, A.A., Litster, J.D. & Cameron, I.T., Steady State Modelling and
Simulation of a Fertilizer Granulation Circuit, Computers Chem. Engng, 19(4),
pp 383-393, (1995).
3. Adetayo, A.A., Litster, J.D. & Desai, M., The Effect of Process Parameters on
Drum Granulation of Fertilizers with Broad Size Distributions, Chemical
Engineering Science, 48(23), pp 3951-3961 (1993).
4. Adetayo, A.A., Litster, J.D., Pratsinis, S.E. & Ennis, B.J., Population Balance
Modelling of Drum Granulation of Materials with Wide Size Distribution,
Powder Technology, 82, pp 37-49, (1995).
5. Bathala, C.J., Dodlaty, V.S., Madaboosi, S.A. & Chamarati, D.P.R., Modelling of
Continuous Fertilizer Granulation Process for Control, Part. Part. Syst. Charact.,
15, pp 156-160, (1998).
6. Brooker, D., Improving Granulation Techniques of N-Gold Fertilizer,

Undergraduate Thesis, Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of
Queensland, (1999).
7. Davis, G., Collection of Granulation Circuit Data for Plant Evaluation and
Simulation, Undergraduate Thesis, Department of Chemical Engineering, The
University of Queensland, (1996).
8. Ennis, B.J., Agglomeration and Size Enlargement - Session Summary Paper,

Powder Technology, 88, pp 203-225, (1996)
9. Ennis, B.J., Tardos, G. & Pfeffer, R., A Microbial-Based Characterization of

Granulation Phenomena, Powder Technology, 65, pp 257-272, (1991).
October 27, 2000
10. Iveson, S.M., Litster, J.D. & Ennis, B.J., Fundamental Studies of Granule
Consolidation Part One: Effects of Binder Content and Binder Viscosity,
Powder Technology, 88, pp 15-20, (1996).
11. Litster, J.D. & Sarwono, R., Fluidised Drum Granulation: Studies of
Agglomerate Formation, Powder Technology, 88, pp 165-172, (1996).
12. Litster, J.D., Smit, D.J. & Hounslow, M.J., Adjustable Discretized Population
Balance for Growth and Agglomeration, AIChE Journal, 41(3), pp 591-603,
(1995).
13. Sherrington, P.J., The Granulation of Sand as an Aid to Understand Fertilizer

Granulation: The Relationship Between Liquid-Phase Content and Average
Granule Size, The Chemical Engineer, 220, pp CE201-CE215, (1968).
14. Zhang, J., Dynamics and Control of a Fertilizer Granulation Unit, Postgraduate
Thesis, Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Queensland,
(1996).
15. Zhang, J., Litster, J.D., Wang, F.Y. & Cameron, I.T., Evaluation of Control
Strategies for Fertilizer Granulation Circuits using Dynamic Simulation, Powder
Technology, 108, pp 122-129, (2000).
October 27, 2000
APPENDIX A RAW DATA AND SIZE DISTRIBUTION

CALCULATIONS
4/07/00
Sieve Size Mean Size Tare Weight (1)
(mm)
(mm)
(g)
11.200
8.000
6.700
5.600
4.750
4.000
3.350
2.800
2.360
2.000
1.700
1.400
1.180
1.000
0.710
0.500
0.355
0.250
0.180
0.125
0.106
0.090
0.063
0.000
9.600
7.350
6.150
5.175
4.375
3.675
3.075
2.580
2.180
1.850
1.550
1.290
1.090
0.855
0.605
0.428
0.303
0.215
0.153
0.116
0.098
0.077
0.032
Tare Weight (2)

(g)
443.13
432.04
424.38
420.24
416.29
402.75
396.02
399.46
386.61
374.41
366.39
351.12
355.43
318.92
304.77
293.66
277.65
275.41
265.05
270.74
262.90
259.47
242.97
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
394.80
398.20
385.70
373.40
365.30
349.90
354.20
317.80
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
Total
October 27, 2000
Exit Granulator
Total Mass AS Mass Mass Fraction Mass Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
451.50
435.80
427.50
424.20
418.80
406.40
401.20
412.10
414.20
404.20
394.20
363.90
364.10
328.10
307.80
294.30
277.30
274.70
264.20
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
9.70
3.80
3.90
4.00
3.50
4.50
6.40
13.90
28.50
30.80
28.90
14.00
9.90
10.30
4.00
1.60
0.50
0.20
0.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0543
0.0213
0.0218
0.0224
0.0196
0.0252
0.0358
0.0778
0.1595
0.1724
0.1617
0.0783
0.0554
0.0576
0.0224
0.0090
0.0028
0.0011
0.0017
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0170
0.0164
0.0198
0.0263
0.0261
0.0387
0.0651
0.1768
0.4430
0.5745
0.5391
0.3561
0.3078
0.1988
0.1066
0.0617
0.0266
0.0160
0.0305
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
178.70
1.00
3.05
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer
#1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
448.70
434.90
427.10
422.40
417.90
405.20
398.00
406.00
402.10
388.50
381.60
357.10
360.60
325.20
307.40
294.50
277.60
275.20
264.10
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
6.90
2.90
3.50
2.20
2.60
3.30
3.20
7.80
16.40
15.10
16.30
7.20
6.40
7.40
3.60
1.80
0.80
0.70
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0637
0.0268
0.0323
0.0203
0.0240
0.0305
0.0295
0.0720
0.1514
0.1394
0.1505
0.0665
0.0591
0.0683
0.0332
0.0166
0.0074
0.0065
0.0018
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0199
0.0206
0.0294
0.0239
0.0320
0.0469
0.0537
0.1637
0.4206
0.4648
0.5017
0.3022
0.3283
0.2356
0.1583
0.1146
0.0704
0.0923
0.0336
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
108.30
1.00
3.11
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
486.10
444.71
437.35
431.37
429.47
415.35
408.21
424.81
438.04
415.16
405.21
368.68
367.96
331.01
309.44
295.48
278.47
275.80
265.25
270.74
262.90
259.47
242.97
42.97
12.67
12.97
11.13
13.18
12.60
12.19
25.35
51.43
40.75
38.82
17.56
12.53
12.09
4.67
1.82
0.82
0.39
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.1326
0.0391
0.0400
0.0343
0.0407
0.0389
0.0376
0.0782
0.1587
0.1257
0.1198
0.0542
0.0387
0.0373
0.0144
0.0056
0.0025
0.0012
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0414
0.0301
0.0364
0.0404
0.0542
0.0598
0.0684
0.1777
0.4407
0.4191
0.3992
0.2462
0.2148
0.1286
0.0686
0.0387
0.0241
0.0172
0.0112
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
324.14
1.00
2.52
October 27, 2000
Oversize #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
733.00
485.70
484.20
471.90
458.90
415.00
398.30
399.60
386.60
374.70
366.20
351.20
355.40
317.80
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
291.20
53.70
60.60
51.70
43.60
13.10
3.50
1.40
0.90
1.30
0.90
1.30
1.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.5553
0.1024
0.1156
0.0986
0.0831
0.0250
0.0067
0.0027
0.0017
0.0025
0.0017
0.0025
0.0023
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1735
0.0788
0.1051
0.1160
0.1109
0.0384
0.0121
0.0061
0.0048
0.0083
0.0057
0.0113
0.0127
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
524.40
1.00
0.68
October 27, 2000
Oversize #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
649.80
485.90
476.80
476.60
473.60
424.60
403.30
400.90
388.60
374.40
366.10
350.40
354.70
318.30
304.00
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
208.00
53.90
53.20
56.40
58.30
22.70
8.50
2.70
2.90
1.00
0.80
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.4425
0.1147
0.1132
0.1200
0.1240
0.0483
0.0181
0.0057
0.0062
0.0021
0.0017
0.0011
0.0011
0.0011
0.0004
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1383
0.0882
0.1029
0.1411
0.1654
0.0743
0.0329
0.0131
0.0171
0.0071
0.0057
0.0048
0.0059
0.0037
0.0020
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
470.10
1.00
0.80
October 27, 2000
Product Size #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
425.10
423.00
426.40
454.50
430.70
384.60
369.50
350.90
355.20
318.20
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.80
21.10
31.60
56.30
45.00
11.20
4.20
1.00
1.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0539
0.1161
0.1739
0.3099
0.2477
0.0616
0.0231
0.0055
0.0055
0.0022
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0719
0.1787
0.3162
0.7042
0.6879
0.2055
0.0771
0.0250
0.0306
0.0076
0.0026
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
181.70
1.00
2.31
October 27, 2000
Product Size #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
417.40
416.10
428.30
450.40
430.40
384.40
368.40
350.90
354.90
318.30
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.10
14.20
33.50
52.20
44.70
11.00
3.10
1.00
0.70
0.50
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0129
0.0871
0.2054
0.3200
0.2741
0.0674
0.0190
0.0061
0.0043
0.0031
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0172
0.1339
0.3734
0.7274
0.7613
0.2248
0.0634
0.0279
0.0238
0.0106
0.0029
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
163.10
1.00
2.37
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.13
432.04
424.38
420.24
416.29
402.75
396.21
405.86
433.21
448.16
443.16
359.75
384.89
349.81
319.56
300.42
280.70
276.73
265.60
270.85
262.90
259.47
242.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.19
6.40
46.60
73.75
76.77
8.63
29.46
30.89
14.79
6.76
3.05
1.32
0.55
0.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0006
0.0214
0.1557
0.2464
0.2565
0.0288
0.0984
0.1032
0.0494
0.0226
0.0102
0.0044
0.0018
0.0004
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0012
0.0486
0.4325
0.8214
0.8551
0.1311
0.5469
0.3559
0.2353
0.1558
0.0971
0.0630
0.0334
0.0193
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
299.27
1.00
3.80
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.13
432.04
424.38
420.24
416.29
402.79
396.20
401.56
403.37
413.20
426.98
389.42
388.19
358.58
325.32
304.24
282.47
277.66
266.06
270.95
262.98
259.52
242.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.18
2.10
16.76
38.79
60.59
38.30
32.76
39.66
20.55
10.58
4.82
2.25
1.01
0.21
0.08
0.05
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0001
0.0007
0.0078
0.0624
0.1443
0.2255
0.1425
0.1219
0.1476
0.0765
0.0394
0.0179
0.0084
0.0038
0.0008
0.0003
0.0002
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0002
0.0012
0.0178
0.1732
0.4812
0.7516
0.6478
0.6773
0.5089
0.3641
0.2715
0.1708
0.1196
0.0683
0.0411
0.0186
0.0069
0.0000
268.73
1.00
4.32
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
473.40
446.61
444.48
442.12
438.85
422.33
415.86
416.49
403.90
390.25
385.07
363.67
367.17
336.53
317.87
302.12
282.46
278.32
267.12
271.46
263.61
260.49
244.74
30.27
14.57
20.10
21.88
22.56
19.58
19.84
17.03
17.29
15.84
18.68
12.55
11.74
17.61
13.10
8.46
4.81
2.91
2.07
0.72
0.71
1.02
1.77
0.1026
0.0494
0.0681
0.0741
0.0764
0.0663
0.0672
0.0577
0.0586
0.0537
0.0633
0.0425
0.0398
0.0597
0.0444
0.0287
0.0163
0.0099
0.0070
0.0024
0.0024
0.0035
0.0060
0.0321
0.0380
0.0619
0.0872
0.1019
0.1021
0.1222
0.1312
0.1627
0.1789
0.2110
0.1933
0.2210
0.2058
0.2114
0.1977
0.1552
0.1409
0.1275
0.1284
0.1504
0.1280
0.0952
295.11
1.00
3.18
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
468.28
446.53
442.48
438.61
436.52
423.06
416.09
418.69
405.85
391.83
387.52
365.40
370.25
342.55
320.65
302.89
282.86
278.48
267.26
271.55
263.74
260.67
246.20
25.15
14.49
18.10
18.37
20.23
20.31
20.07
19.23
19.24
17.42
21.13
14.28
14.82
23.63
15.88
9.23
5.21
3.07
2.21
0.81
0.84
1.20
3.23
0.0816
0.0470
0.0587
0.0596
0.0656
0.0659
0.0651
0.0624
0.0624
0.0565
0.0686
0.0463
0.0481
0.0767
0.0515
0.0300
0.0169
0.0100
0.0072
0.0026
0.0027
0.0039
0.0105
0.0255
0.0362
0.0534
0.0701
0.0875
0.1014
0.1184
0.1418
0.1734
0.1884
0.2286
0.2106
0.2672
0.2644
0.2454
0.2066
0.1610
0.1423
0.1304
0.1383
0.1704
0.1442
0.1664
308.15
1.00
3.47
October 27, 2000

(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
417.10
409.00
410.10
425.00
419.90
389.90
372.90
352.10
355.20
318.20
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.80
7.10
15.30
26.80
34.20
16.50
7.60
2.20
1.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0159
0.0628
0.1354
0.2372
0.3027
0.1460
0.0673
0.0195
0.0088
0.0035
0.0009
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0212
0.0967
0.2462
0.5390
0.8407
0.4867
0.2242
0.0885
0.0492
0.0122
0.0042
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
113.00
1.00
2.61
October 27, 2000
Exit Polishing Screen

(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.13
432.04
424.38
420.24
416.29
402.84
396.11
399.72
387.14
427.32
423.33
389.46
375.23
329.94
306.49
294.08
277.65
275.41
265.05
270.74
262.90
259.47
242.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.09
0.09
0.26
0.53
52.91
56.94
38.34
19.80
11.02
1.72
0.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0005
0.0005
0.0014
0.0029
0.2905
0.3127
0.2105
0.1087
0.0605
0.0094
0.0023
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0008
0.0009
0.0032
0.0081
0.9684
1.0422
0.9569
0.6040
0.2087
0.0450
0.0159
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
182.12
1.00
3.85
October 27, 2000
Product
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.13
432.04
424.38
421.66
424.88
426.47
434.29
463.06
465.12
405.77
372.19
351.72
355.81
319.00
304.77
293.66
277.65
275.41
265.05
270.74
262.90
259.47
242.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.42
8.59
23.72
38.27
63.60
78.51
31.36
5.80
0.60
0.38
0.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0056
0.0340
0.0940
0.1517
0.2521
0.3111
0.1243
0.0230
0.0024
0.0015
0.0003
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0066
0.0454
0.1446
0.2758
0.5728
0.8643
0.4143
0.0766
0.0108
0.0084
0.0011
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
252.33
1.00
2.42
October 27, 2000
Recycle
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
450.59
435.10
430.94
425.13
423.92
410.15
405.62
414.09
420.73
419.50
414.00
376.90
375.17
342.00
318.00
301.29
282.04
278.34
267.16
271.45
264.54
261.08
243.28
7.46
3.06
6.56
4.89
7.63
7.40
9.60
14.63
34.12
45.09
47.61
25.78
19.74
23.08
13.23
7.63
4.39
2.93
2.11
0.71
1.64
1.61
0.31
0.0256
0.0105
0.0225
0.0168
0.0262
0.0254
0.0330
0.0502
0.1172
0.1548
0.1635
0.0885
0.0678
0.0793
0.0454
0.0262
0.0151
0.0101
0.0072
0.0024
0.0056
0.0055
0.0011
0.0080
0.0081
0.0205
0.0198
0.0349
0.0391
0.0599
0.1142
0.3255
0.5161
0.5450
0.4024
0.3766
0.2733
0.2163
0.1807
0.1436
0.1437
0.1317
0.1283
0.3520
0.2048
0.0169
291.21
1.00
4.26
October 27, 2000
7/07/00
Exit Granulator
Total Mass AS Mass Mass Fraction Mass
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
469.80
436.90
430.30
425.30
422.30
406.60
403.30
411.60
406.90
391.90
383.20
360.20
362.10
326.40
308.50
294.90
278.20
275.50
264.70
270.00
261.80
258.30
242.50
28.00
4.90
6.70
5.10
7.00
4.70
8.50
13.40
21.20
18.50
17.90
10.30
7.90
8.60
4.70
2.20
1.40
1.00
0.80
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.1617
0.0283
0.0387
0.0294
0.0404
0.0271
0.0491
0.0774
0.1224
0.1068
0.1033
0.0595
0.0456
0.0497
0.0271
0.0127
0.0081
0.0058
0.0046
0.0023
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0505
0.0218
0.0352
0.0346
0.0539
0.0417
0.0892
0.1758
0.3400
0.3560
0.3445
0.2703
0.2534
0.1712
0.1292
0.0876
0.0770
0.0825
0.0840
0.1216
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
173.20
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer
#1
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
462.70
440.70
430.70
425.50
421.80
409.40
403.10
407.40
401.10
387.70
381.00
359.20
362.70
328.60
310.80
296.80
278.60
275.60
264.70
270.30
262.20
258.70
242.50
20.90
8.70
7.10
5.30
6.50
7.50
8.30
9.20
15.40
14.30
15.70
9.30
8.50
10.80
7.00
4.10
1.80
1.10
0.80
0.70
0.40
0.40
0.00
0.1276
0.0531
0.0433
0.0324
0.0397
0.0458
0.0507
0.0562
0.0940
0.0873
0.0958
0.0568
0.0519
0.0659
0.0427
0.0250
0.0110
0.0067
0.0049
0.0043
0.0024
0.0024
0.0000
0.0399
0.0409
0.0394
0.0381
0.0529
0.0704
0.0921
0.1277
0.2612
0.2910
0.3195
0.2581
0.2883
0.2274
0.2035
0.1726
0.1047
0.0959
0.0888
0.2249
0.1526
0.0904
0.0000
163.80
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer #2
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
494.10
438.20
430.20
424.40
420.50
407.50
401.50
406.50
397.60
386.30
378.70
357.50
361.20
327.50
309.20
295.90
278.50
275.60
264.70
270.00
261.90
258.30
242.50
52.30
6.20
6.60
4.20
5.20
5.60
6.70
8.30
11.90
12.90
13.40
7.60
7.00
9.70
5.40
3.20
1.70
1.10
0.80
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.3071
0.0364
0.0388
0.0247
0.0305
0.0329
0.0393
0.0487
0.0699
0.0757
0.0787
0.0446
0.0411
0.0570
0.0317
0.0188
0.0100
0.0065
0.0047
0.0023
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0960
0.0280
0.0352
0.0290
0.0407
0.0506
0.0715
0.1108
0.1941
0.2525
0.2623
0.2029
0.2284
0.1964
0.1510
0.1296
0.0951
0.0923
0.0854
0.1236
0.0367
0.0000
0.0000
170.30
October 27, 2000
Oversize #1
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
754.70
494.00
476.00
462.00
433.00
404.60
395.60
398.40
385.80
373.40
365.30
349.90
354.20
317.80
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
312.90
62.00
52.40
41.80
17.70
2.70
0.80
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.6378
0.1264
0.1068
0.0852
0.0361
0.0055
0.0016
0.0004
0.0002
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1993
0.0972
0.0971
0.1002
0.0481
0.0085
0.0030
0.0009
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
490.60
October 27, 2000
Oversize #2
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
721.40
500.90
488.20
474.60
455.00
413.10
398.10
399.40
386.30
373.60
365.80
350.30
354.50
318.10
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
279.60
68.90
64.60
54.40
39.70
11.20
3.30
1.20
0.60
0.20
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.5324
0.1312
0.1230
0.1036
0.0756
0.0213
0.0063
0.0023
0.0011
0.0004
0.0010
0.0008
0.0006
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1664
0.1009
0.1118
0.1219
0.1008
0.0328
0.0114
0.0052
0.0032
0.0013
0.0032
0.0035
0.0032
0.0020
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
525.20
October 27, 2000
Product Size #1
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
424.30
423.70
436.70
432.00
438.60
468.60
409.60
380.40
367.40
350.80
354.90
318.40
304.20
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.70
3.50
21.40
30.10
43.80
70.40
23.90
7.00
2.10
0.90
0.70
0.60
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0034
0.0170
0.1041
0.1465
0.2131
0.3426
0.1163
0.0341
0.0102
0.0044
0.0034
0.0029
0.0019
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0031
0.0200
0.1388
0.2253
0.3875
0.7786
0.3231
0.1135
0.0341
0.0199
0.0189
0.0101
0.0093
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
205.50
October 27, 2000
Product Size #2
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.40
428.50
439.20
445.50
454.60
409.30
377.90
366.70
350.20
354.30
317.90
304.00
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
13.20
37.30
50.70
56.40
23.60
4.50
1.40
0.30
0.10
0.10
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0011
0.0702
0.1984
0.2697
0.3000
0.1255
0.0239
0.0074
0.0016
0.0005
0.0005
0.0011
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0013
0.0936
0.3052
0.4903
0.6818
0.3487
0.0798
0.0248
0.0073
0.0030
0.0018
0.0051
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
188.00
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#1
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.10
401.60
407.40
409.00
406.30
371.50
372.10
337.40
314.00
297.80
279.60
276.40
264.80
269.70
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.30
3.40
21.70
35.60
41.00
21.60
17.90
19.60
10.20
5.10
2.80
1.90
0.90
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0016
0.0187
0.1192
0.1955
0.2252
0.1186
0.0983
0.1076
0.0560
0.0280
0.0154
0.0104
0.0049
0.0005
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0030
0.0424
0.3310
0.6517
0.7505
0.5392
0.5461
0.3711
0.2667
0.1931
0.1464
0.1491
0.0899
0.0289
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
182.10
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#2
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.10
398.80
389.00
380.60
378.30
360.10
364.20
331.40
312.70
298.10
279.60
276.10
265.20
270.30
262.50
259.00
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.60
3.30
7.20
13.00
10.20
10.00
13.60
8.90
5.40
2.80
1.60
1.30
0.70
0.70
0.70
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0037
0.0075
0.0411
0.0897
0.1619
0.1270
0.1245
0.1694
0.1108
0.0672
0.0349
0.0199
0.0162
0.0087
0.0087
0.0087
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0068
0.0170
0.1142
0.2989
0.5396
0.5774
0.6919
0.5840
0.5278
0.4638
0.3321
0.2846
0.2944
0.4588
0.5448
0.3229
0.0000
80.30
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #1
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
457.60
437.90
436.50
429.30
427.60
410.40
405.00
405.80
392.90
380.30
374.40
355.60
360.20
326.30
310.90
298.10
280.40
277.10
266.00
270.50
263.00
259.50
243.10
15.80
5.90
12.90
9.10
12.30
8.50
10.20
7.60
7.20
6.90
9.10
5.70
6.00
8.50
7.10
5.40
3.60
2.60
2.10
0.90
1.20
1.20
0.60
0.1051
0.0392
0.0858
0.0605
0.0818
0.0565
0.0678
0.0505
0.0479
0.0459
0.0605
0.0379
0.0399
0.0565
0.0472
0.0359
0.0239
0.0173
0.0140
0.0060
0.0080
0.0080
0.0040
0.0328
0.0302
0.0780
0.0712
0.1090
0.0869
0.1233
0.1148
0.1330
0.1529
0.2017
0.1723
0.2216
0.1949
0.2248
0.2476
0.2280
0.2470
0.2539
0.3149
0.4987
0.2955
0.0633
150.40
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #2
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
449.50
436.50
429.10
427.20
425.40
409.50
402.60
406.10
394.00
380.30
375.30
357.10
362.70
330.20
311.80
297.30
279.30
276.20
265.70
270.50
262.70
259.30
243.00
7.70
4.50
5.50
7.00
10.10
7.60
7.80
7.90
8.30
6.90
10.00
7.20
8.50
12.40
8.00
4.60
2.50
1.70
1.80
0.90
0.90
1.00
0.50
0.0578
0.0338
0.0413
0.0525
0.0758
0.0570
0.0585
0.0593
0.0623
0.0518
0.0750
0.0540
0.0638
0.0930
0.0600
0.0345
0.0188
0.0128
0.0135
0.0068
0.0068
0.0075
0.0038
0.0181
0.0260
0.0375
0.0618
0.1010
0.0877
0.1064
0.1347
0.1730
0.1725
0.2501
0.2455
0.3543
0.3208
0.2858
0.2380
0.1786
0.1822
0.2455
0.3554
0.4220
0.2778
0.0595
133.30
October 27, 2000

Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.60
425.80
438.30
445.90
463.90
436.40
389.50
371.50
351.40
355.10
318.30
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
10.50
36.40
51.10
65.70
50.70
16.10
6.20
1.50
0.90
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0017
0.0438
0.1517
0.2129
0.2738
0.2113
0.0671
0.0258
0.0063
0.0038
0.0021
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0020
0.0583
0.2333
0.3871
0.6222
0.5868
0.2236
0.0861
0.0284
0.0208
0.0072
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
240.00
October 27, 2000

Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
402.00
395.70
399.00
386.30
417.00
412.70
362.60
361.40
322.10
304.90
293.30
277.10
274.80
264.60
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.90
0.80
0.60
43.60
47.40
12.70
7.20
4.30
1.10
0.60
0.30
0.30
0.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0008
0.0075
0.0066
0.0050
0.3615
0.3930
0.1053
0.0597
0.0357
0.0091
0.0050
0.0025
0.0025
0.0058
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0013
0.0136
0.0151
0.0138
1.2051
1.3101
0.4787
0.3317
0.1229
0.0434
0.0343
0.0237
0.0355
0.1055
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
120.60
October 27, 2000
Product
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
431.40
423.70
420.90
427.00
427.40
427.10
436.60
421.80
384.10
366.90
350.60
354.70
318.30
304.20
293.10
277.10
274.60
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.70
11.70
25.50
32.30
38.40
36.10
10.70
1.60
0.70
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.40
0.30
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0006
0.0044
0.0731
0.1594
0.2019
0.2400
0.2256
0.0669
0.0100
0.0044
0.0031
0.0031
0.0025
0.0025
0.0019
0.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0006
0.0051
0.0975
0.2452
0.3670
0.5455
0.6267
0.2229
0.0333
0.0199
0.0174
0.0108
0.0119
0.0172
0.0179
0.0089
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
160.00
October 27, 2000
Recycle
Frequency
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.50
433.10
427.40
423.60
420.60
406.00
398.40
403.10
400.30
393.30
388.50
363.30
366.40
332.70
314.00
299.00
281.10
277.50
266.70
271.10
263.60
260.80
247.20
1.70
1.10
3.80
3.40
5.30
4.10
3.60
4.90
14.60
19.90
23.20
13.40
12.20
14.90
10.20
6.30
4.30
3.00
2.80
1.50
1.80
2.50
4.70
0.0104
0.0067
0.0233
0.0208
0.0325
0.0251
0.0221
0.0300
0.0895
0.1219
0.1422
0.0821
0.0748
0.0913
0.0625
0.0386
0.0263
0.0184
0.0172
0.0092
0.0110
0.0153
0.0288
0.0033
0.0052
0.0212
0.0245
0.0433
0.0387
0.0401
0.0682
0.2485
0.4065
0.4739
0.3732
0.4153
0.3148
0.2976
0.2662
0.2509
0.2626
0.3119
0.4837
0.6893
0.5674
0.4571
163.20
October 27, 2000
15/07/00
Exit Granulator
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
461.00
443.10
438.30
431.30
425.90
411.00
407.30
418.60
424.50
408.40
399.30
366.20
366.50
330.00
309.50
294.80
277.60
275.10
264.50
270.10
261.80
258.30
242.50
19.20
11.10
14.70
11.10
10.60
9.10
12.50
20.40
38.80
35.00
34.00
16.30
12.30
12.20
5.70
2.10
0.80
0.60
0.60
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0717
0.0415
0.0549
0.0415
0.0396
0.0340
0.0467
0.0762
0.1450
0.1308
0.1271
0.0609
0.0460
0.0456
0.0213
0.0078
0.0030
0.0022
0.0022
0.0019
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0224
0.0319
0.0499
0.0488
0.0528
0.0523
0.0849
0.1733
0.4028
0.4360
0.4235
0.2769
0.2554
0.1572
0.1014
0.0541
0.0285
0.0320
0.0408
0.0983
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
267.60
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer
#1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
457.90
435.90
428.50
423.50
420.50
406.30
401.20
408.30
403.70
391.90
384.70
360.40
363.80
329.50
310.10
296.80
278.60
275.50
264.70
270.00
262.00
259.50
242.50
16.10
3.90
4.90
3.30
5.20
4.40
6.40
10.10
18.00
18.50
19.40
10.50
9.60
11.70
6.30
4.10
1.80
1.00
0.80
0.40
0.20
1.20
0.00
0.1020
0.0247
0.0311
0.0209
0.0330
0.0279
0.0406
0.0640
0.1141
0.1172
0.1229
0.0665
0.0608
0.0741
0.0399
0.0260
0.0114
0.0063
0.0051
0.0025
0.0013
0.0076
0.0000
0.0319
0.0190
0.0282
0.0246
0.0439
0.0429
0.0737
0.1455
0.3169
0.3908
0.4098
0.3025
0.3380
0.2557
0.1901
0.1792
0.1086
0.0905
0.0922
0.1334
0.0792
0.2817
0.0000
157.80
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
455.40
435.90
428.30
423.10
420.00
406.80
401.20
409.50
408.80
397.30
390.00
362.80
365.20
331.30
310.80
296.00
278.50
275.60
264.70
270.10
262.10
258.70
242.50
13.60
3.90
4.70
2.90
4.70
4.90
6.40
11.30
23.10
23.90
24.70
12.90
11.00
13.50
7.00
3.30
1.70
1.10
0.80
0.50
0.30
0.40
0.00
0.0770
0.0221
0.0266
0.0164
0.0266
0.0277
0.0362
0.0640
0.1308
0.1353
0.1399
0.0730
0.0623
0.0764
0.0396
0.0187
0.0096
0.0062
0.0045
0.0028
0.0017
0.0023
0.0000
0.0241
0.0170
0.0242
0.0193
0.0355
0.0427
0.0659
0.1454
0.3633
0.4511
0.4662
0.3320
0.3460
0.2636
0.1888
0.1289
0.0917
0.0890
0.0824
0.1490
0.1062
0.0839
0.0000
176.60
October 27, 2000
Oversize #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
654.00
485.90
483.00
465.20
439.50
405.70
395.90
398.70
385.70
373.40
365.30
349.90
354.20
317.80
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
212.20
53.90
59.40
45.00
24.20
3.80
1.10
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.5304
0.1347
0.1485
0.1125
0.0605
0.0095
0.0027
0.0012
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1657
0.1036
0.1350
0.1323
0.0806
0.0146
0.0050
0.0028
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
400.10
October 27, 2000
Oversize #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
649.00
490.00
493.70
477.30
467.50
420.90
398.50
399.20
385.90
373.40
365.30
349.90
354.20
317.80
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
207.20
58.00
70.10
57.10
52.20
19.00
3.70
1.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.4423
0.1238
0.1496
0.1219
0.1114
0.0406
0.0079
0.0021
0.0004
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1382
0.0952
0.1360
0.1434
0.1486
0.0624
0.0144
0.0049
0.0012
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
468.50
October 27, 2000
Product Size #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.60
425.20
424.50
431.50
439.00
415.90
378.90
366.00
350.60
355.50
318.10
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
9.90
22.60
36.70
40.80
30.20
5.50
0.70
0.70
1.30
0.30
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0027
0.0664
0.1515
0.2460
0.2735
0.2024
0.0369
0.0047
0.0047
0.0087
0.0020
0.0007
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0032
0.0885
0.2330
0.4472
0.6215
0.5623
0.1229
0.0156
0.0213
0.0484
0.0069
0.0032
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
149.20
October 27, 2000
Product Size #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.60
425.20
424.50
431.50
439.00
415.90
378.90
366.00
350.60
355.50
318.10
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
9.90
22.60
36.70
40.80
30.20
5.50
0.70
0.70
1.30
0.30
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0027
0.0664
0.1515
0.2460
0.2735
0.2024
0.0369
0.0047
0.0047
0.0087
0.0020
0.0007
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0032
0.0885
0.2330
0.4472
0.6215
0.5623
0.1229
0.0156
0.0213
0.0484
0.0069
0.0032
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
149.20
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.10
400.30
398.80
396.40
392.40
364.40
367.30
332.00
311.70
297.40
279.30
276.20
264.60
270.10
262.10
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.30
2.10
13.10
23.00
27.10
14.50
13.10
14.20
7.90
4.70
2.50
1.70
0.70
0.50
0.30
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0024
0.0167
0.1042
0.1830
0.2156
0.1154
0.1042
0.1130
0.0628
0.0374
0.0199
0.0135
0.0056
0.0040
0.0024
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0043
0.0380
0.2895
0.6099
0.7186
0.5243
0.5790
0.3895
0.2993
0.2579
0.1894
0.1932
0.1013
0.2094
0.1492
0.0000
0.0000
125.70
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
394.80
399.20
388.40
381.20
382.20
363.50
368.70
338.20
317.30
301.10
281.50
277.20
265.70
270.20
262.30
258.80
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
2.70
7.80
16.90
13.60
14.50
20.40
13.50
8.40
4.70
2.70
1.80
0.60
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0091
0.0246
0.0712
0.1542
0.1241
0.1323
0.1861
0.1232
0.0766
0.0429
0.0246
0.0164
0.0055
0.0046
0.0046
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0207
0.0684
0.2372
0.5140
0.5640
0.7350
0.6418
0.5865
0.5286
0.4084
0.3519
0.2986
0.2881
0.2851
0.1690
0.0000
109.60
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
450.10
440.80
434.60
430.20
427.70
409.40
405.70
408.50
396.20
382.10
378.10
358.60
363.10
332.50
314.20
299.50
281.10
277.40
266.40
270.60
263.20
259.30
242.70
8.30
8.80
11.00
10.00
12.40
7.50
10.90
10.30
10.50
8.70
12.80
8.70
8.90
14.70
10.40
6.80
4.30
2.90
2.50
1.00
1.40
1.00
0.20
0.0477
0.0506
0.0632
0.0575
0.0713
0.0431
0.0626
0.0592
0.0603
0.0500
0.0736
0.0500
0.0511
0.0845
0.0598
0.0391
0.0247
0.0167
0.0144
0.0057
0.0080
0.0057
0.0011
0.0149
0.0389
0.0575
0.0676
0.0950
0.0663
0.1139
0.1345
0.1676
0.1667
0.2452
0.2273
0.2842
0.2913
0.2846
0.2695
0.2354
0.2381
0.2612
0.3025
0.5029
0.2129
0.0182
174.00
October 27, 2000

(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
422.00
427.70
422.10
430.50
441.00
427.00
386.30
369.50
350.90
354.50
318.40
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.80
12.40
20.20
35.70
42.80
41.30
12.90
4.20
1.00
0.30
0.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0104
0.0716
0.1166
0.2061
0.2471
0.2385
0.0745
0.0242
0.0058
0.0017
0.0035
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0122
0.0955
0.1794
0.3748
0.5616
0.6624
0.2483
0.0808
0.0262
0.0096
0.0119
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
173.20
October 27, 2000

(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.00
398.20
386.80
405.10
419.80
364.70
362.30
322.50
304.70
293.10
276.90
274.80
264.40
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.00
1.10
31.70
54.50
14.80
8.10
4.70
0.90
0.40
0.10
0.30
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0017
0.0000
0.0094
0.2702
0.4646
0.1262
0.0691
0.0401
0.0077
0.0034
0.0009
0.0026
0.0043
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0031
0.0000
0.0260
0.9008
1.5487
0.5735
0.3836
0.1382
0.0365
0.0235
0.0081
0.0365
0.0775
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
117.30
October 27, 2000
Product
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.30
425.50
421.90
420.90
437.40
426.40
387.40
366.90
350.40
355.50
318.20
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
10.20
20.00
26.10
39.20
40.70
14.00
1.60
0.50
1.30
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0006
0.0662
0.1298
0.1694
0.2544
0.2641
0.0909
0.0104
0.0032
0.0084
0.0026
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0008
0.0883
0.1997
0.3079
0.5781
0.7337
0.3028
0.0346
0.0147
0.0469
0.0090
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
154.10
October 27, 2000
Recycle
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.40
432.10
425.00
422.20
418.00
404.30
397.80
401.20
396.30
390.80
389.60
362.80
365.90
333.70
313.50
298.30
279.90
276.60
265.60
270.40
262.50
259.50
242.60
1.60
0.10
1.40
2.00
2.70
2.40
3.00
3.00
10.60
17.40
24.30
12.90
11.70
15.90
9.70
5.60
3.10
2.10
1.70
0.80
0.70
1.20
0.10
0.0119
0.0007
0.0104
0.0149
0.0201
0.0179
0.0224
0.0224
0.0791
0.1299
0.1813
0.0963
0.0873
0.1187
0.0724
0.0418
0.0231
0.0157
0.0127
0.0060
0.0052
0.0090
0.0007
0.0037
0.0006
0.0095
0.0176
0.0269
0.0276
0.0407
0.0509
0.2197
0.4328
0.6045
0.4376
0.4851
0.4092
0.3447
0.2882
0.2203
0.2239
0.2307
0.3142
0.3265
0.3317
0.0118
134.00
October 27, 2000
16/07/00
Exit Granulator
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
458.10
432.50
427.30
425.10
421.40
407.10
402.50
413.10
415.00
403.60
396.10
365.70
366.70
331.20
310.30
295.40
277.80
275.10
264.40
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
16.30
0.50
3.70
4.90
6.10
5.20
7.70
14.90
29.30
30.20
30.80
15.80
12.50
13.40
6.50
2.70
1.00
0.60
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0805
0.0025
0.0183
0.0242
0.0301
0.0257
0.0380
0.0735
0.1446
0.1491
0.1520
0.0780
0.0617
0.0661
0.0321
0.0133
0.0049
0.0030
0.0025
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0251
0.0019
0.0166
0.0285
0.0401
0.0395
0.0691
0.1671
0.4017
0.4969
0.5067
0.3545
0.3428
0.2281
0.1528
0.0919
0.0470
0.0423
0.0449
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
202.60
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
448.50
436.40
429.60
427.70
423.20
407.10
403.50
412.20
407.00
393.30
387.10
362.10
364.50
331.10
311.80
298.20
279.20
276.20
265.30
270.20
262.20
258.60
242.50
6.70
4.40
6.00
7.50
7.90
5.20
8.70
14.00
21.30
19.90
21.80
12.20
10.30
13.30
8.00
5.50
2.40
1.70
1.40
0.60
0.40
0.30
0.00
0.0373
0.0245
0.0334
0.0418
0.0440
0.0290
0.0485
0.0780
0.1187
0.1109
0.1214
0.0680
0.0574
0.0741
0.0446
0.0306
0.0134
0.0095
0.0078
0.0033
0.0022
0.0017
0.0000
0.0117
0.0189
0.0304
0.0492
0.0587
0.0446
0.0881
0.1773
0.3296
0.3695
0.4048
0.3089
0.3188
0.2555
0.2122
0.2113
0.1273
0.1353
0.1418
0.1759
0.1393
0.0619
0.0000
179.50
October 27, 2000
Exit Dryer #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
467.80
436.70
428.00
423.40
421.30
406.10
401.10
409.40
406.50
391.50
384.30
359.00
362.50
326.60
308.50
295.00
277.90
275.10
264.50
269.90
262.20
258.80
242.50
26.00
4.70
4.40
3.20
6.00
4.20
6.30
11.20
20.80
18.10
19.00
9.10
8.30
8.80
4.70
2.30
1.10
0.60
0.60
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.00
0.1619
0.0293
0.0274
0.0199
0.0374
0.0262
0.0392
0.0697
0.1295
0.1127
0.1183
0.0567
0.0517
0.0548
0.0293
0.0143
0.0068
0.0037
0.0037
0.0019
0.0025
0.0031
0.0000
0.0506
0.0225
0.0249
0.0234
0.0498
0.0402
0.0713
0.1585
0.3598
0.3757
0.3944
0.2576
0.2871
0.1889
0.1394
0.0988
0.0652
0.0534
0.0679
0.0983
0.1557
0.1153
0.0000
160.60
October 27, 2000
Oversize #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
674.60
466.10
466.00
446.00
432.00
405.00
395.90
398.70
386.00
374.40
365.60
350.30
354.50
318.30
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
232.80
34.10
42.40
25.80
16.70
3.10
1.10
0.50
0.30
1.00
0.30
0.40
0.30
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.6479
0.0949
0.1180
0.0718
0.0465
0.0086
0.0031
0.0014
0.0008
0.0028
0.0008
0.0011
0.0008
0.0014
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.2025
0.0730
0.1073
0.0845
0.0620
0.0133
0.0056
0.0032
0.0023
0.0093
0.0028
0.0051
0.0046
0.0048
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
359.30
October 27, 2000
Oversize #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
567.70
460.50
459.70
454.50
449.70
410.70
398.20
399.70
386.30
374.40
365.80
350.60
354.80
318.40
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
125.90
28.50
36.10
34.30
34.40
8.80
3.40
1.50
0.60
1.00
0.50
0.70
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.4547
0.1029
0.1304
0.1239
0.1242
0.0318
0.0123
0.0054
0.0022
0.0036
0.0018
0.0025
0.0022
0.0022
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1421
0.0792
0.1185
0.1457
0.1656
0.0489
0.0223
0.0123
0.0060
0.0120
0.0060
0.0115
0.0120
0.0075
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
276.90
October 27, 2000
Product Size #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
421.90
430.30
425.50
426.90
456.60
443.00
392.70
374.20
352.60
356.10
318.60
304.50
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.70
15.00
23.60
32.10
58.40
57.30
19.30
8.90
2.70
1.90
0.80
0.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0076
0.0674
0.1061
0.1443
0.2626
0.2576
0.0868
0.0400
0.0121
0.0085
0.0036
0.0031
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0090
0.0899
0.1633
0.2624
0.5968
0.7157
0.2893
0.1334
0.0552
0.0475
0.0124
0.0150
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
222.40
October 27, 2000
Product Size #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
420.90
427.00
438.50
463.40
432.30
384.80
368.50
350.80
354.60
318.00
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.60
25.10
43.70
65.20
46.60
11.40
3.20
0.90
0.40
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0277
0.1240
0.2159
0.3221
0.2302
0.0563
0.0158
0.0044
0.0020
0.0010
0.0005
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0369
0.1908
0.3926
0.7321
0.6395
0.1877
0.0527
0.0202
0.0110
0.0034
0.0024
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
202.40
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.20
400.50
400.00
398.30
394.60
367.00
368.80
334.80
313.40
297.80
279.60
276.00
265.00
270.00
262.10
258.90
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
2.30
14.30
24.90
29.30
17.10
14.60
17.00
9.60
5.10
2.80
1.50
1.10
0.40
0.30
0.60
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0028
0.0163
0.1012
0.1762
0.2074
0.1210
0.1033
0.1203
0.0679
0.0361
0.0198
0.0106
0.0078
0.0028
0.0021
0.0042
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0051
0.0370
0.2811
0.5874
0.6912
0.5501
0.5740
0.4149
0.3235
0.2489
0.1887
0.1517
0.1415
0.1490
0.1327
0.1573
0.0000
141.30
October 27, 2000
Undersize
#2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.10
399.10
391.10
389.40
394.20
372.80
375.80
346.20
320.10
301.40
281.10
276.70
265.30
270.20
262.20
258.80
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.90
5.40
16.00
28.90
22.90
21.60
28.40
16.30
8.70
4.30
2.20
1.40
0.60
0.40
0.50
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0019
0.0057
0.0340
0.1008
0.1820
0.1442
0.1360
0.1788
0.1026
0.0548
0.0271
0.0139
0.0088
0.0038
0.0025
0.0031
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0034
0.0129
0.0945
0.3359
0.6066
0.6555
0.7557
0.6167
0.4888
0.3778
0.2579
0.1979
0.1603
0.1989
0.1574
0.1166
0.0000
158.80
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #1
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
452.00
435.90
430.30
427.70
427.70
411.10
406.60
408.50
396.90
382.90
377.30
358.80
362.90
332.10
316.60
300.20
281.80
278.50
267.20
271.00
262.60
259.10
243.00
10.20
3.90
6.70
7.50
12.40
9.20
11.80
10.30
11.20
9.50
12.00
8.90
8.70
14.30
12.80
7.50
5.00
4.00
3.30
1.40
0.80
0.80
0.50
0.0591
0.0226
0.0388
0.0434
0.0718
0.0533
0.0683
0.0596
0.0649
0.0550
0.0695
0.0515
0.0504
0.0828
0.0741
0.0434
0.0290
0.0232
0.0191
0.0081
0.0046
0.0046
0.0029
0.0185
0.0174
0.0353
0.0511
0.0957
0.0820
0.1242
0.1355
0.1801
0.1834
0.2316
0.2342
0.2799
0.2855
0.3529
0.2995
0.2757
0.3309
0.3474
0.4267
0.2895
0.1716
0.0460
172.70
October 27, 2000
Exit Crusher #2
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
450.60
436.40
435.00
428.90
427.80
414.20
405.40
407.20
396.30
382.40
377.30
357.60
362.80
330.50
311.80
297.00
278.80
275.90
265.20
270.40
262.70
258.80
242.50
8.80
4.40
11.40
8.70
12.50
12.30
10.60
9.00
10.60
9.00
12.00
7.70
8.60
12.70
8.00
4.30
2.00
1.40
1.30
0.80
0.90
0.50
0.00
0.0559
0.0279
0.0724
0.0552
0.0794
0.0781
0.0673
0.0571
0.0673
0.0571
0.0762
0.0489
0.0546
0.0806
0.0508
0.0273
0.0127
0.0089
0.0083
0.0051
0.0057
0.0032
0.0000
0.0175
0.0215
0.0658
0.0650
0.1058
0.1201
0.1224
0.1299
0.1869
0.1905
0.2540
0.2222
0.3034
0.2781
0.2419
0.1883
0.1209
0.1270
0.1501
0.2673
0.3571
0.1176
0.0000
157.50
October 27, 2000

(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
418.70
414.00
413.30
436.40
418.70
390.00
373.40
351.90
355.30
318.80
303.80
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.40
12.10
18.50
38.20
33.00
16.60
8.10
2.00
1.10
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0254
0.0903
0.1381
0.2851
0.2463
0.1239
0.0604
0.0149
0.0082
0.0075
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0338
0.1389
0.2510
0.6479
0.6841
0.4129
0.2015
0.0678
0.0456
0.0257
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
134.00
October 27, 2000

(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.60
420.20
415.30
401.90
395.20
398.60
386.80
401.30
414.80
368.00
363.20
323.20
304.90
293.10
277.00
274.50
264.30
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
0.40
1.10
27.90
49.50
18.10
9.00
5.40
1.10
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0035
0.0035
0.0097
0.2450
0.4346
0.1589
0.0790
0.0474
0.0097
0.0035
0.0018
0.0000
0.0035
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0064
0.0080
0.0268
0.8165
1.4486
0.7223
0.4390
0.1635
0.0460
0.0242
0.0167
0.0000
0.0639
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
113.90
October 27, 2000
Product
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
441.80
432.00
423.70
420.60
420.60
412.10
414.80
439.10
424.80
387.00
368.30
350.50
354.60
318.00
303.90
292.70
276.80
274.50
263.90
269.60
261.80
258.30
242.50
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.40
5.30
10.20
20.00
40.90
39.10
13.60
3.00
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0007
0.0030
0.0396
0.0762
0.1494
0.3055
0.2920
0.1016
0.0224
0.0045
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0007
0.0035
0.0528
0.1172
0.2716
0.6942
0.8111
0.3386
0.0747
0.0204
0.0166
0.0052
0.0036
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
133.90
October 27, 2000
Recycle
(g)
(g)
(mm-1)
443.70
433.60
424.90
421.70
419.50
403.60
397.50
403.10
399.10
393.50
389.50
364.00
366.60
332.60
312.70
298.10
280.10
277.00
265.70
270.90
262.60
258.30
242.50
1.90
1.60
1.30
1.50
4.20
1.70
2.70
4.90
13.40
20.10
24.20
14.10
12.40
14.80
8.90
5.40
3.30
2.50
1.80
1.30
0.80
0.00
0.00
0.0133
0.0112
0.0091
0.0105
0.0294
0.0119
0.0189
0.0343
0.0938
0.1408
0.1695
0.0987
0.0868
0.1036
0.0623
0.0378
0.0231
0.0175
0.0126
0.0091
0.0056
0.0000
0.0000
0.0042
0.0086
0.0083
0.0124
0.0392
0.0183
0.0344
0.0780
0.2607
0.4692
0.5649
0.4488
0.4824
0.3574
0.2968
0.2608
0.2201
0.2501
0.2292
0.4791
0.3501
0.0000
0.0000
142.80
October 27, 2000
APPENDIX B OPERATING DATA

FLOWS
Production Rate
Recycle Rate
Slurry to T208A
Slurry to T209A
Slurry to tee
Ammonia to tee
Ammonia to sparger
Alum to P256/209
Acid to scrubbers
Acid to tee
Aqua to tee
Water to T210
8/4/2000
7/7/2000 8/15/2000 8/16/2000
28.00
3.75
105.00
6.00
2.52
0.28
0.40
0.20
2.60
6.50
26.90
4.09
110.00
2.80
3.40
4.80
2.30
0.25
0.40
0.25
2.60
1.50
5.20
27.50
4.55
125.00
5.20
5.70
6.40
2.55
0.26
0.39
0.24
2.60
0.00
6.80
29.70
4.04
120.00
4.50
5.70
6.30
2.60
2.50
0.38
0.30
2.60
0.00
6.50
t/hr
92.00
111.00
480.00
66.00
-
89.00
79.00
111.00
481.00
60.00
-
82.00
113.00
489.00
55.00
-
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
t/hr
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
L/s
TEMPERATURES
Solids ex Granulator
Solids ex Dryer
Dryer air out
Dryer air in
Solids Recycle at Granulator
Slurry in T210
Ambient Temperature
112.00
481.00
91.00
62.00
SAMPLES
T210 Slurry
Specific Gravity
% Water
pH
1.06
85
1.65
1.05
87
1.75
1.035
90
1.66
Product
% Nitrogen
% Water
% Al
free acid
hardness
size
4.6
0.17
0.31
90+
20.4
0.27
0.29
0
-
20.5
0.13
0.31
0
-
October 27, 2000
APPENDIX C DAESIM CODE

Drum Granulator Model
(********************************************************************
(* Block Name: drum_gran
(*
(* Description:
(* The drum granulator model based on a general population
(* balance (GPB) model using Hounslow's discretisation method to
(* handle the birth and death terms.
(* The model requires a geometric discretization of particle
(* volume such that v(i)=2v(i-1) or d(i)=1.2599d(i-1).
(*
(* Model assumes perfect mixing in the volume and only accounts for
(* aggregation mechanisms of birth and death.
(* Constant mass holdup assumed in the drum.
(*
(* No. State Variables/Equations:
(* No. Algebraic Variables:
(* No. Algebraic Equations:
(*
(*
(* Authors:
Nicoleta Balliu and Ian Cameron
(* Organization:
CAPE / DaeSim Technologies Pty Ltd
(* Version and Date: 1.1 5 September 2000
(*
1.2 6 September 2000
(*
1.3 8 September 2000
(********************************************************************
function_block drum_gran
#include
"sys_defs.h"
type
ldist :
structure
lsize : array (1 .. nsize) of real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lpar :
structure
lcomp : array (1 .. ncomp) of ldist ;
end_structure ;
end_type
type
v
October 27, 2000
lstream :
structure
ltphcomp : array (1 .. ncomp) of ldist ; (* kilograms per second solids flow *)
ltphwater : real ;
(* kilograms per second water flow *)
end_structure ;
end_type
var_in_out
i1 : sol_liq_stream = ( inlet ) ;
o1 : sol_liq_stream = ( outlet ) ;
end_var
var_input
x_holdup : lstream ;
rhogf : real ;
rhogl : real ;
sol : real ;
por : real ;
a : real ;
rho : real ;
init_diam : real ;
end_var
(* mass of particles in each size range [kg] *)

(* density of salt kg/m3 [1600] *)
(* density of solution kg/m3 [1300] *)
(* solubility of salt in water kg/kg *)
(* porosity of granules m3/m3 [0.38] *)
(* parameter in the kernel model [1/s] *)
(* density of the granule kg/m3 [1500] *)
(* initial diameter for ranges [m] *)
var_output
deriv_holdup : lstream ;
resid_out : lpar ;
resid_water : real ;
end_var
var
i : int ;
(* index *)
j : int ;
(* index *)
k : int ;
(* index *)
k1 : int ;
(* index *)
birth : real ;
(* mass appearing in range j due to birth *)
death : real ;
(* mass disappearing from range j due to death
*)
diameter : array (1 .. nrange ) of real ; (* [nsize+1] diameter markers for size
ranges [m] *)
numb : lpar ;
(* number of particles in size range j *)
sum1 : real ;
(* second birth term *)
sum2 : real ;
(* first birth term *)
sum3 : real ;
(* first death term *)
sum4 : real ;
(* second death term *)
Beta0 : real ;
(* the constant kernel *)
ntotal : real ;
(* total number of particles in drum [#]
*)
total_massholdup : real ;
(* total kilograms in drum [kg] *)
total_flow_in : real ;
(* total in-flow of solids [kg/s] *)
dbar : array (1 .. nsize ) of real ; (* mean granule size of the range [m] *)
October 27, 2000
xw : real ;
(* particle moisture content kg/kg [0.10]
*)
end_var
(* function block calculation *)

(* generate the particle size range markers *)
diameter(1) := init_diam ;
for i := 2 to nrange do
diameter(i) := diameter(i-1)*(2**(0.333333333)) ;
end_for
(* calculate the mean particle size for each size interval *)
for k1 := 1 to nsize do
dbar(k1) := (diameter(k1) + diameter(k1+1))/2 ;
end_for
(* get total in-flow and total holdup in drum *)
total_massholdup := 0.0 ;
total_flow_in := 0.0 ;
for i := 1 to ncomp do
for j := 1 to nsize do
total_massholdup := total_massholdup + x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) ;
total_flow_in := total_flow_in + i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
(* moisture calculation and kernel constant estimation *)
xw := x_holdup.ltphwater/total_massholdup ;
Beta0 := xw*(1+sol)*rhogf*(1-por)*a/((1-xw*sol)*rhogl*por) ;
(* Total particles *)
ntotal := 0.0 ;
ntotal := ntotal + (x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)/(dbar(j)**3)) ;
end_for
end_for
ntotal := ntotal * 6/(3.14159*rho) ;
(* initialization and calculation of aggregation *)
October 27, 2000
(* Birth and death agglomeration terms based on mass using Hounslow's

discretization method *)
(* second birth term *)
if j > 1 then
sum1 := 0.5*Beta0*(x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j-1) *
x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j-1))
* ((6/(3.14159*rho*(dbar(j-1)**3)))**2)/ntotal ;
else
sum1 := 0 ;
end_if
(* first birth term *)
sum2 := 0 ;
if j > 2 then
for k := 1 to j-2 do
sum2 := sum2 + (2.0**(k-j+1))*Beta0*(x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j1)/(dbar(j-1)**3))
*
(x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(k)/(dbar(k)**3))*((6/(3.14159*rho))**2)/ntotal ;
end_for
end_if
(* first death term *)
sum3 := 0 ;
if j > 1 then
sum3 := sum3 + (2.0**(kj))*Beta0*(x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)/(dbar(j)**3))
*
end_for
end_if
(* second death term *)
sum4 := 0 ;
for k := j to nsize do
sum4 := sum4 + Beta0*(x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)/(dbar(j)**3))
*
end_for
birth := (sum1 + sum2) ;

death := (sum3 + sum4) ;
October 27, 2000
(* The total rate of change of mass in each size range [kg/s] *)

deriv_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j)
+ (birth - death)*((3.14159*rho*(dbar(j)**3))/6)
;
end_for
end_for
(* perfect mixing rule *)
resid_out.lcomp(i).lsize(j) := total_flow_in*x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)
- total_massholdup*o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
(* transfer water flow from inlet to outlet stream *)
deriv_holdup.ltphwater := i1.z_tphwater - o1.z_tphwater ;
resid_water := o1.z_tphwater - i1.z_tphwater ;
end_function_block
October 27, 2000
Dryer Model
(********************************************************************
*)
(* Block Name: DRYER
(*
(* Description:
(*
(* Dryer model assuming plug flow
(*
(* No. State Variables/Equations: 0
(* No. Algebraic Variables:
0
(* No. Algebraic Equations:
ncomp*nsize+1
(*
(* Author:
(* Organization:
(* Version and Date
(********************************************************************
function_block dryer
#include
"sys_defs.h"
type
ldist :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lstream :
structure
ltphcomp : array (1 .. ncomp) of ldist ;
ltphwater : real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lsep :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
var_in_out
i1 : sol_liq_stream = ( inlet_1 ) ;
o1 : sol_liq_stream = ( solids_outlet ) ;
o2 : sol_liq_stream = ( moisture_outlet ) ;
end_var
October 27, 2000
var_input
tr : real ;
(* drying rate, kg H2O/kg.feed/metre of drum length *)
L : real ;
(* dryer length, metres *)
sep_func : lsep ; (* fraction solids material to air stream *)
end_var
var_output
resid_solids : lstream ;
resid_liquid : lstream ;
end_var
var
i : int ;
j : int ;
end_var
(* function block calculations *)
resid_solids.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j)*(1 sep_func.lcomp(i).lsize(j))
- o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
resid_liquid.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) :=
i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j)*sep_func.lcomp(i).lsize(j)
end_for
end_for
resid_solids.ltphwater := i1.z_tphwater*(1-tr*L) - o1.z_tphwater ;
resid_liquid.ltphwater := i1.z_tphwater*tr*L - o2.z_tphwater;
end_function_block
Screen Model
(******************************************************************)
(* Name: SCREEN
(*
(* Description:
(*
(* The "screen" model, which uses a selection function to
(* assign what fraction of the size range goes to the oversize
(* stream.
(*
(* State Variables/Equations: 0
(* Algebraic Variables:
0
(* Algebraic Equations:
2*(ncomp*nsize+1)
(*
October 27, 2000
(* Author: Bob Newell, Ian Cameron, DaeSim Technologies P/L

(* Version: 1.0 Rev 1: September 4, 2000
(******************************************************************)
function_block screen
#include
"sys_defs.h"
type
ldist :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lstream :
structure
ltphwater : real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lsep :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
var_in_out
o1 : sol_liq_stream = ( outlet_oversize ) ;
o2 : sol_liq_stream = ( outlet_undersize ) ;
end_var
var_input
sep_func : lsep ;
end_var
(* fraction of inlet to oversize *)
var_output
resid_over : lstream ;
resid_under : lstream ;
end_var
var
i : int ;
j : int ;
end_var
October 27, 2000
resid_over.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j)
- sep_func.lcomp(i).lsize(j)
* i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
resid_under.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := o2.tphcomp(i).z_size(j)
- ( 1 - sep_func.lcomp(i).lsize(j) )
* i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
(* all the water goes out the bottom *)
resid_over.ltphwater := o1.z_tphwater - 0.000000001 ;
resid_under.ltphwater := o2.z_tphwater - i1.z_tphwater ;
end_function_block
October 27, 2000
Crusher Model
(******************************************************************)
(* Name: GRINDS
*)
(*
*)
(* Description:
*)
(* The ball mill model (solids particulate stream)
*)
(*
*)
(* State Variables/Equations: ncomp*nsize+1
*)
0
*)
ncomp*nsize
*)
(*
*)
(* Author:
Bob Newell, Ian Cameron
*)
(* Organization:
Daesim Technologies Pty Ltd
*)
(* Date:
6 September 2000
*)
(******************************************************************)
function_block grinds
#include
"sys_defs.h"
type
ldist :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lpar :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lstream :
structure
ltphwater : real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
var_in_out
end_var
var_input
x_holdup : lstream ;
breakage_rate : lpar ;
breakage_func : lpar ;
October 27, 2000
selec_func : lpar ;
end_var
var_output
deriv_holdup : lstream ;
resid_out : lpar ;
resid_water : real ;
end_var
var
i : int ;
j : int ;
k : int ;
n : int ;
total_sholdup : real ;
total_sflow_in : real ;
nett_breakage : real ;
breakage_out : array (1 .. nsize) of real ;
breakage_in : array (1 .. nsize) of real ;
broken_residue : real ;
end_var
breakage_in(j) := 0.0 ;
end_for
breakage_out(1) := 0.0 ;
for j := 1 to nsize-1 do
breakage_out(j+1) := x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j+1)
* breakage_rate.lcomp(i).lsize(j+1) ;
broken_residue := breakage_out(j+1) ;
if j > 1 then
n := j - k + 1 ;
breakage_in(n) := breakage_in(n)
+ breakage_out(j+1)
* breakage_func.lcomp(i).lsize(nsize-k) ;
broken_residue := broken_residue
- breakage_out(j+1)
* breakage_func.lcomp(i).lsize(nsize-k) ;
end_for
end_if
breakage_in(1) := breakage_in(1) + broken_residue ;
end_for
nett_breakage := breakage_out(j) - breakage_in(j);
October 27, 2000
deriv_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j)
- o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) - nett_breakage ;
end_for
end_for
deriv_holdup.ltphwater:= i1.z_tphwater - o1.z_tphwater;
(* totals *)
(* algebraic equations *)
total_sholdup := 0.0 ;
total_sflow_in := 0.0 ;
total_sholdup := total_sholdup + x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)
* selec_func.lcomp(i).lsize(j) ;
total_sflow_in := total_sflow_in + i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
(* perfect mixing rules *)
(* use total_sflow_in instead of total_sflow_out to enforce the
total_sflow_in = total_sflow_out constraint without structural
or conditioning problems *)
resid_out.lcomp(i).lsize(j) :=
total_sflow_in * x_holdup.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)
* selec_func.lcomp(i).lsize(j)
- total_sholdup * o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
resid_water := o1.z_tphwater - i1.z_tphwater ;
end_function_block
Mixer Model
(******************************************************************)
(* Name: MIXER
*)
(*
*)
(* Description:
*)
(* The "mixer" model
*)
*)
0
*)
ncomp*nsize+2
*)
October 27, 2000
(******************************************************************)
function_block mixer
#include
"sys_defs.h"
type
ldist :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lstream :
structure
ltphwater : real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
var_in_out
end_var
var_output
resid_out : lstream ;
end_var
var
i : int ;
j : int ;
end_var
resid_out.ltphwater := i1.z_tphwater +
i2.z_tphwater - o1.z_tphwater ;
resid_out.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) +
i2.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) - o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
end_function_block
October 27, 2000
Global Variables Code

(* global variable declarations
*)
var_external
(********************************************************************
(* these are the standard declarations and should not be touched *)
initialization : bool = 0 (none) ; (* enables user code at time zero *)
time : real = 0 (s) ;
(* simulation time *)
max_time : real = 100 (s) ;
(* time for end of simulation *)
print_level : int = 0 (none) ;
(* degree of print output *)
integrate_option : int = 2 (none) ; (* specifies the type of integrator *)
special_option : int = 0 (none) ; (* special tasks during solution *)
error_tolerance : real = 0.0001 (none) ; (* integration error acceptable *)
no_comps : int = 1 (none) ;
(* number of components in stream *)
no_comps_4 : int = 1 (none) ;
(* number of components in stmline *)
mole_flag : int = 0 (none) ;
(* mole flows = 1, mass flows = 0 *)
f_errcode : int ;
(* argument for system error function *)
(********************************************************************
(* add your own global variable declarations here
nsize : int = 6 (none) ;
nrange : int = 7 (none) ;
ncomp : int = 1 (none) ;
*)
(* number of size fractions *)

(* number of range markers *)
(* number of components *)
(********************************************************************
end_var
Solid-Liquid Source Code
(******************************************************************)
(* Name: SCL_SOURCE
(*
(* Description:
(* The source of a stream entering the flowsheet
(* with its solid component rates and liquid rate (scl_)
(* specified.
(*
(* Maximum usage is specified and will halt the simulation
(* with error code 5001.
(*
October 27, 2000
0
ncomp*nsize+1
(*
(* Authors: Bob Newell, Ian Cameron, Daesim Technologies P/L
(* Version, Date: v2.0, 6 September 2000
(******************************************************************)
function_block scl_source
#include
"sys_defs.h"
type
dist :
structure
end_structure ;
end_type
type
lstream :
structure
ltphcomp : array (1 .. ncomp) of dist ;
ltphwater : real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
var_in_out
o1 : sol_liq_stream = (outlet_stream) ;
end_var
var_input
x_usage : real ;
max_usage : real ;
specn : lstream ;
end_var
var_output
deriv_usage : real ;
resid_flow : lstream ;
end_var
(* accumulated flow *)
(* source capacity *)
(* outlet flow *)
var
i : int ;
j : int ;
total_flow : real ;
end_var
function error ( errcode : int; ) end_function
October 27, 2000
(* stream specification and summation *)

resid_flow.ltphwater := specn.ltphwater - o1.z_tphwater ;
total_flow := o1.z_tphwater ;
resid_flow.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j) := specn.ltphcomp(i).lsize(j)
total_flow := total_flow + o1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
(* mass balance *)
deriv_usage := total_flow ;
(* limiting calculations *)
if x_usage > max_usage then
call error( errcode := 5001; );
end_if
end_function_block
October 27, 2000
Solid Liquid Link Code

(********************************************************************
(* Global and Link Definitions
(********************************************************************
(* Solids - Liquid Stream Definition *)
type
sm_dist :
structure
z_size : array (1 .. nsize) of real ;
end_structure ;
end_type
type
sol_liq_stream :
structure
tphcomp : array (1 .. ncomp) of sm_dist ; (* tonne per hour solid *)
(* components
*)
z_tphwater : real ;
(* tonne per hour water *)
end_structure ;
end_type
Solid Liquid Sink Code
(******************************************************************)
(* Name: SCL_SINK
(*
(* Description:
(*
(* The free sink of stream leaving the flowsheet.
(* A maximum usage is specified and will halt
(* the simulation with error code 1002.
(*
0
0
(*
(******************************************************************)
function_block scl_sink
#include
"sys_defs.h"
October 27, 2000
var_in_out
i1 : sol_liq_stream = (inlet_stream) ;
end_var
var_input
x_usage : real ;
max_usage : real ;
end_var
var_output
deriv_usage : real ;
end_var
(* accumulated flow (kg) *)

(* sink capacity (kg) *)
(* inlet flow *)
var
i : int ;
j : int ;
total_flow : real ;
end_var
function error ( errcode : int; ) end_function
total_flow := i1.z_tphwater ;
total_flow := total_flow + i1.tphcomp(i).z_size(j) ;
end_for
end_for
(* mass balance *)
deriv_usage := total_flow ;
(* limiting calculations *)
if x_usage > max_usage then
call error( errcode := 5002; );
end_if
end_function_block

S Ross Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S Ross Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

3.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Size Distribution Analysis

Moisture Content Analysis

4.0 RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Plant Audit Results

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

APPENDIX A - RAW DATA AND CALCULATIONS

APPENDIX B - OPERATING DATA

APPENDIX C - DAESIM CODE

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

Fertilizers such as ammonium sulphate are processed in a rotary drum or mixer

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

Figure 1: Typical Granulation Circuit (Zhang et al, 2000)

Adetayo et al (1993) suggests that the successful operation of granulation circuits is

In addition to these problems, fertilizers (such as ammonium sulphate) generally have

The material is often soluble so the chemical composition and moisture

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

A validated model for an operational granulation circuit that accurately predicted

Demonstrating how population balance modelling of rotary granulation drums

Illustrating how these simulations can be used as a powerful tool in identifying

Displaying how population balance simulations can be used to assess the

Identifying possible scale up improvements to current granulation circuit

Recommending improvements that may be made to Incitecs ammonium

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Factors Affecting the Growth of Fertilizer Granules

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

Figure 2: Growth Mechanisms (Adetayo et al, 1993)

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

Using experimental data based on three fertilizers including ammonium sulphate

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

= Viscous Stokes Number (dimensionless)

= Critical Viscous Stokes Number (dimensionless)

= Granule Density (g/cm3)

= Binder Viscosity (Pa.s)

= Effective Granule Size (mm)

= Velocity of granule collision (m/s)

= Binder Layer Thickness

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

Figure 3: States of Mobile Liquid Bonding (Brooker, 1999)

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

= Solution Phase Ratio

= Mass Fraction of Water in the Granule

= Solubility of the Fertilizer Salt in Water (gsalt/gwater)

= Density of Fertilizer Salt (g/cm3)

= Density of Fertilizer Solution (g/cm3)

Simon Ross / Individual Inquiry

October 27, 2000

The importance of this definition is highlighted by a simulation completed by

Figure 4: Effects of Binder Content and Crusher Efficiency on Granulation