Comminution Bern Klein, Ph.D., P.Eng.

Professor

and Norman B. Keevil

Institute of Mining
Size Classification Engineering

University of British
Columbia

Beijing, China
May 2015

Bern Klein, Ph.D, P.Eng

Professor
Norman B. Keevil Institute of Mining Engineering,
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, Canada

bklein@mining.ubc.ca
604 822 3986

Process Design Engineer 1990-1998

Professor Mineral Processing 1998-present
 3

Teaching
Comminution and Size Classification
Process Design
Process Mineralogy
Processing of Precious Metal Ores
Rheology of Mineral Suspensions
Mine-Mill Integration

Research Areas
Comminution - High Speed Stirred Milling, High Pressure
Grinding Rolls
Rheology – Hydraulic Transport, Paste and Thickened Tailings
Sensors and
Systems
Continuous Centrifugal Gravity Concentrators
Weathering of Waste Rock

Course Outline
- Comminution Overview and Theory
- Process Development and Plant Design
• Process Development
• Metallurgical Testing
• Sampling
• Process Mineralogy
• Physical Properties
• Plant Design

- Crushing and Screening

• Crushing Technologies
• High Pressure Grinding Rolls
• Screening
• Crushing and Screening Circuits Design
 5

Course Outline

- Sensors and Sorting

- Ore Grinding and Size Classification

• Grinding Technologies
• Ore Characterization
• Circuit Design
• Ball and Rod Mill Sizing
• Size Classification
• Fine Grinding
• Energy Efficiency in Mining

- Comminution Case Studies

Course Objectives
To learn about the main unit operations that are used to 
process minerals including
• Introducing new comminution technologies and systems

• Describing the fundamental physical principles that are 
exploited/employed to achieve the purpose
• Demonstrating how to size and select the equipment

• Demonstrating the use of the equipment in mineral 
processing
 7

• List of Recommended Publications

‒ Mineral Process Plant Design, A.L. Mular, D.N. Halbe, D.J.

Barratt, SME, 2002
‒ Mineral Comminution Circuits, T.J. Napier-Munn, S. Morrell, R.D.
Morrison, T, Kojovic, JKMRC Mining and Mineral Processing,
2005
‒ Advances in Comminution, S.K. Kawatra, SME, 2006
‒ Mine to Mill Conference, A. Scott, S. Morrell, Aus IMM, 1998
‒ Advances in Autogenous and Semiautogenous Grinding
Technology, Proceedings, 1989, 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011 (2015)
‒ Proceedings of the Annual General Meeting of the Canadian
Mineral Processors, 1964 - present

COMMINUTION
OVERVIEW
AND THEORY
 9

Comminution Overview

Comminution at Face Coarse Breakage Fine Breakage

Particle Weakening Size Classification

Sensing and Sorting

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy

10

Comminution at Face
- Mine to Mill
- Drill & blast optimization
- Continuous miners
- Caving methods
- Hydrofracturing

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy
 11

Particle Weakening

- Sellfrag
- Electric Pulse Treatment
- Microwave

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy

12

Coarse Breakage
- Crushers (gyratory, jaw, cone)
- Vertical roller mills (VRM)
- High Pressure Grinding Rolls (HPGR)
- Vibrocone
- SAG milling

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy
 13

Sensing and Sorting Systems

-Sorting
- High capacity sorting machines
- Sensors
-Other Sensing Applications

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy

14

Classification
-Classification equipment
-Coarse classification
-Screening
-De-agglommeration
-Cyclones

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy
 15

Fine Breakage (Grinding)

-Ball milling
-Low speed stirred mills
-High speed stirred mills

CHARACTERIZATION
Lithology Mineralogy
Geometallurgy

16

Definitions
Mineral Processing

The technology of economically converting mineral

bearing raw material into individual mineral
constituents; the minerals remaining essentially
unaltered in physical and chemical form throughout.
The temperature of the system normally is less than
the boiling point of water. Mineral processing is also
known as mineral beneficiation, milling or
concentration.

Unit Operation

An individual process with a specific function, which is

a component or forms part of a complex process.
 17

Mineral Processing
Ore

Comminution

Mineral Separation Tailing

De-watering

Concentrate

18

Primary 
Primary 
Mine Crushing Plant Design
Crushing

Mineralogy & 
2nd/3rd 
2nd/3rd  Autogenous
Autogenous Process 
Screening
Screening
Crushing
Crushing Grinding
Grinding Development

Rod Mill/Ball 
Rod Mill/Ball  Sampling
Cyclone
Cyclone Gravity
Mill
Mill

Material 
Flotation/  Transport
Regrind
Regrind
Leaching
Tailing

Thickening Filtering
Filtering

Unit Operations
 19

THEORIES OF
COMMINUTION

20

Theories of Comminution
• Large particle + Energy = Small Particles + Sound + Heat
• Energy dissipation (sound + heat) accounts for 99% of input 
energy
• Most expensive unit operation requiring 5 – 40 kWh/t
 21

Breakage Mechanisms
Properties of solids that influence breakage mechanisms:
• Elastic versus Plastic (stress-strain relationship linear or nonlinear)
• Strain behavior (fracturing) depends on:
‒ Microstructural differences in physical properties of adjacent
minerals e.g. hardness, brittleness, cleavage
‒ Macrostructural weaknesses e.g. along joints, bedding planes, grain
boundary cementation/impurities
‒ Microstructural weaknesses e.g. schistosity, number of flaws/
number and type of defects including cracks, crystal surfaces,
impurities, minute inclusions
‒ Orientation of flaws

22

Surface Properties
From fracture mechanics, for an isotropic material:
F’/A = 2Es/L
F’ - critical force to initiate fracture
A - cross sectional area
L - length of specimen
Es - surface energy
δ - Young’s modulus
Critical stress to initiate fracture is proportional to
surface energy which depends on the number of flaws
on surface.
 23

Breakage Energy

• ↑ cracks or flaws = ↓ energy required

• ↑ brittleness = ↓ energy required
• ↑ coarse grain crystals = ↓ energy required
• water = ↓ energy required

24

1st Theory – Rittinger (1867)

• Constant energy per unit of surface area generated.
New surface area produced by crushing and grinding is
directly proportional to the useful work input.

Surface area is
 1 1  inversely
E  k  
 X 2 X1  proportional to the
diameter of the
particle

where E - energy consumed

X2 - product size
X1 - feed size
 25

2nd Theory – Kick (1885)

• Constant energy per unit mass for similar relative reduction. The
work input required to deform a homogeneous rock to the yield
point and to break it is proportional to the reduction in diameters of
the particles concerned.
x 
E  k  ln  1 
 x2 
• Theory: Work required to reduce rock from 4 cm to 2 cm equals
work required to reduce rock from 2 cm to 1 cm.
• Rock is not homogeneous due to flaws and breakage is controlled
by number of flaws. Rock breaks at far below the stress required
by its theoretical homogeneous elastic limit.
• Overestimates work input at coarse sizes and underestimates work
input at fine sizes.

26

3rd Theory – Bond (1951)

• Useful work input per ton is inversely proportional to the
square root of the new surface area produced.
• Derived empirically from operating data and experimental test
results.
• Compromise between Rittinger and Kick Theories and is still
used for most mill designs.

 1 1 
E  k  
 x2 x1 

• Bond Equation gives us indices for Work Index and Operating

Work Index for ores
 27

General theories of comminution

• Consider the incremental energy dE required to produce
an incremental change in size dD. More energy is
required to achieve a similar relative degree of size
reduction as the product becomes finer:

• Where E’ = specific energy to introduce new surface

energy; K = constant; D = particle size; n = value to
describe behaviour in different size ranges.
• Rittinger: n=2; Kick: n=1; Bond: n= 1.5

28

Log-Log plot of Energy Consumed vs Size

Rittinger
slope=-1

Bond
Slope =-1/2 Kick slope=0

-1000μm, Rittinger Particle Size (µm) 1cm+, Kick

 29

Comminution Research
Main objectives:
• Reduce unit operating cost ($/t)
• Increase throughput
• Improve downstream process performance as a result of
an improved size specification.
• Improve energy efficiency.

• Two kinds of improvements

• Fundamental change, novel technologies (e.g. ultrasonic,
microwave, impact and electricity)
• Incremental (design, operating practice)

30

Factors Affecting Fracturing

• Ability to fracture rocks depends on degree of internal strain

which is influenced by:
‒ composition
‒ nature of chemical bonds
• grain boundary cementation/ impurities
• number of internal flaws
• number of surface flaws which decrease surface energy
 31

Breakage Mechanisms

Four breakage mechanisms

1. Impact
2. Compression
3. Abrasion
4. Chipping

32

Impact/Compression Breakage
Particle shatters into fragments with minimal secondary
breakage (re-breakage)

Size distribution data often fits the Gaudin-Schuhmann

Size Distribution Equation

Wp = cumulative fraction passing size X

K = size modulus
m = ln (Y1/Y2)/ln (X1/X2)
for impact/compression breakage n = 1
e.g. crushing
 33

Attrition Breakage - Rod and Ball Mills

• abrasion + chipping
• abrasion e.g. chalk on board
• chipping e.g. off center loading

Size Size
Abrasion Chipping

34

Bond Work Index

Power Draw vs. Product Particle Size & Throughput
Bond measured grindabilities of various ores using a batch
mill in closed circuit with a screen. For ball mills he
maintained a circulating load of 2.5 and for rod mills 1.0.
Bond conducted parallel tests using an 8 ft diameter ball
mill and rod mill. Obtained ratio of net power to feed rate.
A plot of Work input vs F80 - P80 produced a straight
line. The proportionality constant is the Work Index. The
Work Index was obtained using an empirical equation for
size reduction in a ball mill.

W = 10 Wi [1/P80 - 1/F80] (kWh/t)

P = W x TPH
 35

Therefore to estimate W:
1. Measure Rod/Ball Mill Grindability using the Standard
Procedure.

2. Calculate Work Index using Bond’s empirical

equation.

3. Use the Work Index to calculate the Work Input, W.

4. Total Power Required = W x Feed Rate.

5. Estimate size of grinding mill using equation relating

net power per mill versus mill geometry and operating
conditions.

36

Typical Work Indices

• Determined by:
‒ Crushability Test
‒ Rod Mill Grindability Test
‒ Ball Mill Grindability Test

• Typical Work Index Values (kWh/t)

• Bauxite 11
• Cement clinker 16
• Corundum 33
• Dolomite 14
• Feldspar 13
• Granite 12
• Gypsum 8
• Hematite 15
• Limestone 15
• Pyrite 11
• Quartz 16
 37

Example P Calculation

What is the total power required for to reduce particle

size from F80 = 1 mm to P80 = 50 µm for ore with Wi =
15 kWh/t at Capacity = 2500 tpd?

P = (2500/24)*10*15*(1/(50)1/2 -1/(1000)1/2)

P = 1716 kW

38

Process Development

HVC: 0.3% Cu
Industry Avg.: ~ 0.8%
 39

Mine Life Cycle

All mining projects pass through a series of stages over the
project life:
• Exploration
• Discovery
• Development
• Production
• Reclamation/Abandonment

40

Pre-Feasibility & Feasibility Studies

Feasibility Study is conducted to determine the economic
and environmental viability of a project and includes the
following sections:

1. Geology and Geological Reserves

2. Mineral Reserves, Mining Plan and Mining Methods

What is the difference between geological and mineable

reserves?

1. Mineral Processing Plant Design

2. Environmental Review
3. Capital and Operating Costs
4. Net Cash Flow
5. Marketing Study
 41

Mineral Process Plant Design

- including Plant Expansions and Retrofits

• Trade-off studies
• Process Selection:
‒ Process Design Criteria
‒ Flow Sheets
‒ Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams
• Process Equipment Specification/Selection
‒ Equipment Specifications
• Process Calculations
• Commissioning and Operations Support

42

Steps of a Mineral Geological Exploration

Development Project
Mineralogical Studies
Mine Design
Lab and Pilot Tests

Engineering Studies

Increasing Project No
Certainty company
Yes

Basic Engineering

Detailed Engineering

Implementation
 43

Process Development

• Process Development is a blend of science, technology

and economics.

• The objective is to develop a process which, when

combined with all other aspects of the project, will
optimize the overall economics of the project.

44

Transforming Rocks into Ores

Rocks or minerals

1. Raw Material
Mineral Processing 2. Technology
3. Market
4. Economic Aspects
5. Environmental &
Social Issues

Ore or Valuable Minerals

Saleable
 45

Process Development

• The Flow sheet is critical to establish:

‒Design Criteria
‒Mass balance
‒Water balance
‒Energy balance
‒Tailing disposal
‒Plant lay-out
‒Equipment sizing
‒COSTS

46

Flow Sheet Development Objectives

• Determine processing parameters

• Determine mass/water/energy balance of each unit
operation
• Evaluate processing alternatives
• Establish the list of main pieces of equipment required
• Create the foundation for the conceptual engineering
(feasibility study)
 47

Flow Sheet Development Goals

• Create a procedure (process) to concentrate

minerals with high recovery (hopefully >90%)

• Create a process to obtain concentrates with a high

grade (saleable)

• Create an economically feasible process

• Create a safe & environmentally sound process

48

Key Information for Process

Flowsheet Definition

• Grades (chemical analysis of elements)

• Ore-minerals
• Gangue-minerals
• Mineralogical Factors
• Physical Properties
• Chemical Properties
• Liberation
• Process Recovery
 49

Role of Metallurgical Testing in Project

Development
‒Is very project specific, however, like projects have
like metallurgical requirements
‒Should be based on creating existing, saleable
products, as well as using known technologies
‒In most projects, early metallurgical testing is
concerned with fatal flaw detection
‒Detailed project test work should ideally follow after
ore reserve data is secure.

50

Metallurgical Testing
Determine Processing Parameters
• Lab Scale Testing
‒Evaluate and Monitor Process Performance
‒Evaluate Changes to Process Prior to Implementing
‒Evaluate Reagents
• Equipment
‒Size and Select Equipment
‒Process Development
• Pilot Scale
‒Confirm Process Selection
‒Confirm Scale-Up & Test New Technologies
 51

Prefeasibility &
Lab-Scale Feasibility
Testing
• Confirm flowsheet & identify
reagents
• Establish recovery &
concentrate quality
• Study variability (met
mapping)
• Determine preliminary
concentrator design criteria

52

Steps to Define Process Flow Sheet

Sample

Pilot Testing Mineralogical Lab Testing

Studies

Mine Plan Process Flow sheet Modeling

 53

1. Raw Material Rock (full of minerals)

2. Technology
3. Market
4. Economic Aspects Ore (with defined ore-
5. Environmental & minerals and gangue–
Social Issues minerals)

Crushing and Grinding Comminution

Mineral Separation Processing

Tailings Concentrate

54

Sampling
• Most critical aspect of any
metallurgical test work.

• Needs rigorous planning

• Must link the knowledge of

geologists, metallurgists, mine
planners and consultants
Courtesy of SGS Lakefield Research
 55

Sample Selection
All metallurgical test work is limited to the validity &
representativity of the sample(s) tested

Courtesy of SGS Lakefield Research

56

Representative Sample

• Representative sample (head sample): similar to the

mineable material

• This sample must be used to define all process

parameters, concentration routes and preliminary costs

• Many problems in the mining industry are caused by bad

choice of the head sample for process development
 57

Sampling
• Sampling to Establish Geological Reserves
‒Field samples
‒Drill cores
‒Bulk sampling (e.g. Trenches, Adits)

• Sampling to Develop/Evaluate Process Flow sheet

‒Representative head samples (bulk samples:
trenches, adits, composite sample from drill holes,
etc)
‒Tailing (provide good information about what is
wrong in the plant)
‒Concentrates

58

Considerations for Composite Samples

Criteria for composites or met mapping matrix

• Rock types(s)
• Alteration type(s)
• Mineralogy
• Head grade
• Oxidation state
• Mine plan
• Unusual occurrences
Courtesy of SGS Lakefield Research
 59

Composite samples are best, but…

Excessive compositing can

mask valuable metallurgical
response information and
give misleading conclusions
about actual plant
performance.

Courtesy of SGS Lakefield Research

60

Head Sample Collection

• Particle size (too much fines cause problems in tests)

• Grade (if it’s too low, the lab tests are not
representative)

• Ore oxidation (affects flotation testing)

• Contamination (oil could affect flotation)

• Different types of ore in the same mineral deposit

(hard to make a representative composite sample;
better test many different types separately)
 61

Process Mineralogy

Micrography of back-scattered electrons

Pyrite (Py) grain with

inclusions of
Galena (Ga)
Sphalerite (Sp)
Chalcopyrite (Cp)

Ref. MASc Thesis of Valerie Bertrand, DMMPE-UBC, Vancouver, 1998.

62

Mineralogical Studies
• Mineralogy characterizes the physical and chemical
characteristics of the ore-minerals and gangue-
minerals

• Mineralogical analyses identify the particle size at

which the ore-mineral is liberated from the gangue

• Properties of ore-minerals with respect to the gangue

can be measured/evaluated

• These factors largely determine the mineral

processes to be used in beneficiating the ore
 63

Mineralogical Studies

• Mineralogy: identification and quantification of

minerals to establish concentration and/or leaching
techniques

• Mineralogical factors: characteristics and

properties of minerals determine the technological
routes, mineral liberation, impurities, etc.

64

Importance of Mineralogical Studies

• Which valuable minerals can be concentrated?

• Which contaminants will be in the concentrate (penalties)?
• Which technology is available and suitable?
• What are the environmental impacts?
• Which market the product is suitable for?
• How much will be spent to produce saleable mineral products?
 65

Mineralogical Factors
• Mineral types
• Texture
• Grain shape
• Grain size
• Mineral associations
• Mineral surface
• Inclusions
• Crystal Structure
• Alteration Products
• Physical and Chemical Properties
• Porosity

66

Mineral Analysis Methods

• Hand Specimens (visual mineral identification)
• Rough Chemical Tests (e.g. fizz test)
• Physical Tests (e.g. scratch tests)
• Polarized Optical Microscopy
• X-ray Diffraction
• Electron Microscopy (Scanning & Transmission)
• Other Techniques: Thermal Analysis, Infrared
Spectrometry, X-ray Photoelectron (XPS), Auger
Spectroscopy
• Mineral Liberation Analysis
 67

Mineral Types
Classes Examples
Native Elements Gold, Au
Sulfides Pyrite, FeS2
Sulfosalts Enargite, Cu3AsS4
Oxides/Hydroxides Hematite, Fe2O3; Goethite, FeOOH
Halides Fluorite, CaF2
Carbonates Calcite, CaCO3
Nitrates Nitratite, NaNO3
Borates Borax, Na2B4O5(OH)4.8H2O
Phosphates Apatite, Ca5(PO4)3(F,Cl,OH)
Sulfates Barite, BaSO4
Tungstates Scheelite, CaWO4
Silicates Plagioclase, NaAlSi3O8-CaAl2Si2O8

68

Impurities and Inclusions

 69

Penalty Elements
Typical limits for Cu Concentrate

Pb <6%  It’s important to know where

Zn <5% are these elements in the
As <0.5% ore:
Ni <0.3% 
Sb <0.2% - Forming minerals
F  <0.1% - Structure of ore-minerals
Bi <0.05%
Cd < 0.05% - Structure of gangue-
Hg < 0.01% minerals

70

Specification Cu-concentrate
Escondida Mine, Chile
 71

Degree of Liberation

Mineral of interest 0.07 mm Mineral of interest

not liberated liberated

Assuming that the black particles are the mineral of

interest (ore-mineral)

72

Gravity Separation

High degree of
liberation
 73

Liberation
• Reduce particle size to improve liberation

74

Mineral Liberation and Separation

• Recovery and grade are
two measures of
separation performance.

• Recovery compares the

quantity of valuable metal
in the product stream with
that in the feed stream.

• Grade usually refers to

one stream, such as the
grade of the concentrate.
 75

76

MLA

Source: Teck
 77

MLA

Source: Teck

78

Grade – Recovery Relationship

Recovery (R%)

Grade of the
Concentrate (G)

0 Low High

Mass of Concentrate
 79

Grade – Recovery Curve

Trade-Off Between Grade and Recovery:
• Grade and recovery are interdependent for a given feed composition.
• Because liberation is usually incomplete, even in a well-run
separation unit, there is a trade-off between grade and recovery.
• If the grade of a product increases, recovery drops. If the grade
decreases, recovery rises.

80

Physical Properties
• Specific Gravity (ore reserve estimation, gravity
concentration)
• Moisture
• Magnetic and electrical properties
• Color/shape characteristics
• Specific surface area
• Degree of friability, hardness, toughness
• Particle Size
 81

Size Analysis
• Rotap with stack of sieves with largest sieve at the top.

• Mesh size is the number of openings per square inch (i.e.

larger mesh number corresponds to smaller size).

• Tyler Sieves, US Mesh Number, Canadian Mesh Number

• Convention is 2 series (successive meshes vary by 2)

82

US Sieve Tyler Equivalent Opening

Size mm in
- 2½ Mesh 8.00 0.312
- 3 Mesh 6.73 0.265
No. 3½ 3½ Mesh 5.66 0.233
No. 4 4 Mesh 4.76 0.187
No. 5 5 Mesh 4.00 0.157
No. 6 6 Mesh 3.36 0.132
No. 7 7 Mesh 2.83 0.111
No. 8 8 Mesh 2.38 0.0937
No.10 9 Mesh 2.00 0.0787
No. 12 10 Mesh 1.68 0.0661
No. 14 12 Mesh 1.41 0.0555
No. 16 14 Mesh 1.19 0.0469
No. 18 16 Mesh 1.00 0.0394
No. 20 20 Mesh 0.841 0.0331
No. 25 24 Mesh 0.707 0.0278
No. 30 28 Mesh 0.595 0.0234
No. 35 32 Mesh 0.500 0.0197
No. 40 35 Mesh 0.420 0.0165
No. 45 42 Mesh 0.354 0.0139
No. 50 48 Mesh 0.297 0.0117
No. 60 60 Mesh 0.250 0.0098
No. 70 65 Mesh 0.210 0.0083
No. 80 80 Mesh 0.177 0.0070
No.100 100 Mesh 0.149 0.0059
No. 120 115 Mesh 0.125 0.0049
No. 140 150 Mesh 0.105 0.0041
No. 170 170 Mesh 0.088 0.0035
No. 200 200 Mesh 0.074 0.0029 * 1.0 mm = 1000 microns (µm)
No. 230 250 Mesh 0.063 0.0025
No. 270 270 Mesh 0.053 0.0021
No. 325 325 Mesh 0.044 0.0017
No. 400 400 Mesh 0.037 0.0015
 83

Sieve Analysis Report

Sieve Size Individual Cumulative Cumulative
% Retained % Retained % Passing
Sieve fraction Weight Aperture size
(µm) (g) (µm)

+210 0.75 210 0.3 0.3 99.7

-210 + 149 6.25 149 2.5 2.8 97.2
-149 + 105 45.51 105 18.2 21 79.0
-105 + 74 63.01 74 25.2 46.2 53.8
-74 + 53 41.80 53 16.7 62.9 37.1
- 53 + 44 13.01 44 5.2 68.1 31.9
-44 + 37 12.50 37 5.0 73.1 26.9
- 37 67.25 26.9
Total 250.08 100.0

84

Cummulative % passing vs. particle size

100
90
Cumulative % passing

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
20 100 500
Particle size [microns]
 85

Particle Size Distributions Equations

• Determining PSD is laborious and repetitive

• Typical particle size distributions belong to families of curves,

with normal, or log-normal distributions

• You can represent data with mathematical functions, using a

small number of parameters.

• The coefficients of the mathematical equation can be used to

monitor operations or can be used in models for process
simulation.

• The two mathematical functions used most commonly in

mineral processing are the Gaudin-Schuhmann and the
Rosin-Rammler equations.

86

Gaudin-Schuhmann Equation

where, Wp = Cumulative percent passing

X = size in microns
K = size modulus (size at Wp = 100)
(measure of top size)
m = distribution modulus (slope of
log-log plot of Wp vs X)

The coefficients can be determined graphically or from

linear regression. The function is most appropriate for
coarse, crushed material, which has been screened at
some top size.
 87

Rosin-Rammler Function

where, Wr = cumulative weight percent retained on X

X = size in microns
a = size at which (100/exp) = 36.8% of
particles are retained
b = constant
(slope of plot of ln ln(100/Wr) vs ln x)

Special graph paper available to plot cum. % retained values

directly on the Y-axis. A line at cum.% retained = 36.8 is included
for estimation of “a”

Originally developed for coal, but fits many mineral size

distributions very well, especially finely ground material (e.g. ball
mill product)

88

Generated using Matlab,

2010
 89

Particle Size Analysis Methods

• Sieving (wet/dry)
• Cyclosizer
• Coulter Counter (Elzone PSA)
• Laser beam diffraction methods (Malvern)
• Sedimentation Methods -Andreassen Pipette

The resultant particle size depends on method used

• particle size that passes through a sieve
• equivalent spherical diameter of a settling particle

90

Particle Size Analysis Methods

Gupta et al, 2006

 91

Assay / Chemical Analysis Methods

• Wet chemical assays

• Fire assays
• Atomic Absorption
• Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma Emission
Spectroscopy (ICP)
• X-ray Fluorescence Analysis

92

Size-Assay Analysis – Grain Size

Sieve size Wt retained Au DAu
(mesh) (%) (ppm) (%)
+6 3.31 8.60 10.87
-6 +8 4.50 7.00 12.02
-8 +10 7.80 4.09 12.18
-10 +14 6.70 3.45 8.82 83% of gold
-14 +20 6.75 4.01 10.33 + 48 mesh
-20 +28 8.90 2.70 9.17
-28 +35 9.80 2.93 10.96
-35 +48 8.90 2.54 8.63
-48 +65 6.02 0.81 1.86
-65 +100 6.20 1.36 3.22
-100 +150 7.55 0.98 2.82
-150 +200 6.30 0.82 1.97
-200 +270 5.97 1.12 2.55
-270 +400 6.30 1.13 2.72
-400 5.00 0.98 1.87
Total 100.00 2.62 100.00

Not necessarily coarse: Au can be fine but not liberated

 93

Metallurgical Testing

• The behavior of a sample under a well-defined set of

chemical and physical conditions

• The technically and economically optimum conditions

for concentration or separation to specific project
requirements, and

• The ultimate plant design incorporating well-informed

selections of processing unit operations, equipment
types and sizes, materials of construction and physical
arrangements

McNulty, T.P., Mineral Processing Plant Design, Practice and Control, SME 2002

94

Metallurgical Testing

• Grain Size Analysis

• Assays (grades)
• Geotechnical properties
• Bond Work Index Determinations
• Abrasion Tests
• Concentration Tests (Flotation, Gravity, etc)
• Leaching Tests
 95

Metallurgical Testing
• In Bench Scale
‒ Evaluate and Monitor Process Performance
‒ Evaluate Changes to Process Prior to
Implementing
‒ Reagents (quality and quantity)
• Equipment Selection Based on Parameters Obtained
in the Bench Scale and Mineralogical Studies

96

Pilot Testing - Purpose

• Verify processes in a continuous operation
• Identify differences between batch bench and full scale
continuous
• batch versus continuous grinding
• circuit stability
• Provide scale-up information
• Bench  Pilot  Full Scale
• Evaluate and test equipment designs and processes
• To test conditions on large scale
• To evaluate new equipment
• Confirmation of material and energy balances, equipment
selection and plant design
• Produce adequate sample size for downstream testing
 97

Simplified
Process
Flowsheet

Cerro Verde

98

Process Development - Overview

• Review pertinent background information
• Sampling (representative sample)
• Obtain good mineralogical information
• Evaluate concentration possibilities/ alternatives (lab
tests)
• Determine important process information
• Economic evaluation of process alternatives
• Process optimization
• Pilot testing?
• Process plant design and feasibility study
 99

Process Plant Design - Objectives

• Review the major steps in process development.

• Introduce the key documents a process design 
engineer must be familiar with.

100

Project Phases
TYPICAL PROJECT PHASES

STUDIES

FRONT-END ENGINEERING

DETAILED ENGINEERING

PROCUREMENT

CONSTRUCTION

STARTUP

Typical Total Project Duration About 2-3 Years

 101

Actual Project Phases

STUDIES

FRONT-END ENGINEERING

DETAILED ENGINEERING

PROCUREMENT

CONSTRUCTION

STARTUP

Project Duration: ASAP

102

100
90 A Order of magnitude
80 B Preliminary Feasibility
70 C Bankable standard
60 D Definitive
% Progress

50 Preparation period

Project 40
30
20

Definition 10
0

A B C D
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% Engineering & Design Duration

50
Probable Accu racy W/O contingency

Order of magnitude estimate

40

Preliminary Feasibility Estimate

30
Bankable Standard

20 Definitive Estimate
Mechanical Completion
Project
10 Completion

0
Project Definition
 103

Studies / Conceptual Engineering

 Developing project requirements, proposing & optimizing 
solutions, estimating the costs, and evaluating the 
economics of a project
 Conceptual work such as developing configurations and 
material balances.
 Conceptual engineering work such as developing 
preliminary material balances and process flow diagrams.

104

Project Phases – Front End Engineering

 Preliminary Engineering

 Completing first-pass process, control systems, and mechanical

engineering design activities.

 Developing cost estimates for the project.

 Supporting environmental studies and permitting.

 What documents would typically be prepared for Front-End Engineering?

 Design Basis and Scope, PFDs, Material Balance

 Material Selection Diagrams, Plot Plan (layout), P&IDs
 Equipment Data Sheets, Instrument Data Sheets, Utility Balances
 105

Project Phases – Detailed Engineering

 Completing the process, control systems, piping,

structural, and electrical design. Incorporating vendor
information. Procurement of equipment and bulk
items.
 What additional documents would typically be
prepared for Detailed Engineering?
 Isometrics (piping design), Structural Drawings,
Electrical Drawings.

106

Project Phases - Construction

 Building and testing

 Engineering responsibilities include:

 Supporting construction questions and changes.

 Completing field checkout and developing punch
lists.
 Supporting testing of equipment and systems (Pre-
operations).
 107

Project Phases - Startup

 Commissioning and starting unit operation

 Engineering responsibilities include:
 Operator training
 Supporting operations during startup
 Monitoring startup and unit operation
 Supporting performance tests.

108

Typical Engineering Documents

• Process flow diagrams
• P&IDs
• Process data sheets
• Plot Plan/Layout
• Equipment list
• Design criteria
• Piping Line list
• Equipment specifications and
vessel sketches
• Utility requirements
• Soils data
• Design specifications (all
accounts)
• Sewer and paving layouts
• Concrete, steel & building
drawings/sketches
• Piping drawings/sketches: alloy
large dia. C.S., special fabrication
• Motor list
• Single-line wiring diagrams
• Area classification (electrical)
• Electrical equipment specifications
• Conduit/cable schedules
• Electrical design drawings/layouts
• Instrument list
• Insulation schedules (equipment
and piping)
 109

Design Criteria
• Set basis for all design and calculations

• Criteria cover
‒life of mine
‒throughputs
‒wastes
‒operating parameters
‒maintenance schedules
‒feed properties
‒product qualities
‒+++

110

Design Criteria - Example

 111

Equipment Specifications - Example

112

P&IDs
Diagram which shows the piping of the process flow
together with the installed equipment and instrumentation
Process and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs):
- Schematic representation of the equipment, piping,
and instrumentation of a plant
- Formal documentation of a plant engineering design.
P&IDs are required by authorities in many areas of the
world.
 113

P&ID Development

• Input
‒Process Flow Diagrams
‒Process Description
‒Design Criteria
‒Equipment Datasheet
‒Instrument Datasheet
‒Line sizing
‒Piping Spec

114

P&ID Development - Basic Steps

 Conduct The Joint P&id Review

 Issue For Hazop Review
 Issue For Design
 Issue For Construction
 Issue P&IDs For Record
Flow Sheet - Ball Mill Circuit

115

116

P&ID Ball Mill

 117

Process Design - Summary

• Different project stages include:
‒Studies
‒Front-end engineering (feasibility)
‒Detailed Engineering
‒Construction
‒Commissioning

• At each stage metallurgists create and provide definition for

the project, including the following key documents:
‒Process flow diagrams (Flow sheets)
‒Material Balances (Mass Balances)
‒Design criteria
‒Equipment specifications
‒P&IDs

118

COMMINUTION
TECHNOLOGIES
 119

Objectives
• Understand basic principles of comminution
• Review common comminution equipment
• Review common comminution circuits

120

Introduction
Def: Comminution is the size reduction of solid materials through
the application of energy, usually by means of mechanical forces.

Objectives:
• To liberate valuable minerals from waste prior to concentration

• To increase surface area available for chemical reaction (e.g. lime,

leaching processes)
•
• To produce minerals particles of required size and shape (e.g.
industrial mineral products)

1st stage of comminution: Blasting

 121

Comminution – Process Significance

‒Power Requirements
• Typically accounts for 30% - 50% of total plant
• For hard ores, up to 70%

‒Operating costs – typically 50%

‒Capital costs – 20-50%

‒Only a small percentage of power actually used for

comminution:
• Grinding efficiency may be as low as 1%
• Most energy is used transferring heat to the ore.

122

Breakage Mechanisms

1. Impact
2. Compression
3. Abrasion
4. Chipping

Crushing – Impact/Compression
Grinding – Abrasion/Chipping
 123

Crushing Circuits

Crushing:
• Relatively Coarse Sizes
• Usually include screening equipment
• Usually dry process

Three classes:
• Primary
• Secondary
• Tertiary

124

Primary Crushers

• Jaw Crusher
• Gyratory Crusher
• Roll Crushers
• Impact Crushers
 125

Jaw Crusher

126

Gyratory Crusher
 127

Impact Crusher

128

Roll Crusher - MMD Sizer

 129

Secondary Crushers

• Reduction Gyratory Crusher

• Cone Crusher
• Hammer Mil
• Impact Crushers

130

Cone Crusher
 131

Hammer Mill

132

Impact Crusher
 133

Tertiary Crushers

• Roll Crusher
• Short Head Cone Crusher
• High Pressure Roll Crusher
• Impact Crusher
• Hammer Mill
• Finer Reduction Gyratory Crusher 

134

High Pressure Grinding

Roll - HPGR
 135

HPGR Roll

136

Grinding Equipment
Producing relatively Fine Product Sizes - Usually include
size classification equipment – typically hydrocyclones

Tumbling Mills
• Autogenous (AG) Mills
• Semi-autogenous (SAG) Mills
• Rod Mills
• Ball Mills
• Stirred Mills
‒Tower Mills
‒Vertical Pin Mills
‒Horizontal Pin Mills
 137

Ball Mills

138

Horizontal Stirred (Bead) Mills - ISA

 139

Circulating Load
• Open Circuit
Feed Product
Comminution

• Closed Circuit
Feed Product
Size
Comminution
Classification

Oversize

Circulating load expressed as a percentage of new feed :
CL =  100 x O/F

140

Sizing Classification Technologies

Screens
‒ Static grizzlys
‒ Inclined vibrating
‒ Sieve Bends

Size Classifiers
‒ Cyclones
‒ Hydraulic
‒ Rake/spiral
 141

Plant Availability
• Plant availability is the percentage amount of time the plant
is actually running.

• If a plant is designed to produce a set tonnage, a certain

amount of downtime for maintenance must be planned.

• Example: 100,000 tpd design at:

‒90% availability; tph = 100,000 tpd/24 h/0.90 = 4,629 tph
‒100% availability: tph = 100,000/24 = 4,167 tph

142

Availability Example – Ball Mill Screens

Plant Availability 93%

Circulating Load 90%

Ore S.G. 2.75

Screen Operating
Density (wt %
solids) 50%
Ball Mill Screen
Feed % Solids 94%
Ball Mill Screen O/S
% Solids 90%
Ball Mill Screen
Undersize (t/d) 13,500
Screen Deck Sprays
(m3/h) 200

Feed Grade (%Cu) 0.64

Mass Balance

Solids (dry basis) Water Wet basis Copper

t/d Avg t/h S.G. t/h % Solids S.G. m3/h % Cu

 143

Myra Falls
- Crushing
Circuit

144

Myra Falls
- Grinding Circuit
 145

Highland Valley Copper

146

Highland Valley Copper AG Mills

 147

Highland Valley Copper SAG Mills

148

Cerro Verde – Crushing Circuit

 149

Cerro Verde – HPGR Grinding Circuit

150
 151

Sampling

152

Definition
Sampling is the process of securing, in either weight or a
sample, a representative fraction / lot for some purpose such
as assaying.

Basic Rule for Correct Sampling

Each particle of ore or concentrate must have an equal
probability of being collected and becoming part of the final
sample for analysis
 153

Sampling
• Sampling for feasibility
– Field samples
– Drill core
– Bulk sampling
• Trenching
• Mined sample

• Plant /Operations sampling

― ROM samples

― Head samples

― Mill feed

― Crusher, mill, cons & tailings samples

154

Why do we want to sample a plant?

• Determine material characteristics

hardness, abrasivity, BWI, angle of repose
• Assess size distributions
• Obtain samples for assay
- Determine Feed, Concentrate Grade
- Mass Balances
- Assess Process Performance (Recovery)
- Estimate Metal Production
- Identify deleterious elements
 155

Representative Sample
– precision, accuracy and confidence

Repeat 2 Mean Precision

ASSAY

Repeat 1
Accuracy

True Value

Sample

156

Accuracy and Precision

 157

Sample Variance
From Statistics, recall that for a set of values y1, y2…yn, the
mean value is: n

y i
y i 1
n
and the variance of x is:
Var(Y) = s2 =  (Yi – Y)2/(n-1)
Where, s is the standard deviation.
n-1 = the degrees of freedom

For several sets of results, the variance of the mean value is:

Var(Y)= s2/n (1)

n - number of sample increments

s - standard deviation associated with

determining Y

158

Confidence Interval
The true mean can be expressed as the estimated mean
plus/minus a confidence interval as indicated in the following
expression.
µ = Y ± t,1-V(Y)1/2 (2)

µ - true mean value

Y- estimated mean value
t,1- - t-statistic at
 degrees of freedom, and
 probability
(see statistic reference)

Equations (1) and (2), can be used to determine number of

increments for a desired precision

n = [t,1-s/(µ-Y)]2 (3)
 159

Example 1- Precision and Accuracy

Determine the standard deviation and the 95%
confidence interval for the following Au grades.

Assay Au (g/t)
1 5.45
2 4.73
3 4.66
4 5.39
5 4.71
Mean 4.99

160

Example – Confidence Interval

V(Y) = S2 = (Yi - Y)2/(n-1)
S = 0.396

Y = Y ± t,1-V(Y)1/2 [Eq. 2]
 = n-1 = 4
 = 0.95

from table of t-statistics

t,1- = t4,0.05 = 2.776

therefore,
Y = 4.99 ± 2.776x0.396
Y = 4.99 ± 1.099 g/t Au
 161

Example 2 - Confidence
Estimate the number of samples required, at 95%
confidence, to obtain a difference of not more than 0.1 g/t
Au between the true mean assay estimate and the
estimated mean. Assume infinite degrees of freedom.

n = [t,1-S/(µ-Y)]2 [Eq. 3]

(µ-Y) < 0.1 g/t Au

from t-statistic table

t, 0,0.95 = 1.96
use calculated S,
S = 0.396

162

Example 2 - Confidence
Therefore, the number of increments required is:

n = (1.96x0.396/0.1)2

n = 60.2 increments or cuts of a stream.

Similarly,
Max. Difference Number of Samples
0.2 g/t 15.1 (15)
0.3 g/t 6.7 (7)
0.4 g/t 3.8 (4)
 163

Sample Size for Desired Precision,

Accuracy and Confidence – Gy’s Method

W = C x [d3/σ2]
Sampling Error Variance determined by Pierre Gy, 1982
σ2 = Cd3/W
Where,
σ2 - sampling error variance
C - sampling constant which is a
function of material characteristics.
d - nominal top size, cm
W - sample mass, g

164

Gy’s Method
Sampling Constant, C
C = fgmL
f - shape factor
g - size distribution factor
m - mineral composition factor
L - liberation factor

Re-arranging the equation, provides an expression

for sample size.
W= fgmLd3/S2
 165

f – Shape factor

f=1 f = 0.5 f = 0.1 f = 0.2

g – size distribution factor

Wide range in size (d0.95/d0.05 >4); g = 0.25

Medium range in size (2 < d0.95/d0.05 <4); g = 0.50
Small range in size (1 < d0.95/d0.05 <2); g = 0.75
Uniform size - pulverized (d0.95/d0.05 = 1); g = 1.0

166

m – mineralogical composition factor

m = (1-a) [(1-a)m + ag]/a (units – g/cm3)

where a = fractional average mineral content

m = specific gravity of the mineral
g = specific gravity of the gangue
 167

l – liberation factor

l = (dL/d)0.5
dL= Liberation size
d = 95% passing size

Francois-Bongarcon and Gy (2002) proposed general

form of l=(dL/d)b

- where in the case of gold mineralization, the value of b

is almost always experimentally found close to 1.5

168

Example

Information is given for a copper/gold process.

If W= fgmLd3/S2

What size sample should be obtained for assay?

a. Mill discharge
b. Flotation feed
 169

Mill details

Ore type Massive sulphide copper

Feed Rate 2500 tpd
Mill Discharge 95%-0.1 cm
Flotation Feed Size 95% -48 mesh (0.0297 cm)
Flotation Pulp Density 40% solids.
Liberation size, d1 200 mesh (0.0074 cm)
m (CuFeS2) 4.2 g /cm3
g (gangue) 2.7g /cm3
Sampling error <0.01% Cu (0.0289%CuFeS2)

%Cu ore = Atomic weight of Cu x % Chalcopyrite in ore

Mol. Wt. Chalcopyrite

170

a. Find f - Particle Shape Factor

f = 0.5 for most ores, f= 0.2 for Au ores

b.Find g - Size Distribution Factor

select according to ratio d/d’
d - top size; d’ - lower size (5% passing size)
d/d’ g
>4 0.25
24 0.5
<2 0.75
1 1.00
Mill discharge d = 1000 µm d’ = 100 µm
Flotation feed d = 300 µm d’ = 20 µm
g = 0.25
 171

c. Find m-Mineralogical Factor

m = (1-a) [(1-a)m + ag]/a

From mineralogical analysis, chalcopyrite grade

estimated to be 1%
for a = 0.01
m = 414.3

d. Find L – Liberation Factor: L = (dL/d)0.5

Mill Discharge: L = (0.0074/0.1)0.5= 0.272

Flotation Feed: L= (0.0074/0.0297)0.5 = 0.50

172

e. Calculate W – sample mass

W = fgmLd3/ S2

Gy recommends a factor of 2 to 3 times larger than

calculated

f. Calculate pulp volume

Flotation Feed @ 40% solids
Volume ore = 24,366/2.7 = 9,024 mL
Volume water = 1.5 x 24,366/1.0 = 36,549 mL

Total Volume = 45.57 L

 173

Comparison of Sample Sizes

Parameter Mill Discharge Flotation Feed

d (cm) 0.1 0.0297
S2 8.35 x 10-8 8.35 x 10-8
f 0.5 0.5
g 0.25 0.25
m 414.3 414.3
L 0.272 0.499
W (kg) 168.6 8.12
Gy x factor of 3 505.8 24.4

174

If the desired copper assay to be within +/- X% Cu, how

do you calculate desired value of s?
a) Select desired sampling accuracy e.g. +/- 0.05% Cu, 95
out of 100 times

b) For a probability of 95%, the number of standard

deviations needed to give the above confidence level
is1.96 (For 99%, it is 2.576)

c) Then 1.96s = ao/a

where ao is desired sampling accuracy (0.05% Cu)
a is the Cu assay in the ore
 175

Coning and Quartering

176

Jones Riffle splitter

 177

Jones Riffle splitter

178

Jones Riffle splitter for -1 cm

 179

Rotary splitter

180

Sampling system

• Regular increment
• Uniform speed
• Normal direction
• Proper cutter
• Minimize error
 181

182

Crushing
 183

Overview - Crushing

• Applications
• Crusher features & terminology
• Primary crushing
• Secondary and tertiary crushing
• Crusher selection

184

Crushing & Screening – Part 1

Introduction
Terminology
Crushing Principles
Crusher Types
 I 185

Introduction– why do we crush?

• Improve material handling characteristics

• Generate products of a particular size fraction – e.g.

aggregates

• Prepare for downstream processes – increase surface

area, reaction rate, match feed properties

186

Applications
 187

Preparation of heap leach dumps

Primary Gyratory Crusher

Open Pit
(oxides)

Conveyor

O/S

Screen

Heap Leach Heap

To leach or U/S
Pressure OX

188

ROM/Overland conveyor

Primary Crusher

Mill Feed Bin

Secondary Crushers

Prepare mill feed product

 189

Terminology
F80 – 80% passing size fraction in feed F80
P80 – 80% passing size fraction in
product
Gape
Gape – feed opening dimension
OSS – maximum jaw gap at discharge
CSS- minimum jaw gap at discharge
Throw = OSS - CSS
Mechanical reduction ratio = Gape/OSS
(jaw)
CSS
or Gape/CSS (cone/gyratory) OSS
Particle reduction ratio = f80/p80

P80 P80

190

Terminology
Frame
Pitman
Jaw
Bowl
Mantle
Toggle
Eccentric
Liners
 191

Types of Crushers
• Jaw Crusher
• Gyratory crusher
• Cone crusher
‒Standard
‒Short-head
• Roll crushers
‒Single roll
‒Double roll
• Impact Crusher (interparticle crusher)
• Hammer mills

192

Features
Jaw Crusher
‒Spec by throat dimensions
eg 80x60in
‒Sized by max particle size
in feed
‒Gape 440-1200mm
‒Feed ~ 80% gape
‒OSS > P80 > CSS
‒Reduction ratio ~ 5:1 max
‒45-250 kW
‒10-1600 tph
‒Prefer blocky, coarse
material, can be wet
‒Robust, simple, compact
design
‒Manual or semi-auto
operation
 193

Jaw Crusher

194

Features
Gyratory Crusher
‒Specify by Gape/Mantle
dimension e.g. 60x102in
‒Sized by throughput
‒Gape 0.7-2,5m
‒Max feed size 80% of
gape
‒P80 ~ OSS
‒Reduction ratio ~ 8:1 max
‒500 – 7000 tph
‒200 – 1000 kW+, mantle ~
100rpm
‒Can accept wide range of
feed types
‒Expensive and complex
vs. jaw, but higher
throughput
‒Manual or auto operation
 195

Gyratory Crusher
196

Gyratory Crusher
 197

Cone Crusher
Features
‒ Spec by mantle diameter, e.g. 6ft
‒ Sized by product spec & throughput
‒ F80 - 50% of mean gape
‒ P80~CSS (fine)
- Theoretical reduction ratio can be
13:1 max, prefer 3:1
- 90-650 tph typical
- 45-350kW , up to 750kW
- Compact but complex, higher shaft
speeds, finer applications only
- Automatic operation only

198

Roll Crushers – MMD Sizer

Features
‒Softer materials (coal and
chrome)
‒In-pit and underground sizing
for material handling
‒High throughputs in soft
material
‒Single- or double rolls
‒Allows fines to fall through
‒F80 0,3 – 2m
‒‘Coarse’ product profile, low
reduction ratio
 199

Impact Crushers and Hammer Mills

• Interparticle crushing
• Softer materials
• Lower throughput, 5 – 100 tph
• Low wear / unit throughput
• Require dry, regular sized feed

200

Crushing – Part 2

Primary Crusher 
selection
‒ Duty & Capacity
‒ Feed characteristics
‒ Product requirements
Worked examples
 201

Primary Crusher Duties

• Primary crusher feed – variable tonnage, topsize, size

distribution
• Product requirements not usually strict
• Typically prepare feed for conveying, stockpiling, or feed
preparation for secondary crush
• Capacity dependent on feed size, Work index, crusher size,
speed, throw, CSS

202

Selection parameters
• Duty • P80
• Feed arrangement • Work Index
• Location • Abrasion Index
• Topsize • Hardness
• F80 • Product size distribution –
• Fines/Clay preferred sizes
• Throughput • Discharge arrangement
 203

Crushing Principles
• Understand feed characteristics
‒Throughput (tons per hour)
‒Size distribution (f80)
‒Work Index (kWh/ton)
‒Abrasion & Hardness (Mohs or or mass-loss test)
‒Moisture content (%H2O by mass)
• Understand desired product properties
‒Number of products (separate size fractions)
‒Size distribution – p80 = f80 to next process
• Crushing is a route from one state to the other

204

Crushing Principles
Power Estimate

From Comminution Theory:

Wi = 10BWi(1/√p80-1/√f80)
Where Wi = specific work index
BWi = Bond Work Index for material

Power = k (Q x Wi )
Where k = 0,75 (primary), 1 (secondary)
Q = throughput

Apply safety factors for surge, feed size variation, environment

~ maybe 25-30%
 205

Crusher Selection

206

Typical Crusher Ranges

 207

Preliminary Crushing Sizing

1. Estimate Free Run in Feed (if screened prior to
crushing)
2. Estimate Crusher Capacity
3. Estimate F80 and P80
4. Estimate Power Requirements
5. Determine top size
6. Select crusher

208

Jaw Crusher Selection

• Example: • See Metso Handbook:

Quartzite – BWI ~ 12 kWh/t Gape = Topsize/80%
Throughput = 200 tph CSS < p80 < OSS
f80 = 300 mm, topsize Choose crusher
450mm
Feed – decline conveyor Check capacity
• Discharge to secondary cone Size motor
~ f80 = 80mm
 209

Jaw Crusher Selection

Jaw
CSS ~ P80 ~ 80 mm
F80 300000um Top size, 450 mm
P80 80000um Top size = 80% gape
Q 200t/h Gape = 563 mm
BWi 12kWh/t
Wi 0.205kWh/t Metso C-Series Jaw
k 0.75 Crusher:
SF 1.3 C106
P 40.0kW

210

Typical arrangement
 211

Features Gyratory Crusher

‒Specify by Gape/Mantle
dimension e.g. 60x102in
‒Sized by throughput
‒Gape 0.7-2,5m
‒Max feed size 80% of gape
‒P80 ~ OSS
‒Reduction ratio ~ 8:1 max
‒500 – 7000 tph
‒200 – 1000 kW+, mantle ~
100rpm
‒Can accept wide range of
feed types
‒Expensive and complex vs.
jaw, but higher throughput
‒Manual or auto operation

212

Preliminary Crushing Sizing

1. Estimate Free Run in Feed (if screened prior to

crushing)
2. Estimate Crusher Capacity
3. Estimate F80 and P80
4. Estimate Power Requirements
5. Determine top size
6. Select crusher
 213

Gyratory Crusher Selection

Example:
Copper Porphyry Ore – BWI ~ 15 kWh/t
Plant design throughput = 50,000 tpd
Crusher operating time = 7 x 2 x 8 hr shifts/week.
F80 = 420mm, top size 1200mm
Feed = haul truck
Discharge – overland conveyor ~ 150mm

214

Gyratory Selection - Example

F80 420000um
P80 150000um
Q 3125t/h
BWi 15kWh/t
Wi 0.156kWh/t
k 0.75
SF 1.3
P 475kW
Top Size 1200mm
Gape 1500mm
 215

Gyratory Crusher Capacities

Source: Metso Crushing Handbook

216

Gyratory Selection - Example

F80 420000um
P80 150000um
Q 3125t/h
BWi 15kWh/t
Wi 0.156kWh/t Metso: 62-75
k 0.75 Gyratory, increase
SF 1.3 availability or move
P 475kW to 165 OSS.
Top Size 1200mm
Gape 1500mm

Typical Arrangement
Summary: Jaw vs Gyratory
Jaw
• Lower max capacity, f80
than gyratory
• Compact, robust, cheap
• Must screen out fines
• Prefer reduction ratio ~ 3:1
• Limited by feed
arrangement
217
218
Gyratory
• Highest capacity, f80
• Complex, robust, expensive,
but low cost/tph
• Can accept high fines ratio
• Better reduction ratio
• Accepts all feed methods
• Discharge arrangement needs
care – high tph
 219

Screening:
Features, Design

220

Objective

• Understand principles of screening

• Review screening equipment
• Learn how to size a screen.
 221

Purpose of Screening
Definition:
- Screening is a mechanical process which accomplishes a
separation of particles on the basis of size and their
acceptance or rejection by a screening surface.

• Prepares products of appropriate sizes for downstream

process or final sale.

• Efficiency is determined by the perfection of separation

based on the aperture size.

222

Screening

• Effective from 300mm to 40μm

• Less efficient at finer sizes
• Typically:
‒Dry screening >5 mm
‒Wet screening <250μm
 223

Screening Applications

Metso

224

Screening Applications
• Scalping (oversize rejection)
• Sizing
‒Oversize / recycle
‒Intermediate sizes, feed splitting
‒Final sizing (mill product screens)
• Feed preparation
• Dense media recovery screens (Drain and Rinse Screens)
• Dewatering/desliming
• Trash removal
 Screening Theory 225

• Screen Bed

226

Screening Principles
A - feed zone
B - stratification Saturated zone
C - separation

C B A

f, a

Oversize Undersize

L
 227

Particle flow rate through deck

related to screen length
Zones
a. Feed
b. Stratification
c. Separation

228

Screening Mass Balances

F=200 t/h
fx = 0.7
ox = 0.2
O?
U?
 229

Mass Balance Example

•F=O+U
• Ffx = Oox + U

• If F = 200 t/h, fx = 0.7, ox = 0.2, determine O, U.

‒O = F(1-fx)/(1-ox)
‒O = 200(1-0.7)/(1-0.2)
‒O = 75 t/h
‒Solve for U
‒U = 125 t/h

230

Screen Efficiency

• Undersize Removal Efficiency in Oversize

 F (1  f x ) 
Eu     (1  ox )
 O  (1)

Example. Eu = 80%
• Efficiency of Undersize Recovery

 U   f x  ox 
Ru    
(2)

 x   f x (1  ox ) 
Ff
Ex. Ru = 89%
 231

Types of Screens
• Vibrating Screens
‒Inclined,
‒Grizzly,
‒Horizontal,
‒Dewatering,
‒Banana screens
• Static
‒Self cleaning grizzly
‒Trommel
‒Linear

232

Screen Types
Scalping screen Multi-deck screen

Linear Screen Trommel

 233

Features

Feed plate Side

plates

Flow

Frame
Drive
Top deck
2nd deck
3rd deck

234

Screen Surfaces/Medium
Surface Characteristics:
• Must withstand stress and loads, and be abrasion and
corrosion resistant.
Materials:
• Monel, stainless steel, abrasion resistant high carbon steels,
rubber, and reinforced polyurethane.
Best surfaces provide:
• -Required opening size and capacity
• -Wear resistances
• -Minimum replacement cost per unit of throughput
 235

Woven wire cloth -all sizes:

Media Selection

Rail grizzly bars Poly panels – wear

and corrosion
- coarse sizes: resistant, medium fine
to medium coarse

Wedge wire
- fine and
difficult
screening duty

236

Screen Aperture Shapes

• Square: coarse applications, accurate sizing

• Rectangular / Parallel: - higher capacity (higher area),

less susceptible to blinding, suited to needle shape
particles, good for high moisture ores with clay.

• Rectangular / Perpendicular - less blinding for dry

screening, longer screen life, higher efficiency.
 237

Screen Surfaces

Woven Wire - Traditional

Profile Wire/Bar
• Parallel to flow used for coarse screening
• Perpendicular to flow used for wet fine screening,
desliming and dewatering.
Perforated plate
• Pros: high wear resistance, less blinding, higher
efficiency, higher accuracy.
• Cons: more expensive, less open area
• Polyurethane/rubber screens now standard:
‒less expensive, robust

238

Influence of Variables on Screen

Performance
• Screen Area/Open Area
‒Effective Area < Actual Area
‒Capacity ∝ screen area

• For a given area

‒Capacity ∝ width
‒Efficiency ∝ length

• Length is usually 2 to 3 times width

• Best capacity and efficiency when solids 1 particle layer in

depth at end of screen
 239

Influence of Variables on Screen

Performance
• Aperture Size/Shape
‒  aperture size,  capacity
‒  aperture size,  efficiency
‒  aperture size,  blinding

• Slope
‒  slope,  capacity
‒  slope,  effective aperture size
‒  slope, Constant Efficiency up to Critical Slope, then .
‒Typical Slopes: 20 - 25

240

Influence of Variables on Screen

Performance
• Deck Motion (Speed/Throw)
‒Purpose: To lift material causing stratification and
conveying of particles.
‒Vibration: Inflow vs. Counter Flow, circular/elliptical motion
‒Amplitudes: Typical 3-15 mm
‒Frequency: Normal 700-1000 cycles/min
‒Frequency: High Speed 3600 cycles/min
 241

Influence of Variables on Screen

Performance
• Amplitude:
‒Too small allows blinding
‒Too large reduces efficiency
‒Too large reduces bearing life

• Elliptical Circular Motion

‒In flow increases capacity
‒In flow may decrease efficiency
‒Counter flow decreases capacity
‒Counter flow increases efficiency
‒Counter flow may increase blinding

242

Influence of Variables on Screen

Performance
• Speed:
‒High speed used with small throws, small particles
‒Low speeds used with large throws, large particles
 243

Properties of Feed Material

• Particle Size/Shape/Distribution
‒At fixed screen opening  particle size,  Capacity

• Near size particles = 0.5 to 1.5 of screen size.

‒Amount of near size is rate determining
‒  near size,  capacity,  blinding,  efficiency
‒To maximize capacity,  exposure of fines and near size
to screen

• Use upper screen deck to reduce oversize, ensure good

stratification, optimize throw

244

Properties of Feed Material

• Moisture Content
‒Moisture + Clay leads to agglomeration and blinding
‒In severe cases:
• can heat wire screen,
• Switch to wet screen
• Add rubber ball tray under screen
 245

Properties of Feed Material

• Feed Rate/Bed Depth

‒Bed depth = function of (Feed rate, slope, size distribution,
circulation direction)
‒Bed depth increases with increasing feed rate
‒Screen width selected to maintain bed depth at discharge,
therefore screen width determines capacity.

246

Screen Sizing and Selection

Two methods presented (many more exist):

1. VSMA Screening Surface Area Calculation,

Developed collaboratively by VSMA, screen
manufacturers to ensure consistency and compatibility of
screening equipment. Based on theoretical surface area
of a ‘perfect’ screen in an application.

2. Metso Handbook
 247

Screen Sizing and Selection

Screening Area = US
A x B x C x D x E x F x d x SF
• Where:
US = undersize tonnage (t/h)
A = basic capacity (m3/h/m2)
B = oversize percentage factor (of the deck concerned)
C = efficiency screening factor
D = halfsize percentage factor (of the deck concerned)
E = efficiency screening factor for wet screening
F = deck factor
d = bulk density (t/m3)
SF = free area factor
• In calculating SA, other factors are important:
M = split (mm)
OS = oversize tonnage (t/h)
HS = half size tonnage (t/h)

248

Screening Unit
Efficiency and Capacity
Select:

Factor A = basic capacity for woven wire cloth

Factor E = efficiency screening factor for wet screening
Factor C = screening efficiency factor
normal screening C = 1
high efficiency screening C = 0.8
light screening C = 1.2
Factor F = deck factor
1st deck F = 1
2nd deck F = 0.9
3rd deck F = 0.8
4th deck F = 0.7
 249

Oversize and
Undersize
Factors

250

Free Screening
Area and Efficiency
 251

SF –
Surface Factor

252

Check Bed Depth

If the motion is with
flow: Bed depth at end of deck :
s = 1100 m/h = 0,3
m/s
If the motion is D= OS
counterflow: lds
Where
s = 800 m/h = 0,22
D = bed depth (m)
m/s
OS = oversize tonnage (t/h)
Average screen l = screen width (m)
Dry process, we d = bulk density (t/m3)
must have D < 4 x s = material travel speed (m/h)
aperture
Wet process, we
must have D < 6 x
aperture
 253

Choosing media aperture

and material for application
Relief deck
• can be required for 2 reasons :
• to have a smaller bed depth at the split
considered
• because of the excessive feed size falling on
the deck considered (see table).
Important :
• Data based on observations of field life of
screen deck
• Increase of in size 20% is suitable for gravels
• Coarser feed at smaller apertures requires
poly decks
• Coarser feed at larger apertures requires
perforated plate or grizzly decks

254

Correcting for Moisture

Moisture = H20%
This factor influences the efficiency of fine screening. When the split (M) is
less than 10mm, we consider :
If H20% < M Use conventional woven mesh
8
If M < H20% < M Use stainless or wedge wire cloths
8 4

If M < H20% < M Use anti-blinding stainless cloths

4 2

If M < H20% < M Use ani-blinding or self cleaning deck

2

If M < H20% Wet process is required

*Note - if there is clay content, screening capability must be checked in

laboratory.
 255

Screening:
Sizing and Selection

Primary Source: AJ Gunson

256

Objective

• To review the Metso screen sizing method.

• To size a screen through an example problem.
 257

Reference:
Screen
Conversions

258

Screen Sizing Data

a) Features of material to be
screened:
• Density
• Maximum feed size
• Product granulometry
• Particle shape
• Moisture content
• Presence or lack of clayey
material
• Temperature etc.
b) Capacity
c) Product separation ranges
d) Desired efficiency
e) Type of job:
• Washing
• Final classification
• Intermediate classification etc.
f ) Any room and weight
limitations
g) Degree of knowledge of the
material and desired product
 259

Screen Area

• Screen area determination (Metso):

Qu  S
Area 
A B C  D  E  F G  H  I  J  K  L

• Qu = t/h undersize in the feed

• S = Safety factor (1 to 1.4)
• A = Screen capacity for required size (t/h/m2)
• B to L = Screen Area Modifying Factors

260

Screen Sizing Factors:

A – Screen Capacity

Metso
 261

Screen Sizing Factors:

A – Screen Capacity

Metso

262

Screen Sizing Factors:

B – Oversize Fraction Factor

Metso
 263

Screen Sizing Factors: C

Metso

264

Screen Sizing Factors

• D: Position of screen deck (from top) factor

• E: Wet screening factor, desired separation size.

(1 if dry screening)

• F: Material weight factor (can be graded)

Metso
 265

Screen Sizing Factors

• G: Open surface factor Actual _ open _ area%
G
50%
• H: Shape of screen surface opening factor

• I: Particle shape factor

• J: Screen efficiency factor (%)

Metso

266

Desired separation
size vs. actual required
screen size
• Due to screen slope, actual
screen size must be larger
than the desired separation
size.

• 3% to 5% of the screen
undersize may be slightly
greater than the specified
size – this difference is taken
into account in the sizing
factors and does not need to
be separately calculated.
 267

Screen Free Open Area: A

268

Screen Free Open Area: B

 269

Screen
efficiency,
based on
screen
loading

Metso

270

Screen Sizing Factors

• K: Screen type factor

• L: Feed moisture factor (% moisture by mass)

Metso
 271

Screen Sizing –
Width & Bed Depth
Q
• Width: B
3.6  v  d
• Where,
B = nominal screen width (m)
Q = oversize (discharge) capacity (m3/h)
Not (t/h): Typical bulk density, 1.6 t/m3
d = material layer thickness (mm)
V = material transport speed (m/s)
• Dry process, d should be < 4 x separation size
• Wet process, d should be < 6 x separation size

272

Screen Sizing
Material Transport Speed

Metso
 273

Screen Sizing
Recommended Feed Bed Depth

Metso

274

Screen Sizing:
Recommended Discharge Bed Depth

Metso
 275

Typical Screen Models

Metso

276

Screen Sizing Example

a) Features of feed material:

Mesh (mm) 100 25 13 10 5
• Density: 2.7 t/m3 % Passing 100 75 45 30 22
• Max. feed size: 100mm
• Product granulometry
• Particle shape: flaky
• Moisture content: 3%
• Presence or lack of clayey material
b) Capacity: 380 t/h
 277

Screen Sizing Example

c) Product separation ranges

+25mm, 10 to 25mm, -10mm
d) Desired efficiency: 90%
e) Type of job:
• Dry screening
• Dual sloped, variable elliptical screen
• Inclined screen at 20 degrees, circular motion (coarse)
f ) No room/weight limitations
g) Degree of knowledge of the material and desired product

278

Problem Solution
• Set up mass balance 380 t/h

Mesh (mm) % Passing t/h (Cumm.) Size Fraction t/h (fraction)

(Cumm.) 95 t/h
100 100 380 +25 95

25 75 285 -25+13 114

285 t/h
13 45 171 -13+10 57
171 t/h
10 30 114 -10+5 30.4

5 22 83.6 -5 83.6
114 t/h

1st Screen:
• Qu =285 t/h; Assume Safety Factor S=1.0
• A = 54 t/h/m2 (Either Factor A chart)
 279

Problem Solution
• B = 1.35, from Factor B chart.
%O/S in feed = 100% - 75% = 25% @ +25 mm.
• C = 1.1, from Factor C chart.
%U/S ½ the opening size: Opening size: 25mm
% passing 25/2 ~ 13mm: 45%
• D = 1, first deck.
• E = 1, dry screening.
• F = 1, solids density = 2.7 t/m3

280

Problem Solution
• G = Open Surface factor
‒Assume a heavy square hole, which is appropriate for the
size range and the flaky material.
‒From the “Desired separation size vs. actual required
screen size” table, for at 25mm product size, the screen
size must be between 27-30mm, or 28.5mm, or around 1
1/8". For a 1 1/8" heavy screen, the actual screen free open
area is 61%.
G = actual open area/50% or 61%/50% = 1.22
• H = Screen surface opening factor, or 1.0 for square
openings.
 281

Problem Solution

• I = Particle shape factor, or 0.9 for flaky particles (from table).

• J = Screen efficiency factor, or 1 assuming standard 90%
efficiency (from table)
• K = Screen type factor, or 1.3 assuming a dual slope variable
elipitical screen (from table)
• L = Feed moisture factor, or 1.0 assuming 3% moisture (from
table)

282

Problem Solution

Qu  S
Area 
A B C  D  E  F G  H  I  J  K  L

• A1 = (2851)/(541.351.11111.210.911.31)
• A, deck 1 = 2.5 m2

• A2 = (1141)/(330.90.790.9111.0410.911.31)
• A, deck 2 = 4.4 m2
 283

Problem Solution – B
Q
Width & Bed Depth 3.6  v  d
• Reviewing the typical screen sizes, the Metso 5 x 12
model meets the minimum area required for the 2nd deck
(25mm & 10 mm). Bed depth.

Variable Deck 1 Deck 2

D is less than 4 x
B (m) 1.5 1.5
separation size for
O/F (t/h) 95 175
both decks, 5 x 12
Bulk Den 1.6 1.6
(t/m3)
model passes depth
Q (m3/h) 59 107
test, screen size is
v (m/s)* 0.58 0.58
adequate.
d (mm) 19 34

*Inclined Screen at 20, circular motion, coarse classification

284

Crushing &
Screening:
Plant Design

Primary Sources: AJ Gunson, B Klein

 285

Outline

• Screen Efficiency and Circulating Loads

• Factors Affecting Crusher Design
• Crushing Plant Design Procedure
• Flow Sheet Examples
• Design and Layout
• Design Criteria, Operability & Cost
• Operation & Control
• SAG vs. HPGR

286

Screen Efficiency
• Undersize Removal Efficiency in Oversize

 F (1  f x ) 
Eu     (1  ox )
 O  (1)

• Efficiency of Undersize Recovery

 U   f x  ox 
Ru    
(2)

 x   f x (1  ox ) 
Ff
 287

Crushing Circuits
• Closed Circuit A C=F U
D, dx F, fx Product
Crusher Size
C, cx Classification

Oversize O, ox
cx=% passing x in C
D = tph fresh feed
• Closed Circuit B
dx = % passing x in D
F = t/h screen feed
F, fx Product fx = % passing x in F
Feed D, dx
Size O = tph screen oversize
Classification U ox = % passing x in O
C, cx
U = tph screen undersize
O, ox C = tph crusher discharge
Oversize
Crusher
C=O D = U at steady state

Circulating load expressed as a percentage of new feed

CL = 100 x O/D

288

Screen Efficiency and

Circulating Loads
• Circuit A
As F = O + D, substitute in efficiency eqn 1 & solve for O/D
O 1
 1
D  Eu 
 
 1  f 
x 

As D = U, substitute in equation 2 and solve for O/D

O  1 
  1
D  ( Ru  f x ) 
 289

Screen Efficiency and

Circulating Loads
• Circuit B: As D = U, C = O
F(1-fx) = D(1-dx)+O(1-cx)
Substitute in equation 1 & solve for O/D
O (1  d x )

D Eu  (1  c x )
• Similarly: Ffx = Ddx+Ocx

O 1  Ru d x

D Ru c x

290

Factors Affecting
Crusher Design
• Plant throughput / availability
• Desired product size for downstream process
• Ore Characteristics
‒Size distribution
‒Moisture content
‒Density
‒Crushability
‒Abrasiveness
• Climatic Conditions
 291

Crushing Circuit Planning

• Choose flow sheet and select equipment sizes for efficient

metallurgical performance at designed capacity

• Ensure good access for maintenance and that future

expansion or modification can be carried out without
difficulty

• Plan for minimum capital and operating costs, while

allowing for efficient metallurgical and mechanical
performance.

292

Crushing Plant Design Procedure

• Know the feed size and tonnage, product size req’d
• Choose # of stages of crushing (reduction ratios!)
‒ Decide open or closed circuit at each stage
‒ Draw flow sheet. Check your logic!
• Select crushers
‒ Optimum crusher open/close side settings
‒ Estimate product stream characteristics (tph, P80)
• Select screens
‒ Estimate product stream characteristics (tph, P80)
• Determine if parallel circuits are required
• Determine capacity of surge bins and conveyors
• Size motors
‒ Draw up equipment list
Remember – it’s an iterative exercise….
 293

Crushing Reduction Ratio

294

Crushing Reduction Ratio

Metso
 295

Circuit Design & Layout

• Feed method and orientation
• Material handling criteria set chute/bin angles and opening
sizes (angle of repose & 3 x max size)

• Conveyor length ~ feed height

• For bins, feed height ~ bin capacity

• Check recycle streams, conveyor or structural clashes

• Check centre – centre distances

• Review maintenance access (personnel, cranes & hoists)

296

Design Criteria, Operability and Cost

• Multi stage crushing usually required
• Open circuit means less size control
• Closed circuit usually means larger capacity units
• Scalping prior to a crusher reduces unit size
• Crusher, chutes, feeders & conveyor size ~ particle size
• Surge capacity > cost, increases availability
• Unit capacities must account for tonnage, size, grade, moisture
and operational variabilities
• Good maintenance facilities >cost, but < downtime
• Design last crusher circuit running @ 100% load.
 297

Crusher Circuit Design Basics -1

• Multi-stage crushing usually required – more efficient and typically
a single crusher cannot provide required reduction ratio.

• Closed circuit of final stage necessary, of earlier stages may not

improve efficiency

• Crushers, feeders & surge bins need to be able to handle largest

rock to stop bridging (3-5 x top size)

• Capital & power costs per ton at same closed side setting does not
decrease significantly with crusher size – feed size and capacity
more important than capital and power costs – oversize
equipment.

298

Crusher Circuit Design Basics -2

• For a given crusher, power draw increases linearly with
feed rate.
• At a given power draw,  product size with  throughput.
•  fines leads to  throughput,  power
• Steady feed leads to  throughput – surge capacity
important
• Primary crushers have intermittent feed, so need to be
oversized.
 299

Crusher Cavity Operation

300

Operation and Control

• Maintain product size and throughput targets, maximise

throughput or optimise size
• Equipment health!
‒Electrical status (on/off/trip/emergency stop)
‒Temperatures and pressures
• Interlocks – startup, shutdown and safety
• Monitor system variables vs. design criteria (throughputs,
levels, densities etc.)
 Operation and Control Variables 301

PRIMARY CRUSH STOCKPILE/BIN

-Motor on/off + power -Level
-If hydraulic then hydraulic healthy, CSS, -Feed in
Tramp warning -Feed out
-Feeders on/off
-Feed rate (v/s)
1
SCALPING GRIZZLY
-on/off
-New feed rate 2 12
3
SECONDARY
SCREEN
11 14
4
-Motor on/off
13

CONVEYORS GENERAL
-motor on/off
-belt condition
-maybe variable speed 9 5
-pull cord

6
8 SECONDARY CRUSH
SIZING SCREEN TERTIARY CRUSH -Motor on/off/power
-Motor on/off 7 -motor on/off -Cavity level
-Cavity level -CSS
-CSS -Hydraulic status
-temperatures
-hydraulic status
10 -temperatures

302

Flow Sheet Examples

• High capacity crushing (iron ore)

• Coal plant feed preparation
• Hard rock crushing circuit
• HPGR vs SAGB
 303
MID – SOUTH IRON ORE, SA: 10 000 TPH
-1000mm
IN-PIT
GYRATORY
1

2 3

OVERLAND CONVEYOR
4

5 6

7
SECONDARY
SIZING SCREEN CRUSHING
8
(-30mm) (P80 – 80mm)

11

TERTIARY CRUSH
9 (P80- 25mm) FEED BINS

10

ROM PIT FEED 304

-? @ 500 TPH OVERSIZE DUMP
PRIMARY
JAW
1 (P80 = 80mm)

STATIC SECONDARY 3
GRIZZLY 9 SCREEN (-80)
(-400mm)
2
RECYCLE CONVEYOR 10

TAVISTOCK COLLIERY, SA: 500 tph SIZING

SCREEN
(-80+20;
WASH WATER -20+3)
4
U
-20 + 3

DMS 12
CYCLONE 7
5
FEED PREP
SCREENS -80 + 20
(-1mm) U
DMS
DRUM 11

6 U = -1mm UNDERSIZE & FINES TO MILL & SPRIALS

8
U
 SCALPING GRIZZLY 305
(-120mm)
1 STOCKPILE
-400mm @ (12000 T)
350 TPH
FROM 12 SECONDARY
2
U/G) 3 SCREEN (-40)

11 14
4
PRIMARY CRUSH 13
(P80 – 100mm)

MESSINA PLATINUM, SA – 2000 tpd

RECYCLE 9 5
CONVEYOR

6
8
SIZING SCREEN TERTIARY CRUSH SECONDARY CRUSH
(-12mm) (P80 – 12mm) (P80 – 40mm)
7

10

306

High Pressure Grinding Roll Technology

HPGR at Boddington Gold

(http://www.womp-
int.com/images/story/2009vol10/13a.jp
g)
 307

Presentation Outline
1. HPGR Intro & History
2. Main Components and Wear Items
3. Testing and Sizing Factors
4. Flowsheets and Applications

308

Typical HPGR Comminution Duty

HPGR
 309

History of HPGR Technology

• Comminution method was patented by Dr. Schönert in 1979
• First HPGR installed in a cement application in 1985
• HPGRs became established in the cement industry due to
recognized energy benefits
• 1987 - HPGRs first applied in the diamond industry
• ~1995 Unsuccessful trials in hard rock applications (eg.
Cyprus Sierrita)

310

History of HPGR Technology

• 1995 till present- HPGRs installed in hard rock applications
due to Improvements in roll wear linings and gaining
momentum (more than five vendors participating in the
market)
• 2012, Expiration of studded lining patent. Increase in HPGR
vendors, now including CITIC/KHD, Polysius,
Koeppern/Outotec, Metso & FLSmidth
 311

HPGR - Function
 313

314

HPGR – Main Components

 315

HPGR –Edge Effect

 318

HPGR Wear Components

Studded Lining (~2000 to ~10,000 hours)

Cheek Plates (~1500 hours)

from Weir Minerals Brochure

courtesy of Koeppern Machinery Aus.

 319

ROLL SURFACE - STUD LINING Wear Parts – Roller Changeout

Hart et al (SAG2011)

Newmont roll changeout

Koski et al (SAG2011) Hart et al (SAG2011)
 321

HPGR Test Work and Sizing

Test Work Carried out to Determine:
HPGR Sizing Parameters
‒ Suitable specific pressing force
‒ Specific throughput Mdot
‒ Net specific energy consumption (kWh/t)
‒ HPGR operating gap / Feed top size
‒ Flake density

Process Flowsheet Parameters

‒ Size reduction
‒ Influence of feed parameters
on HPGR comminution
‒ Influence of transfer size
and circuit configuration

322

HPGR Test Work

and Sizing

Agglomerated HPGR product (Flake)

 336

Existing & Upcoming Operations

Project Company Location HPGR TPD Ore Op.
s Type Since
Cerro Verde Freeport Mc. Peru 4->12 120 -> Copper 2006
360 ktpd Porphyry
Grasberg Freeport Mc. Indonesia 2 ~70ktpd Copper, 2007
Gold
Mogalakwena Anglo Platinum S. Africa 1 ~25ktpd Platinum 2008
Boddington Newmont Australia 4 ~100ktpd Gold, 2009
Gold Copper
Penasquito Goldcorp Mexico 1 ~+100 ktpd Poly- 2010
(peb. metallic
crusher
circ.)
Salobo Vale Brazil 2 ~33ktpd Copper, 2012
Gold
Sierra Gorda KGHM/Sumitomo Chile 4 ~110ktpd Copper - 2014?
Moly
Morenci Freeport Mc. USA 1 -> 115ktpd Copper 2014
Porphyry
 337

Reported Benefits of Using HPGR

• Energy efficiency

• Reduced steel consumption (in

comparison to SAG milling)

• Not sensitive to ore variability (in

comparison to alternative
Courtesy of Koeppern Machinery Aus.
comminution equipment)

• Breakage along grain boundaries

(promoting liberation)

338

Reported Disadvantages of Using HPGR

• Relatively small number of operations and experienced
engineers

• Maximum HPGR throughput is approximately 2500 tph

(increasing in near future to ~3000+ tph)

• Sensitive to feed moisture

• Assessment of HPGR is expensive (no lab scale test)

 339

Approach to Application
• Feed Size: Top size related to roll diameter and gap.
Typically a maximum of 50 mm top size

• Feed Moisture: less than 8%

• Circuit Configuration: Typically tertiary application with

closing screen. Quartenary (Grasberg) and pebble
crusher duty (Penasquito and Empire Mine)

• Material Handling: Choke fed feed hopper located

directly above HPGR. Product is typically wet screened

340

Approach to Application
• Tramp Metal: Needs to be removed to protect roll
lining

• Wear Linings: Spare roller set needed to reduce

downtime during liner changes

METSO HRC (METSO Catalogue, 2013)

 341

HPGR Operation
Machine Control:
Product Size: Controlled by changes in pressing force
(hydraulic setpoint) – not roll gap!
Throughput: Controlled through changes in roll speed (VFD)
Roller Skew: control depends on vendor and can be
mechanical or hydraulic (adjusted via control loop).

‘Machine response to changes in roll speed or pressing force

setpoints is almost instantaneous’

342

HPGR Operation

Influences on Roll Wear:

Feed Moisture: Wear generally increases with moisture

Roll Speed: Wear increases with higher roll speeds

Pressing Force: Wear increases when greater pressing

forces are used

Feed Size: An HPGR feed top size that exceeds the width of
the operating roll gap is particularly detrimental to roll wear
 345

Typical Flowsheet:
Tertiary Application

Cerro Verde Flowsheet (Vanderbeek 2006)

346

HPGR – Quartenary
Role (Grasberg)

Villanueva et al (SAG2011)
 347

HPGR – Pebble
Crusher Role

Peñasquito (Mexico)
Palmer et al (SAG2011)

348

HPGR & The Future

 2 stage HPGR & Stirred Milling

Wang et al (CMP2013)
 349

Novel Flowsheet for Ores with Clays

Rosario (2010)

350

COMPARISON OF HPGR - BALL

MILL AND HPGR - STIRRED MILL
CIRCUITS TO THE EXISTING
AG/SAG MILL - BALL MILL
CIRCUITS

Fisher Wang
Presented at CMP Conference, Ottawa, 2013
352
 353

Outline
 Introduction

 Objectives

 Experiment program

 Results and discussion

 Conclusions and recommendations

354

Introduction

• Comminution is energy
intensive and energy inefficient
process

• Low-grade fine-grained deposit

increases energy consumption
and carbon emission -61％

• Energy efficient comminution

technologies include high
pressure grinding rolls and
stirred mills
*US Department of Energy, Industrial technologies program, June 2007
 355

High pressure grinding rolls

(Napier-Munn et al., 1996)

356

Horizontal stirred mill

(Arburo & Smith, 2009)

 357

Objectives

HPGR-ball mill circuit

HPGR-stirred mill circuit

358

Experimental program
Existing Operation

Circuit
Identification

Plant DCS data Plant Survey and

Equipment data Sampling

Bulk Sample

Characterization: Pilot HPGR Testing

JK DW parameter
Bond work index
Size distribution
Specific gravity
Density Pilot Stirred Mill
Testing

Circuit Modelling Identification of

and Simulation Key Parameters

Comparison Analysis
Comminution equipment energy
Complete circuit energy
Operating and capital costs
 359

Test flowsheet

360

JK SimMet simulation

Mill Dimension
Ball Charge
JK DW Test ……
BBWi
PSD
%S……

(Napier-Munn et al, 1996)

 361

Case A - SAB circuit

 Copper-Molybdenum porphyry

 889 tph

 JK DW A x b = 65, Ta = 0.45

 BBWi = 13.8

 F80 = 108 mm

 P80 = 0.19 mm

362

Case C - SAB circuit

 Copper-Molybdenum porphyry

 1332 tph

 JK DW A x b = 64.9, Ta = 0.31

 BBWi = 13.6

 F80 = 92 mm

 P80 = 0.27 mm
 363

Case D - AGBC circuit

 Copper-Molybdenum porphyry

 765 tph

 JK DW A x b = 74.2, Ta = 0.58

 BBWi = 13.8

 F80 = 95 mm

 P80 = 0.24 mm

364

Case H - SABC circuit

 Copper-Molybdenum porphyry

 766 tph

 JK DW A x b = 31.3, Ta = 0.59

 BBWi = 18.0

 F80 = 66 mm

 P80 = 0.16 mm
 365

Sample

366

HPGR testing results

Scaled HPGR product

Specific FSP M-dot ESP net
Test No. (90% Center, 10% Edge)
2 3
[N/mm ] [ts/hm ] [kWh/t] P80 [mm] P50 [mm]
A1 3.0 257 1.37 6.30 1.91
A2 4.0 191 2.22 1.67 0.54
C1 3.0 266 1.23 6.54 1.58
C2 4.0 208 1.87 1.88 0.76
D1 3.0 244 1.55 4.70 1.17
D2 4.0 142 2.90** 1.71 0.55
H1 3.0 184 1.89 6.50 3.00
H2 3.0 222 1.25 3.83 1.75
 367

Bond ball mill work indices

RoM HPGR product Difference

Circuit
[kWh/t] [kWh/t] [%]
A 13.8 12.1 -12.3
C 13.6 12.6 -7.4
D 13.8 12.8 -7.2
H 15.4 15.4 -14.4

368

IsaMillTM testing results

Test Description Units ISA A1 ISA C1 ISA D1 ISA H1

Feed top size [µm] 710 710 1000 710
F80 [µm] 310 326 420 343
Target P80 [µm] 100 100 100 75
Specific Energy [kWh/t] 3.8 4.4 5.0 4.8
Media Consumption [g/kWh] 6 7 5 3
 369

Pure comminution energy

HPGR-BM @ 75 um, 10%

HPGR-IsaMill @ 75 um, 37%

HPGR-BM @ 160 um, 24%

Note: A power factor of 120% and 95% of net specific energy was used to determine the total motor power draw
of the HPGR and IsaMill for the process capacity, respectively.

370

HPGR - ball mill circuit

 371

HPGRs - stirred mill circuit

372

Complete comminution energy

HPGR-IsaMill @ 75 um, 34%

HPGR-BM @ 160um, 21%

Note: A power factor of 120% and 95% of net specific energy was used to determine the total motor power draw
of the HPGR and IsaMill for the process capacity, respectively.
 373

Comparison breakdown

SAG mill
HPGR

374

Comparison breakdown (cont’d)

 375

Capital cost

*determined from vendor quotes and installation costs

376

Operating cost
 377

NPV and IRR*

F80 P80 HPGR/ball mill to SABC HPGR/stirred mill to SABC

[mm] [um] NPV, M$ IRR, % NPV, M$ IRR, %

66 160 33 22 n/a

66 75 22 23 5 7

*@5%, 15 years

378

Conclusions
• The combination of HPGR and stirred mill in a single flowsheet,
without tumbling mills, has been demonstrated to be technically
feasible, with the implementation of two passes of HPGRs in the
flowsheet, and large-diameter ceramic media in IsaMill™ for coarse
stirred milling.

• The work has demonstrated that the HPGR - ball mill circuit and
HPGR – stirred mill as alternatives to existing SAB/AGBC/SABC
comminution circuits has significant potential in energy saving.

• Economics of HPGR - ball mill option and HPGR - stirred mill option
are more favourable compared to existing SABC circuit
‒ larger operation and long mine life
‒ more expensive energy supply area
 379

Recommendations

• Evaluation of the influence of ore hardness variability

• Further evaluation of size classification for HPGR product

• Further evaluation of coarser stirred milling

380

Acknowledgements
 381

Questions?

382

Pre-concentration
and
Waste Rejection
 383

Sensors and Sorting

Towards Tomorrow’s ‘‘Smart Mine’’:

Embedded Sensor Telemetry and Sensor-Based Sorting

384

Acknowledgements

Andrew Bamber, CEO

MineSense Technologies Ltd, Vancouver, Canada.

N. Emre Altun, Associate Professor

Middle East Technical University, Mining Engineering
Department, Ankara, Turkey.

Malcolm Scoble, Professor

Norman B. Keevil Institute of Mining, UBC, Vancouver,
Canada.
 385

Mines of the Future

 Low grade, complex geology, deep and remote
 Clean - less waste, improved waste management
 Healthy and Safe
 Energy efficient
 Invisible - underground mining and processing
 Smart – best use of information eg sensors

386

Sensing and Sorting Technologies

 Hand sorting - pre-Roman times
 Automated sorting
 Uranium radiometric sorting Ontario 1958
 Diamonds X-Ray fluorescence W. Australia 1985
 Recent large scale examples (est. 300 sorters
installations)
 Nickel, Kambalda W. Australia
 Platinum, Amplats, Rustenburg UG2 Section
 Sensors - Surface versus Bulk Properties
 Challenges – Better sensors, higher throughput
machines
 387

Sensor Technologies
Method Analysis Application

Photometric Surface Coal, sulphides, phosphates,

(reflection, oxides
brightness, grey level,
RGB, IR, UV, texture)
Radiometric Bulk Uranium, gold
Conductivity, Bulk Metal sulphides, native
magnetic metals, iron oxides
susceptibility
X-Ray Fluorescence Surface Diamonds, metal sulphides,
limestone, iron
X-Ray Transmission Bulk Coal, sulphides

388

Conductivity Sorting

Conductivity Testing at UBC

PC

Sort Signal

A/D Converter:
Signal generation
and analysis

CommoDas
‘‘ROM Secondary EM’’
Sensing Coil 1 Sensing Coil 2 Sensing Coil 3 Conductivity Sorter

Amplifier
Bridge/
Power Supply Balancing Coil 1 Balancing Coil 2 Balancing Coil 3
Courtesy C.
Bergman
Mintek, 2009

390
391

392
393

394
395

396
397

398
399

400
 401

Sorting Economics

Mining Value Chain (after Porter, 1980)
 Sorting Economics

Value Chain (with sorting)

404

Sensor-based technologies and U/G Mining

 405

Sudbury Ni-Cu Operations

– Energy Assessment

406

Sudbury Operations - Conductivity Sorting

Deposit Feed Grade (%) Conc. Mass (%) Conc. Grade (%) Recovery (%)
Ni Cu Mg Ni Cu Mg Ni Cu Mg
Craig 8112 1.16 0.47 5.54 72 1.50 0.57 5.16 93.49 87.40 67.46

Craig LGBX 2.10 0.35 2.57 83 2.43 0.37 2.39 95.85 86.70 77.07

Fraser Ni 0.81 0.36 4.21 80 0.94 0.40 3.73 92.73 89.43 70.67

Fraser Cu 0.83 11.42 1.81 41 1.65 20.92 0.68 81.12 74.89 15.42

TL Footwall 1.29 9.08 1.90 66 1.85 12.05 1.08 94.66 87.88 37.51

TL Zone 2 1.40 0.87 3.41 62 2.03 0.87 3.41 90.35 83.84 59.11

TL Zone 1 0.68 0.43 6.00 44 0.98 0.48 5.58 63.07 48.43 40.47

Montcalm East 1.66 0.56 4.61 75 2.06 0.63 4.17 93.60 85.48 68.22

Montcalm West 0.32 0.15 5.97 30 0.64 0.30 6.05 59.23 57.50 29.93
 407

Sudbury Operations – Sorting (Bamber Ph.D.)

Overall reduction in energy consumption 20%

10000.00

9000.00
Base

8000.00
Precon
7000.00

6000.00

Power (kW) 5000.00

4000.00

3000.00

2000.00

1000.00

0.00
Montcalm Thayer Fraser Fraser Craig Onaping Ni Rim S Ni Rim S
Lindsley Copper Nickel Depth F/W

Thayer Fraser
Operation Montcalm Lindsley Copper Fraser Nickel Craig Onaping Depth Ni Rim S
Hoisting $399,995 $1,319,625 $505,001 $684,364 $2,391,748 $1,891,163
Haul $786,583 $302,422 $884,600
Pre-con -$1,342,180 -$843,569 -$615,687 -$979,603 -$1,285,380 -$1,285,380 -$1,167,864
Grinding $560,607 $273,248 $236,058 $320,410 $476,930 $476,770 $418,730
Processing $1,397,813 $698,906 $436,817 $873,633 $1,310,450 $1,310,450 $1,135,723
Overall
Savings $1,402,823 $831,002 $1,376,812 $719,440 $1,186,364 $2,893,589 $3,162,352

408

McCreedy East Mine - U/G Sorting

 409

McCreedy East Mine – U/G Sorting

410

Sorting Past – Present - Future?

 Proven Technology
 Sorting machines exist
 Metallurgy proven
 Concepts for mine designs developed
 Economics demonstrated
 Challenges of implementation
 Better sensors
 Higher capacity sorters
 Technology transfer - Risk averse industry
 411

How can we make better use of sensors?

 Sensors – organic part of mining system
 Apply to all aspects from exploration (geophysical,
borehole) to mining to processing
 Embedded sensors in material handling systems
(ore passes, scoops, shovels, bins, chutes,
conveyors)
 Transmission, recording, analysis technologies
 Wireless data transmission (WiFi)
 Data available to GEMCOM, MineSight, process
control
 Intelligent connected mines with active online telemetry

412

Innovative Use of Sensors

• Core logging equipment

• Boreholes
• Blast hole drill rigs
• Face shovel
• Belts
• Sorter
Multi-Sensor Product Platform
ConductOreXTM – Desktop Evaluation System
BeltSense™ - Multi-modal Mineral Telemetry System (completed
Pilot SortOre – HFEMS or HSXRF @ 10 tph (on demand)
ShovelSense™ - Scoop/Shovel HFEMS System (in progress)
SortOre™ – High Capacity Sorting System (in progress)

SortOre40TM ShovelSenseTM BeltSenseTM 413

414

Sensor Based Systems in Surface Mining

 415

Conventional vs Sensor Based Mining

 Conventional mining:

- people-orientated, plan-based, subjective, time

consuming
Future mining:
 Application of on-line telemetry from in-mine
sensors: Production scheduling, grade control,
plant process control settings:
- flexible
- objective
- real-time
- simultaneous

416

Conclusions
There is significant potential to reduce energy usage in mining
by applying several existing technologies

Relatively new, but proven. comminution technologies are more

energy efficient than conventional technologies, but industry is
slow to adopt these technologies.

The outcomes of sensor-based technologies and sorting are

significant in economic and environmental measures – these
can be applied to making mining smarter.

Challenges to the application of these technologies relates

primarilly to aspects of technology transfer and mining culture
rather than technical challenges.
 NBK Research
Centre

418

Introduction to Grinding
 419

Grinding & Classification Outline

1. Types of Mill Equipment and Circuits

2. Factors In Grinding Circuit Selection
3. Ore Properties and Grinding Testwork
4. Mill Power and Sizing Grinding Mills
5. Importance of Grinding Media
6. Ultrafine Grinding
7. Classification Principles and Equipment

420

Types of Mill Equipment and Circuits

• Introduction
• Grinding Fundamentals Recap
‒ Why Grind? Breakage vs. Enrichment and Upgrading
‒ Grinding Economics
‒ Grinding Mechanism Characteristics

• Types and Characteristics of Grinding Equipment

‒ Overview of Ball Mill Feed Preparation Systems
‒ Grinding Mill Equipment Types
‒ Characteristics of Grinding Mills
 421

Introduction
• Course covers grinding equipment typically used in the
ferrous and non-ferrous mineral industry.

• Internationally the technology is fundamentally similar with

minor variations to local conditions.

• Over past 100 + years ball mills remain the central

component and workhorse of most grinding circuits.

• Circuit differences are mainly in feed preparation.

422

Introduction
• Technology is specialized because of the need to grind
mostly siliceous, highly abrasive ores.

• Some adaptation of cement industry equipment has

resulted in power savings with harder rock (High Pressure
Grinding Rolls).

• Wet grinding is almost universally practiced.

• The notable exception of dry-grinding, air-swept, double

compartment ball mills (also adapted from cement
industry) that grind refractory gold ores prior to roasting.
 423

Grinding Fundamentals
Why Grind? Breakage vs. Enrichment and Upgrading
In the size reduction stages of grinding we are creating the
necessary mineral liberation conditions, or surface area, for
subsequent separation and enrichment, upgrading and recovery.

424

Grinding Economics
• Rule of Thumb. Mills consume about two-thirds of the
entire process plant power, or about 20-25 kWh/t (65% of
35-40 kWh/t).

• Mills consume about 1-2 kg/t (C$1-2) of grinding media &

liner steel.

• Assuming 10c/kWh/t overall grinding costs (power+media)

are about $3-$5/t, or about 40-50% of overall mill
consumable costs.
 425

Grinding Economics

• Lost performance in separation due to miss-grinding

represents a major problem for many operations, eroding the
process economics.

• An economic balance is required between the marginal cost

of grinding and revenue to maximize net revenue.

426

Grinding Mechanism Characteristics

a) Breakage Mechanism

Impact / Compression Attrition/ Chipping Abrasion

b) Dominant Grinding Action

Tumbling/Impact Cataracting Cascading

c) Energy Efficiency
Lowest (-) Improving Highest (+)
 427

Tumbling Mill Ball & Energy Distribution

428

Ball Mill Feed Preparation Systems

1. Crushing the ROM feed by primary crusher to a top size

of about 300 mm at crusher settings of 150 to 200 mm to
permit conveyor transport.
2. Further size reduction by either:
‒ 2 + stages of crushing by cone crushers to a ball mill
feed size of 10 to 15mm.
‒ 2 + stages of crushing & rod milling to a ball mill feed
size of 1.5 to 2mm.
‒ Semi-autogenous (SAG) or autogenous (AG) grinding
to a ball mill feed size of 1 to 4 mm.
‒ Cerro Verde Crusher/HPGR: 2.8 mm.
 429

Ball Mill Feed Preparation Systems

• As concentrator capacities have increased, SAG mills have

become the standard method of preparing ball mill feed.

• The capacity of secondary and tertiary crushers has not kept

pace with increasing plant capacity, as well as limitations in
rod mill capacity.

• Currently the largest cone crusher commonly in service is the

MP1250 driven by a 1,250 hp motor.

430

Ball Mill Feed Preparation Systems

• A 50k tpd+ secondary and tertiary crushing plant is

complex – with many lines, screens, conveyors, bins, etc.

• SAG mills were the only practical way to prepare ball feed
at medium and high tonnage rates.

• SAG (or AG) mills have been installed in most mineral

processing grinding circuits in the last 20 years.

• Now HPGRs have been shown to be viable alternatives.

 431

Types of Grinding Equipment

SAG/AG Vertimill Vibrating Ball

Ball Isamill
Rod Stirred Media
Pebble Detritor (SMD)

432

Common Mill Components

1 – Shell 7 – Frame
2 – Mill Heads 8 – Feed spout
3 – Trunnion Bearings 9 – Discharge Trommel
4 – Grinding gear & pinion 10 – Discharge Chute
5 – Grinding Mill Reduction Unit 11 – Mill Liners
6 – Mill Motor
 433

Types of Grinding Equipment

Ball Mill (Grate Rod Mill

Discharge)

434

Insides of rod and ball mills

Ball mill

Rod mill
 435

Types of Grinding Equipment

Vertimill Vibrating Ball

436

Regrind Mills
 437

Grinding Circuits

438

Outline

• Grinding Equipment Selection

• Types of Grinding Mills
• Evolution of Grinding Equipment
• Grinding Circuit Arrangements
• Mongolian ASM Circuit
 439

Source: Mt Polley

440

Reduction Ratio: Grinding vs. Crushing

• Crushers have a limited reduction ratio - due to the design,
there is a limit to the residence time for the material passing
through.

• Grinding in a mill takes place in more open space, thus the

retention time is much longer and can easily be adjusted
during operation.

• In practice size reduction by grinding is done in optimized

stages.
 441

Grinding Equipment Selection

442

Grinding Equipment Selection

Mill Type Grinding Media Feed Size Product Size Diameter / Length

a) Autogenous Coarse Ore 2 feet -100 mesh 3 to 1

b) Semi- Coarse Ore / 2 feet -10 mesh 2 or 3 to 1

autogenous Balls
c) Rod Steel Rods 2 inch -10 mesh 0.5 to 1

d) Ball Steel Balls 1 inch to -200 mesh 0.5 up to 1 to 1

4 mesh
e) Pebble -8” + 4” Pebbles -1 inch -200 mesh 0.8 to 1

f) Verti-Mill Sand/Ceramic - 2mm 25-10 Vertical

microns
 443

Autogenous (AG) and

Semi-Autogenous Mills (SAG)

444

Autogenous (AG) Mill (D:L is about 3:1 US and

1:1 Europe/RSA)
• Wet or dry grate discharge

• Product: ~ -100 mesh (149 micron)

• Primary, coarse grinding (up to 2’ feed)

• Grinding media is the feed material (min load of 15% > 6 in)

• High capacity (short retention time)

• Sensitive to feed size & material composition (critical size)

 445

Semi-Autogenous (SAG) mill (D:L is about 2-3:1

US and 1:1 Europe/RSA)
• Wet or dry
• Product: ~ 10 mesh (2 mm)
• Higher capacity than AG mill
• Primary, coarse grinding (up to 2 ft feed size)
• Grinding media is feed plus 4-12% ball charge (4-5
inches)
• High capacity (short retention time)
• Less Sensitive to feed composition (critical size material)

446

Gibraltar’s New SAG (28’)

 447

Fully Assembled 40 ft. x 22 ft. SAG Mill @ Cadia

© Metso Minerals, Inc. 2003

HVC Line C: 43'x16‘, 2 x 4700 kW motors

 449

Rod Mills (D:L is about 0.5:1)

• Overflow is wet only • End & Center are mainly dry

• Mostly open circuit (secondary)
• Grinding media is rods
• Primary grinding secondary/tertiary
crushed
• product (19-50 mm)
• Coarse grind 600-2500 micron
• Special Applications
• Capacity < 200 t/h limited by rod
length (22 ft max)
• Power < 1,500 kW

450

Rod Mill Dimensions

• Rod length to mill diameter – 1.4 to 1.6

• 6.8 m is practical limit on rod length

• Mill length should be 0.1 to 0.16 meters (4” to 6”) longer than
the rods.
 Rod mill @ Mount Polley

452

Overflow Ball Mills (D:L is about 0.5-1: 1)

- Wet only, Robust & Simple

- Primary on 1 in. to 4 mesh crushed feed
- Mostly closed circuit (secondary) on
AG/SAG/Rod/HPGR product
- Finer Grind (longer retention time) to > 20 microns
- Higher risk of over grinding
- Ball charge 35-45%.
 453

Grate Discharge Ball Mills (D:L is 0.5-1:1)

- Wet or dry
- Discharge grate more complex
- Primary on 10-19 mm crushed feed
- Mostly closed circuit (secondary) on rod product
- Coarser grind (short retention time) > 74 microns
- Lower risk of over grinding
- Can take 5-10% more balls

22 ft x 36.5 ft Ball Mills @ Cadia

 455

24 ft x 36 ft Ball Mills @ Cerro Verde, 13 MW

456

Pebble Mill (D:L is about 0.8:1)

- Wet or dry grate discharge (product –200 mesh)

- Secondary grinding (AG/SAG/Rod/Ball Product) of –1 inch feed
- Grinding media pebbles (-8 + 4 inch) screened from feed, flint
pebbles, porcelain balls
- Larger than ball mills at same power draw
 Grinding @ Mount Polley

458

Vertimills
• Vertical stirred
• From 10 HP through 1500 HP.
• For wet application 2 mm feed
to as fine as 10 microns.
• Secondary/Regrind/Lime
Slaking
 459

VTM-1250-WB
Vertimills at Chino

460

Main Grinding Mill Suppliers

(Sales 1990 –2002)
Metso – Metso
Minerals
Metso

FFE FFE – Fuller-Vecor

Bradkin
Outotec -
Krupp
(purchased
Outo.
Nordberg/Morgardsh
Others
ammar)
 461

AG/SAG Mill Evolution

1959 - 1st 18 ft/5.49m. diameter AG Mill @ 600 HP/448 kW
1959 - 1st 22 ft./6.71m diameter AG Mill at 1,250 HP/933 kW
1962 - 1st 24 ft./7.32m diameter AG Mill @ 1,750 HP/1,306 kW
1962 - 1st 28 ft./8.54m diameter AG Mill @ 3,500 HP/2,612 kW
1965 - 1st 20 ft./6.10m diameter AG Mill @ 500 HP/373 kW
1965 - 1st 32 ft./9.76m diameter AG Mill @ 6,000 HP/4,478 kW
1970 - 1st 26 ft./7.93m diameter AG Mill @ 3,000 HP/2,239 kW
1970 - 1st 30 ft./9.15m diameter AG Mill @ 7,000 HP/5,224 kW
1973 - 1st 36 ft./11.0m diameter AG Mill @ 12,000 HP/8,955kW
1979 - 1st 34 ft./10.4m diameter AG Mill @ 8,800 HP/6,567 kW
1986 - 1st Gearless SAG Mill @ 11,000 HP/8,209 kW
1996 - 1st 38 ft./11.6m diameter SAG Mill @ 26,800 HP/20,000 kW
1996 - 1st 40 ft./12.2m diameter SAG Mill @ 26,800 HP/20,000 kW
Proposed – 42 ft./12.8m diameter SAG Mill @ 37,500 HP/28,000 kW

462

Ball Mill Evolution

• 1965 - 1st 14’ (4.27m) dia. Ball Mills @ 1,306 kW
• 1966 - 1st 15.5’ (4.73m) dia. Ball Mills @ 1,493 kW
• 1967 - 1st 16.5’ (5.03m) dia. Ball Mills @ 2,612 kW
• 1970 - 1st 18’ (5.49m) dia. Ball Mills @ 3,172 kW

• Following poor performance of 18 ft mills at Bougainville,

there was speculation that the limit of ball mill size had
been reached. It was subsequently proved that operating
conditions were the cause of observed lower grinding
efficiency and not size.
 463

Ball Mill Evolution

•1980 - 1st 21’ (6.4m) dia. Ball Mill @ 8,060 kW

•1990 - 1st 20’ (6.1m) dia. Ball Mill @ 5,597 kW
•1996 - 1st 22’ (6.71m) dia. Ball Mills @ 8.955 kW
•1996 - 1st 24’ (7.32m) dia. Ball Mills @ 10,448 kW
•1999 - 1st 25’ (7.62m) dia. Ball Mills @ 13,433 kW
•2001 - 1st 26’ (7.93m) dia. Ball Mills @ 15,500 kW
•Current – 22 MW+

464

Ball Mill Evolution

• Ball mill sizes have continued to increase and there is
currently no evidence to suggest that efficiency drops as
diameter increases.

• Economics is driving selection of the fewest number of

mills lines.

• A large SAG mill followed by a large ball mill could enable

a single mill line to mill up to 150,000 tpd of ore.
 465

Ball Mill Evolution

34 ft. SAG & 20 ft. Ball Mills @ Fairbanks Gold

466

Grinding Circuit Arrangements

Secondary and Tertiary Crushing plus Single-
stage Ball Mill Grinding
•This circuit and the following rod/ball mill circuit were
almost universal pre-1975.

•Variations such as pebble or tube mills and deleting

tertiary crushing for softer ores or low tonnage
operations.

•The 3-stage and single-stage ball remains one of the

most energy efficient compared to AS/SAG but
crusher/rod mill sizes did not keep pace to industry
leading to its demise.
 467

Secondary and Tertiary Crushing

plus Single-stage Ball Mill
PRIMARY
CRUSHER FEED PRODUCT

CYCLONE
SCREEN SCREEN

BALL
MILL

SECONDARY TERTIARY
CRUSHING CRUSHING

468

Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Crushing plus

Rod Mill and One or Two-Stage Ball Mills
PRIMARY
CRUSHER FEED PRODUCT

CYCLONE
SCREEN

ROD BALL
MILL MILL

SECONDARY TERTIARY
CRUSHING CRUSHING
 469

SAG/AG Mill ± (Pebble Crushing) + Ball Mill

• These circuits have been the workhorse of the industry for

the last 20 years.

• External pebble crushing improves power efficiency and is

necessary for competent ores that exhibit a propensity to
form critical size material.

• Early AG installations in the iron industry have operated

well for many years.

470

SAG/AG Mill ± (Pebble Crushing)

+ Ball Mill
• Similar installations in the copper industry were not so
successful, typically grinding too fine at low tonnage rates.
Some circuits were modified to SAG operation.

• There are a few single stage SAG mills operating

successfully. This type of circuit is well suited to uranium
sandstone deposits (Colorado Plateau Ores) in which
uranium coatings are released for leaching.
 471

SAG/AG Mill + Ball Mill

PRIMARY
CRUSHER FEED PRODUCT

CYCLONE

SCREEN
BALL
MILL

472

SAG/AG Mill + Ball Mill +

Pebble Crushing
PRIMARY MAGNETIC
CRUSHER FEED SEPARATOR PRODUCT

PEBBLE
CRUSHER

CYCLONE

SCREEN
BALL
MILL
 473

Double Rotator Dry Grinding

• This circuit has been adopted by two gold roasting operations
in Nevada. The circuit was adapted from cement industry
practice and combines drying with two stages of grinding.

• The handling and classification circuit is relatively complex –

airslides, bucket elevators, dynamic and static classifiers and
product recovery baghouses.

474

Double Rotator Dry Grinding

PRIMARY
CRUSHER FEED PRODUCT

CYCLONE

HOT GAS

DRYING COARSE FINE

GRIND GRIND
 475

Mongolian ASM Circuit

477
 483

Grinding & Classification

– Ore Characterization

484

Introduction – Ore Testing

• Grinding Ore Testing - To quantify what type and size of

grinding circuit is best suited to the ore.
• Test work can range from simple tests, based on a small
sample of rock or core, to comprehensive pilot testing
requiring hundreds of tonnes.

• Objective – to become familiar with commonly used ore tests

for grinding.
 485

Common Ore Tests

• Bond grinding indices (rod, ball and abrasion)
• Unconfined compressive strength (UCS)
• Impact crushing tests
• Autogenous Media Competency (Tumble Test)
• JK drop weight tests
• McPherson
• SPI Minnovex (Starsky)
• Pilot scale milling
• Circuit Surveys

486

Standard Bond Ore Testing

Four Most Relevant Indices:

a) Bond Ball Mill Work Index (BMWI)
b) Bond Rod Mill Work Index (RMWI)
c) Bond Abrasion Work Index
d) Standard Bond Crushing Work Index (see Impact Crushing
Tests)
 487

a) Bond Ball Mill Work Index

• BMWI standard test was developed by Fred Bond in the
1920s, published in 1952 and modified in 1961.
• Test enables basic grinding power requirements to be
determined, from the feed 80% passing size (F80) to the
circuit 80% passing size (P80).
• BMWI test determines the standard Wi of a sample of ore, or
the specific power (kWh/t) required to reduce the P80 of a
sample of material from ‘infinite’ size to 100µm.
• BMWI is used in designing new equipment and in simulating
existing equipment to improve performance.

488

What is a Ball Mill Wi Test?

• The BMWI is a measure of the resistance of the material to
crushing and grinding.
• It is a 'locked cycle' test conducted in closed circuit with a
laboratory screen.
• Requires 10 kg of drill core or rock, crushed to –3.35mm (6#
Tyler)
• The closing screen size is selected so that the product P80
from the test is as close as possible to the product P80
expected from the circuit under design.
• Note: Wi is linked to the tested closing sieve size.

For full details, refer to the original Bond paper (Ref: Bond, F.C. 1961.
“Crushing and Grinding Calculations Part I and II”, British Chemical
Engineering, Vol 6., Nos 6 and 8).
 489

When would a BMWI Test be required?

• A BMWI is required for the design of a new mineral processing
plant. Tests should be on a samples of ore that are typical of
the proposed feed to the plant.
• A BMWI may also be used in the simulation and subsequent
optimization of existing mill(s) and the associated grinding
circuit.
• The Bond Equation can be used to calculate:
‒The specific energy requirement for a given grinding duty,
and
‒The feed size and required product size.
• It is then possible to determine the size of mill required based
on throughput, and therefore motor power.

490

Detailed Ball Mill Work Index

Test Procedure
1.Stage crush the feed to ≤ 3.35mm (- 6 mesh) and take a
representative sample.

2.Undertake a series of batch grinds in a standard Bond mill. A

Bond mill is 0.305m x 0.305m (12”), with rounded corners,
smooth lining, running at 70rpm. The charge consists of 285
balls, weighing a total of 20.125kg.

3.Initially, a 700ml sub-sample of feed is prepared for use in the

first batch grind. It is ground in the mill for 100 revolutions. All
grinding is dry.

4.After each batch grind, the contents of the mill are sieved on
the selected 'closing' screen to remove the undersize. This is
replaced by an equal weight of fresh feed to bring the weight
back to that of the original charge.
 491

Detailed Ball Mill Work Index

Test Procedure
5. This sample is then ground in the mill for a predetermined
number of revolutions calculated to produce a 250% circulating
load. The number of revolutions required is calculated from the
results of the previous period to produce sieve undersize equal
to 1/3.5 of the total mill charge.

6. Repeat at least 7 times until the weight of undersize produced

per mill revolution reaches equilibrium.

7. The average of net mass per revolution from the last three
cycles is taken as the ball mill grindability (Gbp) in g/revolution.

8. A representative sample of product is sized to determine the

P80.

492

Detailed Ball Mill Work Index

Test Procedure
9. Calculate the BMWI using the Bond equation:

Wi = 44.5 / [(P1)0.23 x Gbp0.82 x 10 (1/P80 - 1/F80)]

Where:
Wi = Ball mill work index
P1 = opening in microns of the sieve size tested
Gbp = the average of the last three net grams per
revolution, or grindability.
 493

How are BMWI results reported and

what do they mean?
• The standard report details the Bond test procedure method,
and presents the results including F80, P80, Grindability and
Work Index.

• The Bond BMWI provides a measure of how much energy is

required to grind a sample of ore in a ball mill.

• Typical BMWI results and their relative measure include:

Property Soft Medium Hard Very Hard

Bond WI (kWh/t) 7–9 9 –14 14 –20 > 20

494

Additional Bond BMWI Comments

• A typical BMWI test takes 1 week.

• As a rule of thumb, for a given closing sieve size, the resulting product
P80 will be ~ one root 2 series sieve size smaller. For example, if the
required product P80 is ~ 106 µm then use a 150 µm closing sieve size.

• Wet sieving is only used if the material is likely to agglomerate or if the

closing sieve size is ≤ 45µm.

• Wet sieving significantly increases the test time, as the test must be
carried out on dry material. The sample must be oven-dried after each
wet sieving process.

• There may also be issues of material degradation either in water or at

the high drying temperatures, which needs to be considered before the
test is carried out.
 495

b) Bond Rod Mill Work Index

• BRWI test requires 20 kg of material, which is crushed to -

12.7mm (-1/2”) and is tested in a standard Bond Rod mill.

• The sample is ground to -1.18 mm (14# Tyler) to emulate

the duty of a primary rod mill in front of a secondary ball
mill.

• The rod mill index derived from this test is used in

conjunction with the ball mill work index to determine the
rod mill power demand, again using the Bond power
equation.

496

Rod Mill Grindability Test Procedure

1. Weigh 1250 cc of crushed –1/2 inch rock
2. Conduct sieve analysis and determine, F80
3. Grind dry in closed circuit with 100% circulating load in 12
inch diameter x 24 inch long rod mill
4. Screen and weigh undersize of product
5. Add fresh feed to original 1250 cc weight
6. Calculate number of revolutions to produce 100% circulating
load
7. Repeat cycle until the net grams of undersize produced per
revolution is constant
8. Conduct Sieve Analysis on product and determine P80
9. Calculate Wi:
Wi = 62 / [(P1)0.23 x Gbp0.625 x 10 (1/P80 - 1/F80)]
 497

c) Bond Abrasion Index

• The abrasion index test requires only 5 kg of material, which
is crushed and screened to an exacting size range of +12.7 –
19.0 mm (+½” – ¾”).
• The test uses a small laboratory scale mill with a test paddle
that is weighed before and after being rotated in contact with
the dry test sample.
• The difference in weight is designated as the abrasion index,
and is used in conjunction with Bond formulae to predict liner
wear and media consumption in rod and ball mills, as well as
in crusher liners.

498

d) Impact Crushing Tests:

Standard Bond Method
• These tests can take two forms. The first is the Standard
Bond Crushing Test, which has a requirement of twenty
pieces of rock or core of size +50 – 75 mm (+2” – 3”). Pieces
are placed in a twin pendulum device and impacted to failure
to produce an impact crushing strength, measured in kWh
per tonne of ore.
• Twenty specimens are tested to provide a measure of
variability of results, as there is a tendency towards
heterogeneity in rocks of larger sizes. The standard index is
used primarily by crusher manufacturers to assign down
rating factors for ore toughness in crusher selection.
 499

Impact Crushing Tests: Standard Bond Method

500

Impact Crushing Tests:

Standard Bond Crushability Method
Crushability Test Procedure

1. –3 + 2 inch rock mounted between

two-30 lb weights on wheels
2. Weights strike rock simultaneously on
smallest dimension
3. Increase height until rock breaks
4. Calculate impact crushing strength, C
(ft. – lb/inch)
5. Determine rock SG
6. Calculate Wi from average of 10
breaks

Wi = 2.59 x C / SG
 501

Impact Crushing Tests: Modified Bond

Method
• Test uses a larger sample of rock or drill core.

• 120 kg of material is tumbled in the standard 1.83 m diameter

x 0.3 m wide Bond autogenous media competency test mill
for 500 revolutions at 26 rpm, to eliminate imperfections in
rocks and to mimic seasoned pebbles in a mill charge.
• The product is screened to remove –19 mm material. The
oversize are sorted into 4 or 5 classes, depending on the feed
size. The size classes are 19 x 25 mm, 25 x 38 mm, 38 x 51
mm, 50 x 75 mm, and 75 x 100 mm.
• Select 20 rocks in each size class and subject to standard
Bond Impact Crushing Work Index Test.

502

Impact Crushing Tests: Results

• The test provides the raw data required to derive an impact
crushing profile, used to identify the type of comminution
circuit is best suited to the ore.
 503

SINGLE PARTICLE METHODS

- AG AND SAG

The Barratt Approach and Siddall Approach methods have

been found to predict the single stage grinding power
required in a AG/SAG mill.

In both methods, there is a reliance on either pilot plant data

or database correlations in order to establish T80 (SAG
transfer size), and hence the SAG mill power in a two-stage
grinding circuit.

504

Single Particle Methods (AG and SAG)

a) Bond Impact Test Method: Barratt Approach

Barratt (1986) proposed a method for predicting SAG power involving the
use of a combination of Bond Work Indices over a range of sizes from F80
to a defined P80, applying a correction factor to resultant power, and
deducting the ball milling component of the power:

E (SAG) = [10Wic(Sp) + 10Wir(Sr)*Kr + 10Wib(Sb)*Kb] * 1.25 - 10Wib(Ssb)

where: E (SAG) is the specific SAG mill power in kWh/t

Wic,r,b are the Crushing, Rod and Ball mill Work Indices
Sc,r,b are [1/P - 1/F] for the equivalent stage size ranges

It was noticed that the method can be used unless the Wic and Wir are
significantly higher than the Wib, in which case SABC is indicated and E
(SAG) can be discounted by 10% to arrive at a power efficient SABC design.
 505

Single Particle Methods (AG and SAG)

b) Bond Impact Test Method: Siddall Approach
Siddall, et al., (1996) classified the responses obtained from impact
testing the products of a tumbling drum and related them to a correction
factor, designated f(SAG) which is applied to the Bond Ball Mill Work
Index to predict the total power required to grind from F80 = 150 mm to P80
= 75 micron. The equation takes the form:

P(TOT) = 10 WI * f(SAG) [1/75 - 1/150000]

By subtracting the ball mill power requirement and correcting for feed
size, the SAG mill power can be predicted.

P(SAG) = P(TOT) – P(cr) – P(bm)

P(TOT ) is the total circuit power

P(cr) is the correction for feed F80 size
P(bm) is the correction for ball mill power

506

Ore characterization test requirements

-SAG/AG mills
• Must test particles over the entire size range of SAG mill feed
for both impact and abrasion breakage, to determine energy
levels expected in commercial mills
• Must determine media competency;
• Must allow examination of steady-state mill load characteristics
(critical sized material);
• Must generate a breakage vs. energy level map for simulation
• Must be reproducible (need representative samples);
• Must determine total grinding power required; and,
• Must use a small sample mass.
 507

Additional Ore Characterization Tests

• Unconfined compressive strength (UCS)
• Autogenous Media Competence Test
• JKDrop Weight Test
• McPherson Test
• SPI Minovex
• Pilot Scale Testing
• Plant Circuit Surveys

508

Unconfined Compressive Strength Test

• This test determines the strength of a rock sample under
compression by a single vertical force.

• The test requires the use of a specialized compression

device which applies an evenly controlled force to the
rock until failure.

• Unfortunately, the test is undertaken in many different

types of devices, with widely varying sample
specifications, which makes cross-comparison of results
difficult at times.
 509

Unconfined Compressive Strength Test

• One international standard that is used widely is the

ASTM2938-86.
• A sample specimen is machined into a cylinder featuring a
length twice that of the specimen’s diameter, ideally 50 mm
(2”).
• The test produces two outputs:
‒The mode of breakage, providing insight into the nature of the
rock.
‒The actual UCS value, usually quoted in MPa.
• The UCS value is used to guide crusher manufacturers in
selecting the appropriate equipment, and to assist the grinding
consultant in assessing an ore’s competency.

510

Autogenous Media Competency Test

• When a sample is available in the form of lump rock, the standard
Autogenous Tumbling Test can be carried out using 10 rocks in five
size ranges between 102 and 165 mm.

• The rock is normally tumbled for 500 revolutions in a

6 ft x 1 ft drum and the product sized.

• The product provides data to enable evaluation of the following:

‒ Interpretation of the product distribution against generic curves.
‒ Production of media in AG and SAG mills.
‒ The amount of critical size build-up.
‒ The tendency for ore to generate fines (-6 mm material).
‒ Overall amenability to autogenous milling.
 511

Autogenous Media Competency Test

• The test provides excellent insight into impact breakage and
auto abrasion characteristics of ores, but is currently only
performed in a few laboratories around the world.

512

JK Drop Weight Test

• This test has been devised by the

Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research
Centre (JKMRC), and is used to derive
impact breakage and abrasion
parameters for use in their simulation
package, JKSimMet.

• The method involves dropping a metal

weight from a set height onto a test
specimen and sizing the “daughter”
products from the resultant rock failure.
 513

JK Drop Weight Test

• JK Tech introduced a Drop Weight Test to replace the

Pendulum Test.
• A number of specimens of varying sizes are tested to
generate breakage curves from which the JKSimMet
simulation parameters are calculated.
• The test is a useful adjunct to the other media
competency tests: once the type of circuit that is best
suited to the ore is identified, JKSimMet can be used to
verifying initial mill sizes.

514

JK Rotary Breakage Tester

 515

JK Rotary Breakage Tester

Minerals Engineering 22 (2009) 602–612

516

McPherson Test
• The most notable method in use in the Americas is the
test developed by Art MacPherson.
• It uses dry grinding on material typically crushed to –38
mm to ascertain the ore’s autogenous characteristics in a
450 mm diameter mill.
• The results are compared to a standard Bond test, and an
empirically scaled value for the amount of power that is
theoretically required to grind the ore is determined.
• The test is normally used as a precursor to pilot scale
AG/SAG milling.
 517

McPherson Test
• The main area of concern with the test is the underlying
assumption that ore at large lump sizes behaves in a
similar manner to the small sizes used in the test at –38
mm, which is not consistently correct.
• This is particularly so with tough siliceous ores (typical of
the greenstone belts in Australia and parts of Africa).
• However, the test can serve as a useful adjunct to the
other testes discussed above in providing some insight
into the autogenous characteristics when whole ore is not
available for testing.
• It generates an estimate of the product size from an
AG/SAG mill.

518

SPI Minnovex Test (Starkey)

• This test has been devised by Minnovex in Canada to predict SAG mill
specific power requirements using only –12.7 mm material.
• The test uses a small 300 mm dia. x 100 mm long laboratory scale mill
with a small ball charge of 25 mm balls to grind a 2 kg test sample.
• The objective is to establish the grinding time required to grind the ore to
80% passing 1.7 mm (10#), the closing screen size.
• This test claims to demonstrate a strong correlation between grinding time
for ores and their corresponding SAG mill specific power draw. It provides
an attractive alternative to tests requiring large sample size.
• Like the McPherson test it draws on a large database for comparison with
actual operations, which also provides the basis for calibration of the
model against laboratory results.
 519

Pilot Scale Testing

• Most “greenfields” projects can not access whole ore in the early stages
of the study; hence, the focus on drill core testing.
• If whole ore is available from a current operation or from a development
audit or shaft it is possible to undertake pilot scale SAG mill testing.
• For circuits of less than 2 MTPA capacity, piloting is usually not justifiable,
with the cost of such a venture usually incorporated into extra mill length
and/or motor rating.
• For simple AG or SAG mill piloting without online downstream piloting of
other unit processes (such as flotation or solvent extraction) 100 – 150
tonnes of ore are required, with campaign duration being 10 to 15 working
days in a test facility.
• For more complex arrangements, campaigns have been known to run
over two months, with corresponding escalating costs.

520

Plant Circuit Surveys

• When the mill selection being considered is the result of an
intended plant upgrade, obtain plant survey data in the form
of mass balances and sizing data.
• Supplement with process information such as milling rate,
power draw and equipment configurations (operating ball
charge, total mill charge volume, milling speed, cyclone
parameters, etc.).
• This data can be used to provide input information for power
based modeling, or for more sophisticated breakage rate
based on simulators.
 521

Grinding & Classification

Circuit Design – Mill Power

522

Sessions Outline

1. Types of Mill Equipment and Circuits

2. Factors In Grinding Circuit Selection
3. Ore Testing
4. Mill Power
5. Sizing Grinding Mills
6. Grinding Mill Design and Operation
 523

Milling Power

1. Introduction
2. Power Method Considerations
3. Bond Grindability Method
4. Mill Speed
5. Liner Profile and Speed Effects
6. Classification and Circulating Loads
Reference Papers
“Bench-Scale and Pilot Plant Tests for Comminution Circuit Design,” Mosher &
Bigg & “Selection of Rod Mills, Ball Mills and Regrind Mills” Rowland. SME, 2002.

524

Introduction

• In 1951 Mr. Fred C. Bond of the AllisChalmers Co.

proposed his third theory of comminution.

• Mr. Bond developed his work index (Wi), which is used

extensively to determine power input.

• This session describes methods of determining mill power

(used as the basis of mill sizing) and ore testing.
 525

Introduction
• Ore characterization for comminution is to provide
parameters to design circuits that economically achieve
the throughput and grind that is suited to the balance of
the plant’s equipment and capabilities.

• Circuit design is a balance between:

‒ Finding the minimum operating cost to attain the
desired final grind (consumables and power) &
‒Efficiently using installed capital.
‒The most efficient circuit is the one that allows the
greatest rate of return to a project.

526

Introduction

• Certain circuit configurations require more ore

characterization that others.

• A conventional crusher-rod mill-ball mill circuit requires less

characterization than an AG or SAG circuit.

• AG/SAG circuits power draw is dynamic and greatly affected

by changes in operating conditions.
 527

Mill Power
• Around half the energy used in most mineral processing plant
is consumed in grinding. Usually, it is the single biggest
operating cost item, and good energy utilization is critical to
project economics.
• Sizing of grinding mills is mostly carried out by determining
the energy required for the duty and selecting an appropriate
unit to deliver that energy.
• Determining the energy required can often be done by
laboratory testing. Two forms of testing are common:
‒The Bond grindability tests
‒Single particle tests e.g. the Impact test or the Drop Weight
Test.

528

Power Method Considerations: Testing

• Bond grindability (ball and rod mills)
‒The Bond Grinding Indices are for predicting rod and ball
mill power requirements. They can also be used by
operators to assess the power efficiency of an existing
circuit, as explained below. However, the Bond BWI is not a
good predictor of AG/SAG mills unless adapted using
empirical factors.
• Single particle (AG and SAG mills)
‒In order to assess AG/SAG behavior, single particle tests
have been devised which look at the energy required to
break the particle under impact conditions, and the
relationship between the energy applied and the size
distribution of the “daughter” products.
 529

Bond Grindability Method (Ball and Rod)

Work Input Determination
• Ball mill circulating load 2.5: Rod mills CL 1.0.

• Bond derived a formula for the calculation of the required

energy to reduce particles from a feed 80% passing size
(F80) to a product 80% (P80).
 1 1 
W  10 Wi   
 P80 F80 

Where: W = work input in kWh/t

Wi = Bond Work Index in kWh/t
Multiplying the new feed (t/h) by W gives the power
requirement (kW).

530

Bond Efficiency Factors

Efficiency Factors are applied to W to derive the corrected power
requirement, based on empirical experience:

W Corrected = WBond* EF1 *EF2 *EF3 *EF4 *EF5 *EF6 *EF7 *EF8 *EF9

EF1 – Dry Grinding

EF2 – Open Circuit Grinding
EF3 – Diameter Efficiency Factor
EF4 – Oversized Feed Factor
EF5 – Fineness of Grind
EF6 – High/Low Ratio of Reduction Rod Milling
EF7 – Low Ratio of Reduction Ball Milling Factor
EF8 – Rod Mill Feed
EF9 – Rubber Liners Factor
 531

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF1 (Dry Grinding)

With most materials, for the same range of work, dry

grinding requires 1.3 times as much power as wet
grinding. In some special cases, this correction factor
can be as low as 1.1 or great as 2.0.

532

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF2 (Open Circuit
Product Size EF2
Grinding) Control Reference
% Passing
• For ball milling, EF2 is 50 1.035
a function of the 60 1.05
degree of control 70 1.10
required on the circuit 80 1.20
product. Open circuit 90 1.40
inefficiency factors are
92 1.46
as follows:
95 1.57
98 1.70
 533

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF3 (Diameter Efficiency Factor)

Using a base diameter of 2.44 m (8’) inside liners the

correction for other diameters (in meters) is given by:

0. 2
 2.44 
EF 3   
 D 

• The minimum value applied for EF3 is 0.914 for practical

design purposes.

534

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF4 (Oversized Feed Factor)  F  Fo 
Rr  (Wi  7)   
 Fo 
EF 4 
Rr
• Rr = Reduction Ratio, F80/P80
Wi = Rod Mill or Ball Mill Work Index in kWh/st
Fo = Optimum feed size = Zf * (13/RWi)0.5
Zf = A constant, where: rod milling = 16,000
ball milling = 4,000
RWi = Rod Mill Work Index in kWh/st
• The influence of Rr should be assessed with caution in the
first stage of a two-stage circuit.
• Do not use EF4 for rod mill prepared feed to a ball mill and
do not apply if EF4 < 1.0
• In two-stage ball milling, use EF4 = 1.2
 535

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF5 (Fineness of Grind)

EF 5 
P80  10.3
1.145  P80
• Apply this factor only when P80 < 75μm (200 mesh).

536

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF6 (High/Low Ratio of Reduction - Rod Milling)

Do not use EF6 if (Rr-Ro) is between -2 and +2:

EF 6  1 
 Rr  Ro 
2

150
• Where:
5L
Ro  8 
D
D = inside liner diameter of rod mill (meters)
L = length of rods (meters) = Rod Mill Inside L – 0.15
 537

Bond Efficiency Factors

• EF7 (Low Ratio of Reduction Ball Milling Factor)
• If the Rr ,or reduction ratio, of the ball feed to product
drops below 6, use the EF7 correction factor. The lower
the Rr the more power required.

EF 7 
2  ( Rr  1.35)  0.26
2  ( Rr  1.35) 
• Note: Do not apply an EF7 factor greater than 2.0 without
conducting continuous test work.

538

Bond Efficiency Factors

EF8 (Rod Mill Feed)
• When calculating rod mill power for rod milling only, an
EF8 value of 1.4 is used when the feed is prepared by
open circuit crushing and 1.2 in closed circuit.

• For Rod/Ball circuits 1.2 is used for the rod milling stage
only, if the feed is prepared in open circuit.

• Do not use with Rod/Ball circuits with closed crushing

circuits.
 539

Bond Efficiency Factors

EF9 (Rubber Liners Factor)
• With respect to wear resistance, rubber liners are best
suited for ball diameters up to 80 mm.
• Steel liners are best suited to primary ball milling
applications requiring larger than 80 mm balls and rod
mills, and ball mills larger than 16.5 ft in diameter.
• EF9 is applied to mills with rubber lifters, as they tend to
be somewhat bulkier than the equivalent steel
configuration, reducing the available grinding space.
• Rubber liners also absorb a portion of the impact energy
of the steel media, reducing efficiency.
• An EF9 of about 1.07 is typically assigned for rubber lined
mills.

540

Fines Correction
• The product from the first stage of grinding (AG, SAG, or rod
mill) typically has a higher fines content than a crushing circuit
product.
• To predict the ball mill size required in a secondary milling
application, the mill feed size is modified by removing finished
product from it.
• The next slide shows the size distributions for a crushed vs.
ground feed, with different fines but the same P80.
• A partition curve is typically applied to the SAG product at the
final product separation size.
• The result is that only a fraction of the SAG product requires
secondary grinding, and this daughter product exhibits a
coarser size distribution than its parent.
 541

Fines Correction
The product from the first stage of grinding i.e. an AG mill,
SAG mill, or rod mill, usually has a different size distribution
than that produced by crushing to prepare ball mill feed.

542

Bond Method Limitations

• The method is designed to predict power in a wet grinding
circuit at a 250% circulating load. Moving away from this
condition reduces the accuracy of the test.
• It does not predict the behavior of large rocks in grinding
circuit where the mode of breakage is impact dominated
versus attrition and abrasion in ball mills (SAG/AG Mills).
• The Bond Work Index is based on the energy per unit
mass required to reduce a particle from “infinite” size to
80% passing 100 μm. If the P80 is less than 100 μm,
serious discrepancies can occur. The closing screen in
the Bond test must reflect the size to which the particle is
to be ground.
• If P80 ≤ 10 μm, do not apply Bond predicators of power.
 543

Bond Method Limitations

• The shape of the size distribution generated by a two-
stage grinding operation may differ significantly from the
shape obtained by crushing.
• The F80 may be the same, but the amount of fines at say
F30 or F20 may be markedly different.
• A size distribution correction may be necessary to better
predict 2nd stage power requirements for:
‒SAG/Ball milling and 2-stage ball milling
‒Other ‘unnatural’ or scalped feed distributions.
• These conditions require additional grinding energy based
upon the variation from a more standard feed distribution.

544

Mill Speed - Critical Speed

• Grinding mill is usually shown as a percentage of critical
speed, Nc.
42.31 76.63
Nc  Nc 
D D
(D in meters) (D in feet)
• Normal mill speeds range from 60 to 90% of Nc, dictated
by operational and economic considerations.
• Power drawn is proportional to mill speed, suggesting that
mills should be run as fast as possible.
• However, the useful work done by the grinding charge is
related to the mode of breakage induced, which is in turn
influenced by the liner design and charge level.
• Higher speeds lead to higher rod, ball and liner wear.
 545

Mill Speed
Effect of Mill Speed on Load Trajectory
Figure 1 illustrates the effect on the trajectory of the outer
envelope of the charge at increasing speeds for the same ball
size with two lifter designs.

546

Mill Speed
Speed Guidelines
• Studies such as on the previous slide have produced the
following general guidelines:

• AG Mills - An impact mode of breakage is usually sought,

and with no steel media in the mill it is possible to run at
speeds in the range 80-90% Nc.

• SAG Mills - Typical operating speeds are around 75% Nc.

Liner damage will occur if the balls are allowed to impact
them directly, and SAG mills usually have variable speed
drives.
 547

Rod Mill Speed

Rod Mills operate at a lower speed than ball mills to
ensure that there is no cataracting of the rods. Typical
speeds related to the inside shell diameter are:

Diameter % Nc
(m) Inside Shell
2 68.0

3 65.0

4 64.0

4.57* 62.6

* max. recommended diameter

548

Ball Mill Speed

• Smaller mills can be run at high speeds up to 85% Nc,

medium diameter mills at lower speed – 70-72% Nc. There is
an emerging trend of operating very large mills (>5 m dia.) at
higher speeds – typically 76% Nc – in an attempt to overcome
an “inactive kidney problem.”

• Typically for Ball Mills D < 5m:

% Nc = 83.5 [D] –0.108

 549

Liner Profile and Speed Effects

• Figure 1 also shows the effect of differing lifters on

the trajectory of balls in the ball mill.

550

Liner Profile and Speed Effects

• Fine Grinding:
For fine grinding, it is desirable to have the charge
cascading rather than cataracting. This is achieved by
selecting a lower mill speed and/or using a wave liner
profile.
• Impact Breakage
For breakage of larger feed particles, the grinding balls
should strike the charge close to the toe. Higher lifter bars
and mill speeds will assist.
 551

Classification and Circulating Load

• Efficient classification is key to any closed grinding circuit.
• Typical equipment include screens, classifiers or
hydrocyclones.
• Typical SAG Circulating Load Ratio (CLR): 50-150%
• Typical CLR for Ball Mills 250-350%.
• Ensure that the classifier is performing well by analyzing its
behavior on a regular basis.
• CLR is best measured by mass flow to the cyclones.
• There is also a standard method which uses the size
distributions of the streams to derive a mass balance.
• Use these techniques to check that the mill is grinding the
optimum tonnage by maintaining the target CLR.

552

Summary
• A key aspect for sizing and selecting grinding mills is to
determine the power required.
• Bond's equation works well, but must be modified with
efficiency factors.
• Mill Power is also influenced by mill speed and liner
profiles.
• Efficient classification is critical to an effective circuit.
 554

Grinding & Classification

Circuit Design – Mill Sizing
 555

Sessions Outline

1. Types of Mill Equipment and Circuits

2. Factors In Grinding Circuit Selection
3. Ore Testing
4. Mill Power
5. Sizing Grinding Mills
6. Grinding Mill Design and Operation

556

Grinding Mill Sizing and Design

• Introduction
• Mill Sizing
‒ Factors influencing mill power
‒ Tumbling Mill Power Calculation and Sizing
‒ Calculating Grinding Media Size and Consumption
• General Mill Design Considerations
‒ Drive Selection
‒ Motor Selection
‒ Mill Discharge and Feed System Selection
Reference Paper
“Selection of Rod Mills, Ball Mills and Regrind Mills,” Chester Rowland
 557

Introduction

Objective: to describe methods of sizing ball and rod mills

once the grinding power requirements for these have been
determined.

The approach to sizing SAG mills is fundamentally similar to

ball mills with modification for the effect of grates on the
charge, aspect ratio and pebble crushing.

558

Factors Influencing Mill Sizing

a) Mill Speed
b) Mill Diameter and Length
c) Mill Discharge Opening Size
d) Type of Discharge Mill Head
e) Amount/Size of Grinding Media
f) Feed Size
g) Feed SG
h) Ore Hardness
i) Feed Rate
j) Water addition (viscosity)
 559

Mill Power Factors: Mill Speed

Ps = KTω
Where:
• Ps = Power transmitted
through shaft from motor
• K = Constant
HP approximately
• T = Torque proportional to speed
• ω = RPM over wide range

Net HP
% of Critical Speed 100

560

Mill Power Factors: Mill Dimensions

• Mill Diameter & Length

P  D2.5 PL
Log (net HP per unit length)

HP proportional to
Average length
Slope = 2.5
Net HP

Small mills ~ 2.4

Large mills ~ 2.6

Log (Mill Diameter) Mill Length

 561

Mill Power Factors:

Discharge Opening Size
Mill Discharge Opening Size
Distance Between Load Centroid & Mill Center
Discharge Opening Rotation Direction

Distance from mill center to

centroid of load

As the discharge opening becomes smaller, the distance from

mill center to the centroid of the load becomes smaller, due to Discharge
shift in center of gravity of load. So, HP goes down (despite small Opening
increase in load). Increases
Net HP

Spread in curves
is exaggerated

% of Critical Speed

562

Mill Power Factors:

Discharge Head Type
• Grate Discharge draw more power than Overflow
due to the distance from Centroid to Mill Center
Load N centroid is closer to mill center than Load P centroid

N = center of gravity of load for high discharge mill

N
P = center of gravity of load for diaphragm (grate) discharge mill
P
Mass of Solids at Position X

Load N

Load P
Area under curve is proportional to mass of load

Feed End Distance X Along Mill Length Discharge End

 563

Mill Power Factors:

Discharge Head Type
Overflow Discharge

Grate Discharge

Drum Feeder

Spout Feeder

564

Mill Power Factors: Amount/Size Grinding Media

Critical Speed is the speed at which a ball (m(R-r)w)w

or rod will be centrifuged in the mill. r

From force balance, Wc (rpm): mg

Radius R

76.63 Angular

Wc   Dd 
velocity, w
D = 2R
d = 2r

Due to change in mass Due to shift in centroid of

load and mass
Net HP

Net HP

60 70 80
% of Critical Speed % Media Load, by volume
 565

Mill Power Factors

Feed Size and Rate
From Bond Equation
P = KT[k – 1F80]
K, k are constant and T is feed rate
As feed rate increases, P will increase and then level off

Feed Specific Gravity

The higher the specific gravity, the higher the power draw
 SG =  Power Draw

566

Mill Power Factors: Ore Hardness

From Bond Equation
• P = KWi
Log (HP/T)

Slope of about –1/2

Work Index
Increases

Log P80
 567

Mill Power Factors: Feed Rate

- Startup

Centroid Shift causes less HP

Due to build up of draw
rock in the mill
Less power from slippage
Net HP

Power drawn with steel balls Steady State

and water only. Reached
At time = 0, cut in fresh feed solids

0 Time

-Steady State

Rod Mills and Ball Autogenous Mills

Mills
Net

Net
HP

HP

Feed Rate Feed Rate

568

Mill Power Factors: Water Addition Rate, Pulp Viscosity

Overflow Discharge: - Rod Mills : 80% solids

- Ball Mills – 76% solids

 Water Addition Rate   Viscosity,  Flow and  Power Draw

 Water Addition Rate   Flushing Fines,  Power Draw and 

Wear
Ore containing clays can be
Pulp Viscosity,

“Ice Cream” Discharge

excessively viscous. The viscosity
can be reduced by adding:
“Sausage”
1. Water Discharge
cp

2. Polyacrylic acids
3. Calgon (phosphate dispersant) Pulp Density, gm per cc
 569

Mill Grinding Power and Sizing Calculation: Work Input

• The mill work input to grind a tonne of feed of 80 %

passing size (F80) to a product passing size of 80 % (P80)
is calculated by the Bond equation:
W = 10 Wi [1/P80 - 1/F80]
where:
W = work input in kWh/t
Wi = Bond Work Index in kWh/t
• Efficiency factors EF are applied to W to derive the
corrected power requirement WCOR
• WCOR is multiplied by the new mill feed tonnage T to give
the mill power requirement P = T * WCOR
• This is the power that must be applied at the mill drive in
order to grind the feed tonnage T from one size
distribution F80 to a finer product size distribution P80.

570

Mill Grinding Power and Sizing Calculation: Matching

Mill Size to Power Requirement

• Once the mill power is determined the mill size to draw the
required power must be calculated.
• Power draw theory is based upon a charge load in
equilibrium, and relates to its center of gravity.
• The centroid of the charge is maintained in dynamic
equilibrium at an angle of repose A to the vertical by a
mechanical lever arm force balance between the mill drive
and charge weight.
 571

Mill Grinding Power and Sizing Calculation:

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement
• The figure below shows a section of a mill charge load in
equilibrium in relation to its center of gravity.
W = weight of charge
N D = Diameter
C = distance of center of
D gravity of charge from
center of mill in feet
C A = dynamic angle of
repose of the charge
N = mill speed in rpm
W
A

572

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

DuPont Power Model
An early theoretical power model of DuPont (1900’s) shows
the effect of charge weight, mill diameter and mill speed on
the power draw per unit of mill length (P/L) :

1. Charge Weight: P/L ∝ Mass W ∝ D2

2. Mill Diameter: P/L ∝ Lever Arm Length C (Centroid to Mill
Center) ∝ D
3. Speed: P/L ∝ Speed ∝ 1/ D  2

Therefore P/L ∝ D2 * D * 1/ D = D 2.5

or P ∝ D2.5 * L
 573

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

DuPont Power Model
P ∝ D2.5 *L

This illustrates that:

- mill power is more sensitive to diameter than length
- the relationship between length and power is linear
- diameter affects power draw exponentially
- incremental changes in diameter provide step changes
in power draw

Therefore the selection of larger diameter (and fewer)

mills can significantly reduce the number of mills required
in an application.

574

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

DuPont Power Model
• Capital cost climbs steeply with diameter due to:
‒ manufacturing methods
‒ greater load on mill structure
‒ more expensive drive systems

• Therefore the number of mills required becomes a trade-off

between capacity and capital. In general, the larger the mill
selected the lower the overall installed capital.

There are practical limitations. Currently the largest mills are

about:
Rod Mill – 15 ft diameter by 24 ft long ( 2,625 hp)
Ball Mill – 26 ft diameter by 38 ft long (20,770 hp)
SAG Mill – 42 ft diameter by 26 ft long (22,000 hp)
 575

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

Nordberg Power Model- Theoretical Approach

Nordberg used a mechanical torque arm force balance

analysis to show that the theoretical power input (hp)
required to maintain the centroid of a mill charge in
equilibrium at an angle of repose A to the vertical is:

hp = K * (W) * (C) * Sin A * 2π * N

where:
K =1/33,000
W= weight of charge
C = distance of center of gravity of charge from center of
mill in feet
A = dynamic angle of repose of the charge
N = mill speed in rpm

576

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

Nordberg Power Model
hp = K * (W) * (C) * Sin A * 2 π * N
The model is based on the availability of data from similar
installations. If the value of the angle A can be found then
the power demand of mills with various diameters at the
same speed can be calculated.
However the value of angle A varies with:
• the type of discharge
• percent of critical speed
• grinding condition.

Thus direct comparison can only be made between mills

with a similar type of discharge.
 577

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

Nordberg Power Model
If various types of discharge are to be used, the following
factors must be applied for mills of the same size and speed:
• Dry diaphragm = 1.0
• Wet diaphragm = 0.9
• Wet overflow = 0.8

In order to use the preceding Nordberg Equation, it is

necessary to have considerable data on existing installations.
Therefore, this approach has been simplified.

578

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

Simplified Nordberg Power Model
The five basic conditions that determine the horsepower
drawn by a mill are:
1. Diameter
2. Length
3. Charge (% Loading)
4. Speed
5. Mill type
Nordberg incorporated these conditions into four factors
A,B,C & L to allow the calculation of the approximate
horsepower of a mill at the pinion drive shaft as follows:
HP = A * B * C * L
 579

Matching Mill Size to Power Requirement:

Simplified Nordberg Power Model
• The Nordberg power factors for calculating rod and ball mill power are
on charts on pg 9 of the Nordberg Grinding Catalog, where:
A = factor for diameter inside the shell liners = D^2.5/5.6442
B = factor for mill type and charge volume (% loading) – steel grinding
media
C = factor for mill speed expressed as a percentage of mill critical
speed
L = length in feet of grinding chamber measured between head liners
at the junction of the shell and head liners (Equivalent Grinding
Length EGL) – in most cases subtract 6” from the length inside the
mill shell.

B factor is based on steel grinding media at 315 lbs per cubic ft. The
B factor must be adjusted by the ratio of the actual charge density or,
Factor =B x charge density/315.

580

Summary
• Tumbling mills are sized to deliver the power required
to achieve the desired grind size.
• Several factors influence power draw, including mill
speed, dimensions, type, feed size, type and rate.
• Power draw theory is based upon a charge load in
equilibrium, and relates to its center of gravity
• Mill power is more sensitive to diameter than length
• Mill size can be estimated by the simplified Nordberg
Power Model.
 581

Grinding & Classification

Circuit Design – Mill Sizing
Example

582

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example

- Calculation
Exercise: Size a single stage ball mill (overflow) in closed
circuit with a cyclone with the following parameters:

Feedrate = 500 tonne/h

F80 = 9,400 micrometers
P80 = 175 micrometers
RWI = 13.2 kWh/st
BWI = 11.7 kWh/st
CL = 250% Circulating Load
Cdensity = 340 lb per cubic ft
SG = 2.7
Ai = 0.25
 583

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example –

Calculation
• The feed to a standard Bond ball mill grindability test is
minus 6 mesh (3360μm)

• However the coarser fraction of a minus ½” single-stage

ball mill feed is not included in the feed to the grindability
test mill

• If RWI is different than BWI, then particularly if the former

is higher, a two step calculation should be used to
determine the grinding power input, using 2100 μm to
divide the calculations.

584

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example – Calculation

Calculate Uncorrected Grinding Power Input
Step 1:
W = 10 * (13.2 - 13.2 )= 1.52 kWh/st
2,100 9,400

Step 2:
W = 10 *(11.7 - 11.7) = 6.29 kWh/st
175 2,100
 585

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example – Calculation

Calculate Uncorrected Grinding Power Input
Step 3:
Total = 1.52 + 6.29 = 7.81 kWh/st
= 7.81 * 1.102* 1.341* 500
= 5766 HP, uncorrected

Where:
Power (HP) = Power (kW) x 1.341
1 tonne = 1.102 short ton

586

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 4: Apply Efficiency Factors

HPcorrected = HPuncorrected*Relevant EF1 to EF8 factors

• EF1: Dry grinding. Does not apply.

EF2: Open circuit grinding. Does not apply.

EF3: Diameter Efficiency = (2.44/D)0.2 .

Mill will be larger than 3.81 m (12.5’) in diameter so use
0.914.
 587

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

EF4: Oversize Feed =  F  Fo 

Rr  (Wi  7)   
 Fo 
EF 4 
Rr

Rr = Reduction Ratio = F80/P80 = 9400/175 = 53.7

Fo = Optimum feed size = Zf*(13/RWI)0.5
Zf = 4000 (ball milling)
Fo = 4000 * (13/13.2)0.5 = 3970
EF4 = 53.7 + (11.7-7) * [9400-3970)/3970] = 1.12
53.7

588

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

EF5: Fineness of Grind – P80 > 75μm, Does not apply.

EF6: High/Low Rr - Rod Milling, Does not apply.
EF7: Low Rr Ball Milling Factor, Does not apply.
EF8: Rod milling factor, Does not apply.
EF9: Rubber Liners Factor, Does not apply.

HP,corrected = 5,766 * 0.914 * 1.12 = 5903 HP

 589

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 5: Select # of Mills
Assume use 1 mill: 5,903/1 = 5,903 HP Mill

• Step 6: Size Mill Shell

HP = A * B * C * L

We don’t know D so substitute factor A with D^2.5/5.6442

Charge density is 340 lb/cubic ft so multiply B by ratio of

340/315

5,903 = D2.5/5.6442 * B * (340/315) * C * L

590

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 7: Determine factor B:

Most overflow discharge ball mills operate with a charge

volume that occupies 35% to 45% of the mill volume.
> 20 ft use 35%
< 20 ft > 16.5 ft use 40%
< 16.5 ft use 45%
An average value would be 40%. From tables,
Wet Overflow Ball Mills @ 40% Loading B = 5.02
The B Factor must be adjusted to the steel density of the
balls (340/315).
5,903 = D2.5/5.6442 * 5.02 * (340/315) * C * L
 591

592

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 8: Determine factor C:

• Critical Speed
The percent of critical speed (peripheral speed at which
charge centrifuges) is one of the major factors in
determining the power that a grinding mill draws.

To relate critical speed and peripheral speed as mill

diameter increases, the average recommended speed as
% of critical speed is shown in the table on the following
slide.
 593

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 8: -cont-
Through an iterative Mill Diameter % of Critical
process, you can find the Inside Liners Speed

mill diameter will be >15 ft, Meters Feet Rod Ball

Mills Mills
therefore use a speed of
0.91-1.83 3-6 76-73 80-78
68% of .
1.83-2.74 6-9 73-70 78-75
2.74-3.66 9-12 70-67 75-72
From Nordberg tables
3.66-4.57 12-15 67-64 72-70
Factor C will be = 0.1583
> 4.57 >15 - 70-68
AND by substitution

5,903 = D2.5/5.6442 * 5.02 * (340/315) * 0.1583 * L

594

Factor C – Ball Mill Sizing

 595

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example -

Calculation
• Step 9: Estimate Mill L/D Ratio.

Recommended rod mill length to diameter inside liners is

1.4 to 1.6.

Being free from the limits imposed on rod mills, ball mills
have more variation in length to diameter ratios, ranging
from 1:1 to 2:1. The ratio used varies with
- the circuit type (type of grinding)
- size of the feed
- the ratio of reduction and specified fineness of grind
• In general, as desired fineness of grind  L/D 

596

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

Ball Mill L/D Ratio – General Application Guidelines

Type of Feed F80 Top Ball Size L/D Ratio

Grinding Microns mm in.

Wet 5,000 – 10,000 60 –90 2.5 –3.5 1:1 to 1.25:1

Wet 900 – 4,000 40 –50 1.8 –2.0 1.25:1 to 1.75:1

Wet or Dry Fine Feed –Regrind 20 –30 ¾ - 1¼ 1.5:1 to 2.5:1

Wet or Dry Fine Feed- Open 20 –50 ¾ - 2.0 2.0:1 to 3.0:1

Dry 5,000 – 10,000 60 –90 2.5 –3.5 1.3:1 to 2:1

Dry 900 – 4,000 40 -50 1.8 –2.0 1.5:1 to 2:1

 597

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 9: -cont-

Based on the preceding table, wet milling and a F80 of

9,400 mm and P80 of 175 microns (not fine regrind) a L/D
ratio of 1.25 is selected.

By substitution into equation:

5,903 = D2.5/5.6442 * 5.02 * (340/315) * 0.1583 * 1.25D

598

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 10:
Calculate Mill Diameter (Inside liners):
Power Equation
5,903 = D2.5/5.6442 * 5.02 * (340/315) * 0.1583 * 1.25D

Rearranging:
31,075 = D3.5
D = 19.2 feet (inside liners)

L = 1.25 * 19.2
L = 24.0 feet
 599

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 11:
Select Mill Shell Size:
Add new shell steel liner thickness (0.6 ft) to calculated
diameter
= 0.6ft + 19.2 ft = 19.8 ft (Closest standard is 20.0 ft)

Select a 20.0 ft inside shell diameter by 24.0 ft long overflow

ball mill @ 40% ball charge and running at 5,903 hp.

600

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 12:
Calculate Maximum Ball Size for Mill Charge:

The equations for selecting the largest diameter (in inches)

rod (R) or ball (B) in the initial mill charge, or make-up
charge, for a mill of diameter D is:

R = (F800.75 /160) * [(SG * RWI) / (100 * Cs * D 0.5)]0.5

B = (F80 /K)0.5 * [( SG * BWI)/ (100 * Cs * D 0.5)]0.34
Mill Type Steel or C.I. Balls K
Ball Mill K Factor:
Wet Overflow 350
Wet-Diaphragm 330
Dry- Diaphragm 335
 601

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 12: (cont.)

F80 = 9.4 mm, convert to microns
K = 350
SG = 2.7
Cs = 68%
BWI = 11.7
D = 19.8 ft
by substitution:
B = (9400/350)0.5*[( 2.7* 11.7)/(100*0.68*19.80.5)]0.34
B = 2.4 in. Closest standard is 2.5 in.

602

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 13: Calculate rod/ball and shell liner consumption:

• The following empirical equations use the abrasion index Ai
to estimate rod, ball, and liner wear rates.

Wet Rod Mills:

Rods kg/kw-hr = 0.1590 * (Ai – 0.020)0.2
Liners kg/kw-hr = 0.0159 * (Ai – 0.015)0.3

Wet Ball Mills:

Balls kg/kw-hr = 0.1590 * (Ai – 0.015)0.34
Liners kg/kw-hr = 0.0118 * (Ai – 0.015)0.3
 603

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 13: (cont.)

Importance of Mill Liners

- Shell Liner Protect the Mill Shell

- Lifters attached to Liners which help distribute load for
grinding
- Lifter wear leads to loss of power
- SAG/AG Mills have white metal liners
- Ball Mill > 18 ft have white metal liners
- Ball Mill< 18 ft can have rubber liners (but note EF8)

604

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example - Calculation

• Step 13: (cont.)

Substitute Ai = 0.25 into ball mill equations
Balls = 0.1590 * (0.25– 0.015)0.34 = 0.0972 kg/kw-hr
Liners = 0.0118 * (0.25– 0.015)0.3 = 0.0072 kg/kw-hr
Liner consumption typically ~10% of media consumption.

Multiply by the power draw (kw) and divide by feed rate of

500 t/h to give consumption in kg/t.

Balls = 0.0972 * (5903 *0.75) / 500 = 0.86 kg/t

Liners = 0.0072 * (5903 *0.75) / 500 = 0.064 kg/t
 605

Various liner materials and arrangements

606

Typical Abrasion Index Values

Material Abrasion g Ai
Dolomite 0.0160
Schist-biotite 0.1116
Copper Ore 0.1472
Hematite 0.1647
Heavy Sulphides 0.1284
Magnetite 0.2517
Gravel 0.3051
Granite 0.3937
Quartzite 0.7751
 607

Mill Discharge and

Feed Type Selection (Ball Mill )

Overflow Discharge: Grate Discharge:

• Suitable for almost all
applications
• Simple and trouble-free.
• The discharge trunnion
can be furnished with a
trommel screen.
• 15-20% higher capacity
per unit volume
• Coarser product with high
circulating load producing
little extreme fines.
• Can have a trommel
screen as well.

608

Mill Discharge and

Feed Type Selection (Rod Mill)

• Overflow: Common for wet mill rod milling. Diameter of

discharge trunnion is larger than feed to promote flow.
• End Peripheral Discharge: Used when a coarse product is
required.
• Center Peripheral Discharge: Suitable for dry grinding at
extremely high capacities and coarse grinding, wet or dry.
Also applicable for viscous material and moisture content 3-
15% by mass.
 609

Example of Grate Discharge with Spout

Feeder – Rod Mill

Spout Feeder

610

Nordberg Mill Sizing Example -

Calculation
• Spout feeders normally feed rod mills
• Spout feeders require at least 5 ft head between mill
center line and feed hopper for proper flow
• Spout feeders are normally fed from ball mill cyclone
underflow box, requiring higher pumping heads relative to
a scoop or drum feeder.
• There is a trade-off with scoop/drum drive power and
higher maintenance, such that in modern large mills the
scoop/drum feeder is rarely used.
• Based on the exercise:
Select an overflow ball mill with a spout feeder.
 611

Summary
Mill sizing led to the selection of:
• A 20.0 ft inside shell diameter by 24.0 ft long overflow
ball mill @ 40% ball charge and running at 5,903 hp.
• Ball size: 2.5 in.
• Ball wear estimate: 0.86 kg/t
• Liner wear estimate: 0.064 kg/t
• Feeder/Discharge Arrangement:
‒Overflow mill with a spout feeder

612

Motor Selection
Drive and Motor Types and Efficiencies
Motor Fixed Variable Speed

Drive LSS WR LCI CCV WR PWM

Single Pinion 4.5-10MW 0.950 0.932 0.922 0.916 0.899 0.924

Dual Pinion 9-20MW 0.950 0.912 0.922 0.916 0.899 0.924

Gearless 9-30MW NA NA NA 0.915 NA 0.923

LSS Low Speed Synchronous

Motor Key:
WR Wound Rotor
LCI Load Commutated Inverter
CCV Cycloconverter
PWM Pulse Width Modulated
 613

Motor Selection - Summary

In general the mills should be driven by a large enough motor to allow the
mill:

1) to operate with a 45% by mill volume charge with new liners and to
2) to overcome the drive train and motor efficiency

Based on the example calculation in the last section:

Select a single-pinion fixed speed drive with a low speed synchronous

motor.

Power required = 5903 hp at the mill pinion at 40% mill volume charge.

Based on previous Table: Drive efficiency = 0.95

Select motor size of 5903 * 45/40 * 1/ 0.95 = 6,990 HP = 5250 KW

614

ROD, BALL & SAG MILL SIZING

OLAV MEIJO
HATCH ENGINEERING

May 2013
 615

Outline

1. Brief introduction to Bond’s theory
2. Lab Work index‐ Equipment – Procedure
3. Work index calculation
4. Correction Factors applied to the Lab work index
5. Calculation of the power required for grinding
6. Calculation of the mill power draw
7. All calculations together
8. FAQs 
9. SAG design test methods

616

Introduction
• In 1930 Allis-Chalmers hired Fred Bond to carry out
research on size reduction of ores and grains.

• Bond first task was to determine if the two existing

theories of comminution were right.

• Bond found that Kick and Rittinger theories were wrong

and he proposed the third theory of comminution.
 617

Introduction
• Bond’s second task was to develop a relationship
between ball mill operating data and grindability test
data.
• Bond developed a grindability method to determine the
work index Wi test.

618

The Bond Work Index Wi

The equation shown below is used to determine the value of the 
work index Wi based on the standard Bond grindability lab test.
 619

The Bond Work Index Wi

• The feed for the Ball mill grindability test is 100% - 3350 microns and
80% -2100 microns

• The feed for the rod mill grindability test is 100% -13200 microns.

• The Wi Test corresponds to the motor output power Bond correlated to

an overflow discharge ball mill of 2.44 m(8 foot) internal diameter in
wet grinding conditions, closed circuit at 250% circulating load.

620

Does it really work ?
 621

Validity of the Bond theory

Relationship between Energy consumption and particle 
size, R.T. Hukky 1961 ( Taken from the history of grinding by Alban J. Lynch 
and Chester A.  Rowland)

622

Factors affecting the Bond work index

• There are eight efficiency factors to be applied to the lab test work
index. The result obtained is the corrected work index:

Wi corrected = Wi test x EF1 x EF2 x….EF8

• These factors are applied to take into account conditions observed in

real applications that differ from the bond lab test conditions.
The efficiency factors are:
 623

Factors affecting the Bond work index

• EF1 Dry grinding

• EF2 Open circuit ball mill
• EF3 Diameter efficiency factor
• EF4 Oversized feed
• EF5 Fine grinding in ball mill – product P80 less than 75 microns
• EF6 High or low ratio of reduction rod mill
• EF7 Low ratio of reduction ball milling
• EF8 Rod milling

624

Efficiency Factors
• EF1 : This factor is applied for dry grinding. The value is 1.3
• EF2 : Open circuit grinding requires more energy than closed circuit
grinding and is a function of the product size. The table below shows
the values

(Chester A. Rowland and David M. Kjos)

 625

Efficiency Factors
• EF3 Diameter efficiency factor is calculated based on the ball mil inside 
diameter used by Bond.

EF3 = (2.44/D)0.2 and EF3=0.914 when D>3.81 meters (12.5’)

• EF4 Optimun feed size is applied when the feed size to a ball/rod mill is 
coarser that the optimun size “Fo”.

EF4=( R + (Wi‐7) (F‐Fo)/Fo ) / R

Ratio of reduction R= F80/P80 , 

Fo= 4000 (13/Wi)0.5  For ball mills

Fo= 16000 (13/Wi)0.5  For Rod mills

626

Efficiency Factors
• EF5: This factor is apply when the P80 is finer than 75 microns. This factor is 
calculated using the equation:

EF5=(P80 + 10.3)/(1.145xP80)

• EF6: This factor is applied for rod mills when the ratio of reduction R is high or 
low outside the range  Ro =+/‐ 2 :

EF6=1 + ( R –Ro)2/150
Ro= 8 + 5 L/D, 
L: Rod length D: intern mill diameter

• EF7:The low ratio of reduction factor is applied when “R” is less than 6 

EF7=(2(R‐1.35)+0.26 )/(2(R‐1.35)
 627

Efficiency Factors
• EF8: This factor is apply to rod milling only. There are only
recommended values:

EF8=1.4 for open circuit crushing, rod milling only

EF8=1.2 for closed circuit crushing, rod milling only

EF8=1.2 for open circuit crushing and Rod mill-ball mill circuit

EF8=1.0 for closed circuit crushing and Rod mill-ball mill circuit and
rod mill F80 is less than 12 mm

628

Mill Power Draw

Bond developed an empirical correlation between power and ball
charge to determine power required for a wet grinding overflow ball
mill. The correlation was later modified by Rowland and Kjos. The
final equations is:

kW/st = 3.1 D0.3 (3.2 -3Vp) Cfs (1-(0.1/2(9-10Cfs)) + Ss

D = Mill diameter Inside liners in ft.

Vp = Mill volume fraction of balls
Cfs = Fraction of critical speed
Ss = Ball size factor
*For low level grate discharge mills applied a factor of 1.16 to the above
calculation.
 629

Mill Power Draw

Ss= (B‐3D/20)/2

B = Ball size in inches
D = Mill diameter inside liners in feet
Ss = Power per short ton of ball

630

Mill Power Draw

 631

Ball Mill Sizing – All together

632

Ball Mill Sizing – All together

 633

Ball Mill Sizing – FAQs

• Can I use the Bond ball mill work index for sizing crushers ?
No. 
The Bond work index is not the same as the bond crusher 
work index. 

Bond equation is inappropriate to determine the energy 
required for crushing. 

Bond crushing index underestimates the power required for 
crushing.

634

Ball Mill Sizing – FAQs

• I’m sizing a ball mill, why do I need the “rod mill work index” ?

Energy required for grinding from 13200 microns to a P80 ‐2100 
microns is calculated by using the rod mill work index and then 
added to the ball mill energy required  from 2100 microns to the 
target P80. All ball mill efficiency factors should also be applied.

• Why don’t use big Rod Mills ?

Rod mills are limited in capacity by the maximum rod length.
 635

Ball Mill Sizing – FAQs

• What’s the relationship between Rod mill work index (RWi), 
Bond mill work index (BWi) and the amount of pebbles 
produced in a SAG mill ?

RWi > BWi Specific energy requirement is higher in the 
large fraction than the specific energy in the small fraction 
thus the probability of producing pebbles is higher ( ¼” to 
2” pebbles).

BWi > RWi Specific energy to grind coarse particles is 
lower than the specific energy require to grind fine particles 
thus the likelihood of forming pebbles is low.

636

Ball Mill Sizing – FAQs

• I’m using the Bond equation to calculate the mill power but 
it’s no even close to what the vendors proposed. What’s 
wrong ?

Double check that the correction factors you are using are 
right. If still It’s not close to vendor’s calculation, the vendor 
is wrong !
 637

JK drop weight test - JKSimMet

638

JK drop weight test - JKSimMet

• The JK Method uses two methods to characterize 
ore breakage at different energy levels.
1. High energy levels are characterized by an impact 
breakage test using a drop weight device
2. Low energy levels are characterized an abrasion test 
using a tumbling test. The abrasion parameter is “Ta” 
determined by the abrasion test.
3. “T10”  is the percentage passing 1/10 of the original size.” 
Ecs” is the specific comminution energy
 639

JK drop weight test - JKSimMet

• To use the results of testing, the ore type parameters A and b 
and ta are entered into the SAG/autogenous mill model in 
JKSimMet, 
• The simulation predicts product size and mill load using 
appropriate breakage rates. The simulator can then also be 
used to predict mill performance with variations in screen and 
classifier configurations or even with recycle crushing.
Phantom Cyclone in JKSimMet
• The “phantom overflow” represents the finished product 
produced by the SAG mill which will require no work by the ball 
mill circuit, as it will report directly to the actual ball mill 
cyclone overflow.  The “phantom underflow” however, 
represents the actual tonnage and f80 of material on which the 
ball mill will perform work

640

SMC Test:Steve Morrell’s Approach to Mill

Sizing
• The SMC Test® generates a relationship between specific input energy (kWh/t) 
and the percent of broken product passing a specified sieve size. 
• The results are used to determine the drop‐weight index (DWi), which is a 
measure of the strength of the rock when broken under impact conditions. 
• The DWi is directly related to the JK rock breakage parameters A and b and 
hence can be used to estimate the values of these parameters
 641

SMC Test:Steve Morrell’s Approach to Mill

Sizing

642

SMC Test:Steve Morrell’s Approach to Mill

Sizing
 643

Steve Morrell’s Approach to Mill Sizing

Totat specific energy to reduce crusher product to final product size :
WT  W a  W b
where
W a  specific energy to grind coarse particles
Wb  specific energy to grind fine particles
The general size reduction equation is

The general size reduction equation

is as follows :
f ( x2 ) f ( x1 )
Wi  KM i 4( x 2  x1
where :
Wi  Specific comminutio n energy at a pinion (kWh/tonne )
K  1 for all fine circuits and all coarse circuits without a recycle pebble crusher and 0.95 where circuits do have a pebble crusher.
M i  Work index related to breakage property of an ore (kWh/tonne );
x 2  80% passing size for the product ( m)
x 1  80% passing size for the feed ( m)
f(xj)  - (0.295  x j / 1000000 ) (Morrel, 2006)
M ia  is obtained directly from SMC test
18 .18
M ib  0.295 f ( p 80 ) f ( f 80 )
P1 (Gbp )( p 80  f 80 )

P1  closing screen size.

644

Steve Morrell’s Approach to Mill Sizing

Coarse particle breakage work index (Mia):

Mia = 19.5 kWh/t (from SMC test)

Fine particle breakage work index (Mib)

From the BBWI test results the ff values were obtained:

Gbps = 1.3 gr/rev

F80(um) = 2250
P80(um) = 78
P1(um) = 106
f(xj)  - (0.295  x j / 1000000 )

f(p80) = -0.2951

f(f80) = -0.2973

18 .18
M ib  0.295 f ( p 80 ) f ( f 80 )
P1 (Gbp )( p80  f 80 )

Mib (kWh/t)= = 20.1136

 645

Steve Morrell’s Approach to Mill Sizing

Primary crusher product P80 (um) = 1500000

Final Product P80 (um) = 75

Coarse and fine particle comminution specific energy

f ( x2 ) f ( x1 )
Wi  KM i 4( x2  x1

K 1
Coarse particle comminution specific energy

x1(um) 100000 Crusher Product

x2(um) 750 Definition
fx1 -0.395
fx2 -0.2958

Wa (kWh/t) = 10.184

Fine particle comminution specific energy

x1(um) 750
x2(um) 75
fx1 -0.2958
fx2 -0.2951

Wb (kWh/t) = 11.1477

Total comminution specific energy

WT (kWh/t) = 21.3317

646

SAG design Test

• The SAGDesign test measures the pinion energy to grind ore from 80% 
passing 152mm to 80% passing 1.7 mm (WSAG). 
• The 2nd stage of the test measures the Bond Ball Mill Work Index on SAG 
ground ore, Sd‐BWI. 
• SAGDesign ore feed is prepared from a minimum of 10 kg per sample of 
split or whole diamond drill core pieces by stage crushing the ore in a jaw 
crusher to 80% product passing 19 mm. 
• The crushed ore is then ground in a SAGDesign SAG mill (489 mm inside 
diameter x 163 mm EGL), seen here, that operates with parameters similar 
to commercial SAG mills (26% total charge; 11% steel load, 15% ore load; 
and rotation at 76% of critical speed)

(1) http://sagdesign.com/home/products‐and‐services/sagdesign‐test

.
 647

SAG design Test

648

SAG design Test

 649

Plant Survey

• The objective of a plant survey can be:   
1. to increase throughput  
2. to increase the finess of grind 
3. reducing the costs associated to energy expenditure  
4. replacement of grinding media  
5. replacement of lifter 

650

Plant Survey
• The final recommendations made to the client will be the optimum 
conditions proposed for:   
1. Mill feed size   
2. Feed rate   
3. Ball load and size   
4. Percentage solids   
5. Discharge mechanism   
6. Recycle crushing   
7. Mill circulating load   
8. Operation of cyclones   
9. Mill liner type and profile    
10. Throughput 
 651

Plant Survey

• Streams to be sampled

1. ROM feed (belt cut) TPH, PSD, %Sol 
2. Cycl. Feed % Sol, PSD 
3. Cycl. OF 
4. Cycl. UF 

652

Application of Bond’s Correction Factors

in Trade-off studies
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Qty 2 new + 1 future 1 new + 1 future 2 new 1 new + 1 future
Equipment Dimensions 13’x19’ 16.5’x21’ 15’x19’ 16.5x21’
Equipment Arrangement Parallel Parallel Parallel Series
Project current capacity
Project future capacity
Required power @
2640 2520 3680 2520
current capacity [kW]
Required power @ future
3960 2520 N/A 4180
capacity [kW]
Immediate Equipment
Installation Cost @ R$ 42.9 M R$ 32.2 M R$ 53.8 M R$ 32.2 M
Project current capacity
Additional Equipment
Installation Cost for future R$ 23.0 M R$ 22.9 M N/A R$ 32.2 M
capacity
Final Equipment
Installation Cost after R$ 65.9 M R$ 55.1 M R$ 53.8 M R$ 64.4 M
future expansion
 653

Application of Bond’s Correction Factors

in Trade-off studies

654

Application of Bond’s Correction Factors

in Trade-off studies
 655

SAG Mill Power Draw

Primary SAG Mill

Mill Operating Parameters and Power Required:

Daily Feed Tonnage 35000 tpd

Mill Availability 92 %
Mill Feed Rate 1585 tph
Feed Size F80 150000 um
Product Size P80 2500 um
SAG Mill Work Index 15.5 kWh/t
SAG Efficiency Factor 1.5
Transmission Loss Factor 1.05
Unit Power Consumption 4.25 kWh/t
Mill Power Required 6740 kW
Mill Power Required 9039 HP
SAG Mill Power Installed 10000 HP

Fit of Mill Size to Motor Size:

Number of SAG Mills 1

Power Installed per SAG Mill 10000 HP
Mill Outside Diameter 32 ft
Mill Length-EGL 16 ft
Percent of Critical Speed (VS) 76 %
Mill Speed, rpm 10.38
Percent Volume Total Charge 28 %
Percent Volume Steel Charge 8 %
Tons of Steel Charge 149.27
Ore Specific Gravity 2.8
Slurry Pulp Density 70 % sol
Slurry Specific Gravity 1.82
Charge Specific Gravity 3.40
Charge Density, lb/ft³ 212.03
Mill Power Draw 7920 kW
Mill Power Draw 10621 HP

656

SAG Mill Power Draw

 657

SAG Mill Power Draw

SAG MILL PARAMETERS

Liner thickness m 0.10-0.15 m
Fraction of crit. speed 0.72 to 0.75
Ball volume nominal design % 10-15%
Ball volume max operating % Max operating
Ball volume structural design % 2-5% above max operating
Total filling nominal design % 26% for SAG mill, 28% for AG mill
Total filling max operating % 30-35%
Discharge slurry % solids % solids 65% to 78%, typically 72%
Discharge mechanism Grate discharge for SAG or AG mill

BALL MILL PARAMETERS

Liner thickness m 0.075 m
Fraction of crit. speed 0.72 to 0.76
Ball volume nominal design % 38% to 40%
Ball volume max operating % 38% to 40%
Ball volume structural design % 40%
Discharge slurry % solids % solids 65% to 78%, typically 70%
Discharge mechanism Overflow for ball mill
Discharge screen Trommel

658
 659

Size Classification

Primary Sources: B Klein, AJ Gunson

660

Classification - Outline
1. Introduction
2. Wet Size Classification
‒ Principles
‒ Types of classifiers
‒ Factors affecting performance
‒ Separation efficiencies
3. Hydrocyclone Classifiers
‒ Hydrocyclone description
‒ Geometry variables
‒ Process variables
‒ Cyclone sizing & selection criteria
‒ Example calculation
4. Maintenance and Optimization
 661

Size Classification – Introduction

• Size classifiers (water or air)
separate particles of various
sizes, shapes and specific
gravities under the influence of
gravitational or centrifugal
forces.
• Size classifiers enhance the
effect of particle size over other
properties to produce a size split.
• Size classification is critical to
achieving the target particle size
in order to ensure efficient
valuable mineral recovery.

662

Size Classification – Introduction

Factors that influence size separation:
• Small particles settle slower than large particles.
• In free vortex motion, centrifugal forces affect movement
of large particles more than small ones.
• Small particles have less inertia and therefore flow with
liquid or suspending medium.
• Large particles require higher conveying velocity.
• Collision Frequency Increases with particle size.
 663

Size Classifier Categories

• Physical - Screens
• Wet Classifiers (Water)
‒Mechanical
• Spiral Classifiers
• Rake Classifiers
‒Non-Mechanical
• Cones
• Hydraulic Classifiers - jigs
• Hydrocyclones
• Pneumatic (Dry) Classifiers
‒Cyclones

664

Classification Principles
• Cut Size (separation size) has many definitions
‒Size which passes 95% of the overflow
‒Size at which cumulative percent passing in the
overflow equals the cumulative percent coarse in the
underflow
‒X50 as determined from fractional recovery curve.
‒X50C as determined from corrected fractional
recovery curve
 665

Classification Principles
• Fractional Recovery to the underflow stream
Ri = Uui/Ffi
‒Where U = tph of dry solids in underflow
‒Ui = weight fraction retained in size interval i in
underflow
‒F = tph of dry solids in feed
‒Fi = weight fraction retained in size interval i in feed

666

Classifier Performance
 667

Classifier Performance
• Classifier efficiency is measured by imperfection of
separation, I

• d75 = Size at which 75% passes to U/F d 75  d 25

• d50 = Size at which 50% passes to U/F I
• d25 = Size at which 25% passes to U/F
2d 50

I = 0 means perfect separation

668

Classifier Performance
 669

Classifier Performance
To correct a partition curve

yi  R f
yi ' 
1 Rf
Where:
yi’ = Corrected recovery of i
yi = Uncorrected recovery of i
Rf = Recovery of water to coarse fraction

670

Do I have the correct curve?

 671

Rake & Spiral Classifiers

length

feed Classification
variables:
Fluid velocity
-Feed rate

Wier
-Particle size, shape,
height SG
Coarse
Bottom material
-Tank geometry
slope
Rake or (length, slope
Spiral
Fine freeboard)
material
- Rake/spiral velocity
(2-10 rpm)

672

Rake & Spiral Classifiers

• Adjust rake travel and frequency, spiral rpm
‒Balance transport velocity against turbulent environment
• Adjust weir height to achieve correct cut point
• Can use wash water sprays to clean coarse fraction
• Don’t feed into pool  agitation
 673

Rake & Spiral Classifiers

• Longer spiral for dewatering applications
• Spirals classifiers can be
steeper than rake classifiers
• 100 – 1000 um

674

Settling Cones

• Used in desliming or dewatering applications

 675

Jig Classifiers

• Finer material  shorter strokes, greater frequency

• Coarser material  longer strokes, lower frequency
• Better suited to density classification

676

Hydrocyclones
 677

Hydrocyclones - Introduction
Hydrocyclones are mainly used in mineral processing
classification flowsheets.

1.Hydrocyclone Description
2.Process and Geometry Variables
3.Efficiency and Performance
4.Cyclone Selection Criteria
5.Example Calculation

678

Why use hydrocyclones?

‒Small footprint
‒Low capital expenditure
‒No moving parts
‒Reliable
‒Efficient
‒Can achieve fairly dense underflow

Often abused in mineral processing plants!

Typically a good place to begin optimisation
 679

Hydrocyclone Description

680

Hydrocyclone Description
 681

Hydrocyclone Classification
Geometry Variables:
Inlet Area
• Determines entrance
velocity and affects
tangential velocity
profile. Rectangular
are most common.
• Increased area
requires increased
flowrate to maintain
tangential velocity.
• Inlet Area is typically 6
to 8% of cross-
sectional area of feed
chamber.

682

Variables Affecting Cut Point

Parameter Change (Increase) Cut Point Change
(coarseness of U/F)

Cyclone Diameter
Vortex Finder Diameter
Apex Diameter
Barrel Length
Cone Angle
Inlet Pressure
F80
Feed SG
Fluid Viscosity
 683

Variables Affecting Capacity

Parameter Change (Increase) Capacity Change

Cyclone Diameter
Vortex Finder Diameter
Apex Diameter
Inlet Pressure
Inlet Area

684

Cyclone Selection Criteria

Based on experimental studies and field work, the relationship
for cyclone diameter is as follows:

D = 0.02338(1-V/Vm)2.167 (x50c)1.515 (P)0.4242 (s - l)0.7576

where
D is cyclone diameter in cm
V is the volume percent solids in the Feed
Vm is maximum percent solids = 53%
x50c is cut size in m
P is the inlet pressure in kilopascals (100Kpa = 14.5 PSI)
s & l are specific gravity of solid and liquid
 685

Cyclone Selection Criteria

The cut size can be estimated from the equation:

X50c = 3.14 (dy) Ln(119.12/yd)

where
yd is the cumulative % finer than size dy (m)
Example: If target P80 is 150 m, yd = 80, dy = 150 m
We require:
1. Water and Solids Balance on Weight and Volume Basis
2. Determine Cyclone Diameter
3. Determine Number of Cyclones
4. Estimate Inlet Area
5. Estimate Vortex Finder Diameter
6. Estimate Apex Diameter (Spigot Size)

686

Cyclone Design Rules of Thumb

Inlet AI = 0.05 Dc2
Vortex Finder Do = 0.35 Dc
(can be 0.2 – 0.45 Dc)
Apex Du ≈ 0.2 Dc
Du/Do < 0.45  Rope
0.45 < Du/Do < 0.56  Rope or
Spray
0.56 < Du/Do < 0.90  Spray
Cone Angle Θ = 10o – 20o
 687

Example Calculation
Problem: Select cyclones for the following circuit
Po, O, Wo Po = 36.5%
80% passing 150 micron in O
(U/F) = 4

CYCLONES
Pt
Solids SG = 3.2
T
Rod Mill Feed, F = 250 stph
Pu
Wt
U
Pt must be greater than
55% solids by weight Wu

ROD MILL PUMP BALL

BOX MILL

Water

688

Balance Across Cyclone

Overflow –
250 stph solids
36.3% solids
Feed –
P80 = 150 um
? stph
> 55% solids
F80 = Determine
unknowns for
solids and water
balance
Underflow –
? % solids
? stph
P80?
 689

Task #1: Water and Solids Balance

Step 1: Select U/F solid content to prevent roping.
Roping – When too high a density of solids reports to the underflow plugging the
apex. This results in coarse material reporting to the overflow

100
90 From graph, for O/F
Overflow (O/F) % Solids by Weight

80
70
solids of 36.5%, the
60 maximum U/F solids
50 is approximately 81%
40

30 Select U/F Solids =

80% by weight
20
Roping is probable
to the right of each
15
curve

10
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88
Underflow (U/F) % Solids by Weight

690

Water and Solids Balance

Classifying Cyclone Mass and Volume Balance:
Circulating Load: 400%
Solid S.G.: 3.2, Water SG.: 1.0
Feed = O/F
Cyclone Feed = O/F + U/F
Weight % Solids = 100 x STPH Solids / STPH Slurry
Volume % Solids = 100 x USGPM Solids/ USGPM Slurry

Product Solid Liquid Slurry Solids (%)

STPH USGPM STPH USGPM STPH USGPM STPH USGPM
Feed 250
O/F 250 313 434.9 1740 685 2052 36.5 15.2
U/F 1000 1250 250 1000 1250 2250 80.0 55.6
Cycl. 1250 1563 684.9 2740 1935 4302 64.6 36.3
Feed

Note: USGPM = STPH (4/SG)

 691

Balance Across Cyclone

Overflow –
250 stph
Feed – 2052 USGPM
1250 stph 36.3% solids
4302 USGPM F80 = 150 um
64.6% solids

Underflow –
1000 stph
2250 USGPM
80% solids

692

Task #2: Select Cyclones

Step 1: Determine Cyclone Diameter
D = 0.02338 (1–V/Vm)2.167 (X50c)1.515 (P)0.4242 (–t)0.7576

V = 36.3%
 Vm = 53%
 X50c = 3.14(dy) ln(119.12/yd)
where dy = 150 m
yd = 80%
X50c = 187.5 m
 P = 8 psi = 8 x (100/14.5) = 55.17 kPa
 (–t) = 3.2 – 1.0 = 2.2

D = 52.8 cm = 20.8 inches

Since 20 inch is a standard size, select as cyclone
diameter
 693

Determine Number of Cyclones

Step 2: Determine Number of Cyclones
Total flow to cyclones, V = 4,303 USGPM
The estimated capacity for a single cyclone based on water flow is:

Q = 0.7071 D2P
= 0.7071 x (20)2 x 8
= 800 USGPM
Number of Cyclones = V/Q = 5.38
Say 6 cyclones. For extra capacity, select 7 cyclones

Step 3: Estimate Inlet Area

Inlet area = 0.05 D2
= 20 square inches

Step 4: Estimate Vortex Finder Diameter

Vortex Finder Diameter = 0.35 D = 0.35 x 20
= 7 inches

694

Cyclone Selection
Step 5: Estimate Apex Diameter (Spigot Size)
Minimum diameter below which roping will occur:

S = 4.16 – 16.43 / [2.65 -  + (100/Pu)] + 1.10 ln(U/)

where  = 3.2
Pu = 80%
U = 1000 tph / 6 cyclones (ie. assuming 6 cyclones)
S = 3.29 inches
Therefore use a spigot with a diameter of 3.29 inches or greater
(say 4”)

Summary
Select 7 x 20 inch diameter cyclones for cut size of 187.5um at Feed
of
4303 USGPM with 55% solids:

- Inlet area of 20 square inches

- Vortex finder diameter of 7 inches
- Apex diameter of at least 4 inches
 695

Operational Aspects
‒ Correct underflow fan, 20o and hollow centre
‒ Low % solids in feed, high % solids in underflow
• Minimise underflow tail (fines in underflow)
• Maintain correct spigot size
‒ Maintain correct feed pressure
‒ Low % solids in feed

Roping Conditions
• Du/Do < 0.45  Rope
• 0.45 < Du/Do < 0.56  Rope or Spray
• 0.56 < Du/Do < 0.90  Spray

696

Optimization
• Number of Cyclones  ∆ Pressure  ∆ d50c
• Apex  smaller Du = larger d50c & lower water recovery to UF
• Vortex Finder  Larger Do = larger d50c & lower water
recovery to UF
• Feed Water  Diluting feed slurry reduces fines tail and may
improve efficiency (particle-particle interactions)
• Cyclone Diameter  larger Dc = Larger d50c (& lower wear &
pumping costs)
 697

Maintenance Aspects
• Right size apex and vortex finder
• Good liner condition
‒No odd wear patterns, not worn through
‒Liners correctly installed, no steps
• Functional distributor
‒Unbiased flow patterns, clean pressure ports
• Pump well maintained
• Be careful when changing apex / liners
‒Don’t drop parts into the launder!

698

Reference
Texts:
• Wills, Barry, 1997, “Mineral Processing Technology, 6th
Ed
• Napier-Munn, T., Morrell, S., Morrison, R., Kojovic, T.,
1996, “Mineral Comminution Circuits: Their Operation
and Optimization”
Papers:
• Timothy Olson and Patrick Turner, “Hydrocyclone
Selection for Plant Design”,
http://www.krebs.com/literature.php/hardrock_mining/
• Richard Arterburn, “The Sizing and Selection of
Hydrocyclones”,
http://www.krebs.com/literature.php/hardrock_mining/
 699

Fine Grinding

700

References:
• Mark Adams, Mine 331, ubc, presented on Nov., 2012
• www.outotec.com
• www.isamill.com
• www.metso.com
• www.flsmidth.com
• Burford and Clark, 2007. IsaMillTM technology used in efficient grinding circuit.
• Gao and Forssberg, 1995. Prediction of product size distribution for a stirred ball mill
• Kelly and Spottiswood, 1982. Introduction to mineral processing
• Hogg and Cho, 2000. A review of breakage behavior in fine grinding by stirred-media milling
• Jankovic, 2003. Variables affecting the fine grinding of minerals using stirred mills
• Larson, Anderson, Morrison and Young. Regrind mills: challenges of scaleup www.isamill.com
• He, Wang, Forssberg, 2004. Slurry rheology in wet ultrafine grinding of industrial minerals: a
review
• Parry, 2006. Ultrafine grinding for improved mineral liberation in flotation concentrates
• Tong, Klein, Zanin, Skinner, and Robinson, 2012. Stirred milling of siliceous goethitic nickel
laterite – batch grinding study
• Drozdiak, Klein, Nadolski, and Bamber, 2011. A pilot-scale examination of a high pressure
grinding roll/stirred mill comminution circuit
• Wang, Nadolski, Mejia, Drozdiak, and Klein, 2013. Energy and cost comparisons of HPGR
based circuits with the SABC circuit installed at the Huckleberry mine
• Roufail, Klein, and Radziszewski, 2012. Morphological features and discrete element method
(DEM) forces produced in high speed stirred mill
 701

Outline
• Introduction
• Fine Grinding Technologies
• Fine Grinding Flowsheet (IsaMill)
• Grinding Mechanisms and Conditions
• Case Studies
• Sizing and Scale-up
• Selection Criteria
• Conclusion

702

Introduction
Emergence of fine grinding
• Most of the world’s high-grade, coarse-grained deposits have been
depleted
• Especially in the latter half of the 20th century, attention has turned to
the mining of low-grade, fine-grained deposits
• These fine-grained deposits have necessitated fine grinding to
produce the liberation grind sizes required for downstream processes
to succeed and to do so efficiently enough to make the process
economically viable
 703

Introduction
Example – Necessity Breads Innovation
• In the 1980s, Mt Isa Mines (now Xstrata) owned the McArthur River Pb-
Zn ore body, which required a 7 µm grind for liberation
• Existing grinding technologies were tested, but resulted in the orebody
being uneconomical
- Power consumption too high
- Generally ineffective below 20 µm
- Poor flotation due to negative influence of steel grinding media
• MIM looked outside of mining for a solution and partnered with Netzsch,
who manufactured small stirred mills for other industries
• Once scaled-up, this technology was known as the IsaMill and became
enabling technology for start-up of McArthur River Mine

704

Introduction
Goal of Grinding
• The goal of a grinding machine is to use electrical energy to do work on
ore as efficiently as possible (i.e., with as few losses as possible)
Electrical Energy = Mechanical Energy
+ Sound, Thermal, etc energy Losses
• There is no difference in fine grinding, except that more energy is
generally required to break finer ore
 705

Introduction
Grinding Energy Curve

706

Introduction
History of Fine Grinding
• 1870s: Ball mills are first used for grinding on industrial-scale
• 1900s: Fine grinding is practiced extensively in ceramic, paint and pharmaceutical
industries using different small-scale mills
• 1953: Tower Mill is developed by Nichitsu Mining Industry in Japan
• 1960s: Stirred Media Detritor (SMD) is developed by English China Clays in UK
• 1980: First Tower Mill is installed in a mining application
• 1980s: Mt Isa Mines (now Xstrata) partners with Netszch in Germany to scale-up their
horizontal stirred mill for mining applications
• 1991: Tower Mill license acquired by Svedala (now Metso) and renamed the Vertimill
• 1994: First production-scale horizontal stirred mill installed by Xstrata and renamed the
IsaMill
• 1996: First SMD is installed in a mining application when license is acquired by Svedala
(now Metso)
• 2000s: Other fine grinding mills are acquired/licensed to FLSmidth and Outotec who bring
them into mining industry
 707

Fine Grinding Technologies

Technologies and Typical Grinding Range

Technology Type Typical Grinding Range: µm

Ball Mill 50-10000

Vertimill 20-6000

IsaMill 5-400

SMD 5-100

HIGmill Under development

VXPmill Under development

708

Fine Grinding Technologies

Ball Mill
• First used in mining in the 1870s
• Multiple manufacturers around the world
• Horizontal configuration
• Normally closed-circuit with cyclones
• Cyclone inefficiency (fines bypass) often
leads to overgrinding
• Steel media (25-90 mm or 1-3.5″) – up to
45% full
• Power intensity: 20 kW/m3
• Generally accepted as less efficient than
stirred milling below 100 µm product sizes ( http://www.flsmidth.com
and ineffective below 20 µm)
 709

Fine Grinding Technologies

Vertimill
• First used in mining in 1980

• Metso has license to market to mining

• Vertical configuration open to atmosphere

• Screw agitated

• Top fed, bottom discharge

• Open or closed circuit with cyclones

• Steel media (12-37 mm or 0.5-1.5″)

• Power intensity: 40 kW/m3

• Operating speed: 3 m/s

• Generally considered inefficient below 20 µm

Obtained from http://www.metso.com

710

Fine Grinding Technologies

Stirred Media Detritor (SMD)

• First used in mining in 1996

• Metso has license to market to mining

• Vertical configuration open to atmosphere

• Pin agitated

• Screens to retain media

• Top fed, top discharge

• Open or closed circuit with cyclones

• Sand or ceramic media (2-5 mm)

• Power intensity: 60 kW/m3

• Operating speed: 3 m/s

http://www.metso.com
 711

Fine Grinding Technologies

VXPmill
• First used in mining in 2006

• Previously named the Deswik Mill

• Manufactured by FLSmidth

• Vertical configuration open to

atmosphere

• Disc agitated

• Disc spacing and number variable (up to

16 discs)

• Bottom fed, top discharge

• Ceramic media (2-2.5 mm) – up to 80%

full

• Operating speed: 10 m/s

www.flsmidth.com Deswik Mill at UBC

712

Fine Grinding Technologies

HIGmill
• New to mining industry as of 2012

• Outotec has license to market to mining

• Vertical configuration open to atmosphere

• Disc agitated

• Disc spacing and number variable (up to 30 discs)

• Bottom fed, top discharge

• Normally open circuit with cyclones

• Ceramic media – up to 70% full

http://www.outotec.com
 713

Fine Grinding Technologies

IsaMill
• First used in mining in 1994

• Xstrata Technology has license to market to mining

• Horizontal configuration operating under pressure

• Disc agitated

• Internal classifying system produces “steep” particle

size distribution and less overgrinding than others

• Normally open circuit with densifying cyclones

(operates at 40-60% solids)

• Ceramic or sand media (1-6 mm) – up to 75% full

• Power intensity: 300 kW/m3

• Operating speed: 20 m/s

http://www.isamill.com

714

Fine Grinding Flowsheet

McArthur River Zinc/lead mine, M3000 IsaMill, Feed: P80 70 µm, Product: P80 7 µm

Burford and Clark, 2007

 715

Fine Grinding Flowsheet

Simplified Potgietersrust Platinum mine C-Section (Anglo Platinum)
Flowsheet with a M10,000 IsaMill

Media: 3.5 mm MT1, Feed: P80 75 µm, Burford and Clark, 2007
Product, P80 < 53 µm, Energy
consumption: 9 kWh/t

716

IsaMill Grinding Mechanism

Burford and Clark, 2007

 717

Product Size vs. Energy Usage

Jankovic, 2003

718

Size Reduction Mechanisms

Kelly and Spottiswood, 1982,

Hogg and Cho, 2000
Gao and Forssberg, 1995
 719

Grinding Conditions
IsaMill
• Media Size
• Media Fill
• Stirrer Speed
• Solid Content
• Feed Size
• Flow Rate
• pH Control
• Additive Addition
M20 Stirred mill at the NBK Institute of Mining

720

Grinding Conditions
Grinding Media
• The goal of a grinding machine is to use electrical energy to do work on
ore as efficiently as possible (i.e., with as few losses as possible)
• Grinding media’s job is to transfer energy from a grinding machine
to the ore for breakage
• The majority of energy losses in grinding occur in the transfer of energy
from the machine to the ore
• Since grinding media is the conduit for energy to get from the machine
to the ore, it is vitally important
 721

Grinding Conditions

Grinding Media
• Energy Transfer in a Grinding Media
• Media’s Energy
What makes up media’s energy?

• Examples of Grinding Media

Burford and Clark, 2007

722

Grinding Conditions
Cost of Grinding Media
• Grinding media is often the 3rd highest cost in processing behind energy
and labour
• Proper media selection can improve economics by:
- Reducing its own cost through price and wear improvements
- Reducing energy usage through more efficient energy transfer from
grinding machine to ore

Media Selection
• Type, Size, Supplier and Model, Price
 723

Grinding Conditions
Slurry Rheology
• Slurry rheology significantly influences
the grindability of industrial minerals in
wet ultrafine grinding
• Parameters: mineralogy, solid
concentration, particle size and
distribution, particle shape, temperature,
rotation, pH, and dispersants
• Rheology optimization to increase
throughput, energy efficiency and
product size

He et al., 2004

724

COMMINUTION CASE STUDIES
 725

Case Study - 1

Ultrafine grinding for Improved Mineral Liberation in

Flotation Concentrates
Parry, 2006
• Objectives: Effect of stress intensity on breakage rates for minerals of
different hardness; Effect of mill type on grinding energy requirements;
Effect of stirred milling on downstream processing in terms of particle size
distribution and mineral liberation
• Results: It is possible to target either hard or soft minerals for liberation in
stirred milling; Mineral liberation behavior was similar for the horizontal
and vertical high-speed stirred mills. The greatest benefit of regrinding
using high-speed stirred mills was improved quartz liberation.

726

Case Study - 1

Netzsch LME4 stirred mill at UBC Laboratory 1.5 L batch SMD at UBC
 727

Case Study - 1
By varying the stress intensity it is possible to target either hard or soft minerals
for liberation – Selective comminution was suggested in stirred milling

Effect of Stress
Intensity

728

Case Study - 1
The greatest benefit of regrinding using high-speed stirred mills was improved
quartz liberation

Netzsch mill
products
 729

Case Study - 2
Stirred Milling of Siliceous Goethitic Nickel Laterite to
Upgrade Ni
Tong, Klein, Zanin, Skinner, and Robinson, 2012
• Based on the differences in the mechanical properties of mineral
components in ores, selective grinding was investigated to update
valuable minerals --- properties of mineral
• Previous study indicates an opportunity for selective size reduction of
particles of differing hardness’s using a stirred mill --- mill
• At low stirrer speed, soft minerals break faster than hard ones. Breakage
of the softer or harder components in an ore can be targeted by adjusting
the “stress intensity” in stirred mills --- grinding conditions
• Results: The breakage rates with respect to sample mass for Ni, Mg, and
Si indicate that: Mg>Ni>Mass>Si. The optimum grinding time for the
highest Ni upgrade was 0.25 min. The Ni grade increased from 0.88% to
1.35%, with 24% Ni recovery

730

Case Study - 2

Batch grinding tests:

Netzsch LME4 stirred mill at UBC Feed size: -2000 µm
Product: 38 µm
 731

Case Study - 2
Effect of grinding time on the breakage of +38-2000 µm siliceous goethitic
nickel laterite particles: 20 wt% solid, 1000 rpm, 50% charge volume
Time 0-2000 All - 38 µm All + 38 µm - 38 µm particles
min µm product product from milling +38
Grade, % µm feed
wt% Grade, wt% Grade, wt% Grade,
% % %
0 1.14 46.0 1.44 54.0 0.88 0 0
0.25 1.14 54.3 1.43 45.7 0.79 8.3 1.35
0.5 1.14 57.8 1.43 42.2 0.74 11.8 1.37
1.0 1.14 63.6 1.39 36.4 0.70 17.6 1.25
2.0 1.14 70.4 1.36 29.6 0.62 24.4 1.19
3.0 1.14 74.8 1.33 25.2 0.59 28.8 1.12
4.0 1.17 78.6 1.33 21.4 0.58 32.6 1.07

732

Case Study - 2

Effect of grinding time on the weight fraction remaining on 400 mesh screen and the
specific rate of breakage: 20 wt% solid, 1000 rpm, 50% charge volume, siliceous
goethitic nickel laterite (38-2000 µm)
 733

Case Study - 2

Effect of grinding time on the grade changes and recovery with respect to elements: 20
wt% solid, 1000 rpm, 50% charge volume, siliceous goethitic nickel laterite (38-2000 µm)

734

Case Study - 3
A Pilot-Scale Examination of a High Pressure Grinding
Roll / Stirred Mill Comminution Circuit
Drozdiak, Klein, Nadolski, and Bamber, 2011
• Cone crusher / ball mill, HPGR / ball mill, HPGR / stirred mill circuits were
examined on Mesaba copper-nickel deposit, feed size: F80: 21 mm, P80:
75 µm
• Results: based solely on the specific energy requirements for
comminution, the HPGR / stirred mill circuit achieved a reduction of 9.2%
and 16.7% over the HPGR / ball mill and core crusher / ball mill circuits,
respectively
 735

Case Study - 3

Pilot-scale HPGR installation at UBC M20 stirred mill at UBC

736

Case Study - 3

HPGR / Stirred Mill

flowsheet A

HPGR / Stirred Mill

flowsheet B
 737

Case Study - 3
Summary of results for the first-stage HPGR operating in open (Circuit A) and closed
(Circuit B) circuit

738

Case Study - 3
Summary of stirred mill operating conditions

Stirred mill signature

plot results
 739

Case Study - 3
Summary of specific energy consumption for each circuit

740

Case Study - 3
Proposed layout for an HPGR / stirred mill circuit
 741

Case Study - 4
Energy and Cost Comparisons of HPGR Circuits with the
SABC Circuit Installed at the Huckleberry Mine
Wang, Nadolski, Mejia, Drozdiak, and Klein, 2013
• To summarize a comprehensive energy and cost study comparing an
existing SAG-ball mill circuit with HPGR-ball mill and HPGR-stirred mill
circuit
• Results:
The HPGR-ball mill circuit achieved a 21% reduction in energy
consumption over the existing SAG-ball mill circuit at the same P80 grind
size of 160 µm
At a grind of 80% passing 75 µm, the HPGR-stirred mill circuit showed a
34% reduction in energy compared to the base case
The energy reduction for the new flowsheets significantly improved the
economics of the Huckleberry comminution duty

742

Case Study - 4
 743

Case Study - 4

Huckleberry SABC circuit – base case

744

Case Study - 4

HPGR – ball mill

circuit

HPGR –
stirred mill
circuit
 745

Case Study - 4
Summary of stirred mill test conditions and results

Stirred mill signature

plots

746

Case Study - 5
Morphological Features and Discrete Element Method
(DEM) Forces Produced in High Speed Stirred Mill
Roufail, Klein, and Radziszewski, 2012
• The effect of different operating parameters of high speed stirred mill on
the particle breakage mode is addressed. Morphological features of
broken particles is investigated and related to the types of forces
generated in the mill using Discrete Element Method (DEM)
• Results: About 60% of total particles that are morphologically analyzed
for quartz and galena were rough particles. Such an observation indicates
that the fine product are broken via fracture. The agitator speed, mineral
type, and residence time would dictate the type and mode of particle
breakage
 747

Case Study - 5
Morphology Roughness Level Definitions and Illustration

Breakage Mode versus Roughness Level

Roughness
Breakage Mode
Level
- Started Abrasion
R1 (Transgranular)
Hammered - Then Exposed to Impact
(Indents on Surface)
R2 Abrasion
Smoothest (Transgranular)
R3 Exposed to both Abrasion and Fracture
Semi-Rough (Transgranular and Intergranular)
R4 Fracture
Rougher (Intergranular)
R5 Fracture
Roughest (Intergranular)

748

Case Study - 5

• The smooth particles increased, and the rough particles decreased with time
• The fracture breakage may be the predominant breakage mechanism
• For coarse particles, attrition was the main mechanism as residence time
increased
 749

Case Study - 5
Quantitative Morphological Statistical Analysis (by Clemex)
Morphological Feature
Initial (P1)
Agitator Speed (Skewness Value)
Mineral Type
(RPM) Residence
Sphericity Elongation Roughness
Time (P4/P5)
P1 -0.45 -0.77 -1.26
1000
Galena P5 -0.69 -0.78 -1.53
Concentrate P1 0.00 -0.61 -0.55
2000
P4 -0.43 -1.22 -1.06
P1 0.79 -0.13 -0.9
1000
P5 -0.18 -0.36 -1.49
Quartz
P1 -0.20 -0.61 -2.00
2000
P5 -0.61 -0.91 -3.06
P1 -0.14 -0.55 -1.33
Mixed Quartz & 1000
P5 -0.30 -0.60 -0.60
Galena
P1 -0.14 -0.50 -1.36
Concentrate 2000
P5 -0.29 -0.77 -1.58

750

Case Study - 5

Initial Setting of Particles in the 3 Sections (A, B, and C)

at Time Zero
 751

Case Study - 5
Maximum Normal and Tangential Forces
Maximum Normal Forces Maximum Tangential
Agitator
(N) Forces (N)
Speed (RPM)
A B C A B C
1000 2.0 1.6 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.1
1500 2.3 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.4 0.2
2000 2.7 2.3 1.7 0.4 0.3 0.2

Maximum Normal and Tangential Forces Distribution

Maximum Normal Forces Maximum Tangential
Agitator
(N) Forces (N)
Speed (RPM)
A B C A B C
1500 Media 4.4 3.5 4.7 1.1 0.9 1.1
1500 Galena 4.7 4.1 4.3 1.6 1.4 1.2
2000 Media 4.5 4.4 4.1 1.0 1.1 1.0
2000 Galena 5.4 3.7 5.0 1.8 1.1 1.5

752

Sizing and Scale-Up

General
• Fine grinding machines are sized based on throughput (t/h) and energy
requirement (kWh/t)
• Energy requirement is generally quantified based on testwork results must be
scrutinized
• It is dependent on the following
- Specific ore
- Grinding machine
- Operating conditions (speed, slurry density, etc.)
- Media (type, size, density and quality)
- Feed and target product size
 753

Sizing and Scale-Up

Schematic diagram of experimental flow – signature plot

study (Roufail, 2011)

754

Sizing and Scale-Up

The pendulum testing flow

circuit
Rahal et al., 2011
 755

Sizing and Scale-Up

IsaMill
• IsaMill is sized using a Signature Plot Test
• Continuous test with 15 kg of ore producing a specific energy graph
• Conducted in 4 L IsaMill identically proportional to full-scale
• Uses identical media to full-scale
• Conducted under same operating conditions as full-scale (density, pressure,
media charge level, etc.)
• Published operating vs. scale-up data shows the units scale-up well

Burford and Clark, 2007

756

Sizing and Scale-Up

IsaMill (continued)
• Signature Plots Test: Scale-up of MRM M3000 IsaMill

Barns and Curry, 2006

Larson et al.
 757

Sizing and Scale-Up

IsaMill (continued)
• Sizes presently available

Model Grinding Volume Power Max Flow rate

L kW m3/h
M100 100 75 12
M500 500 200 30
M1,000 1,000 355 or 500 90
M3,000 3,000 1120 ----
M5,000 5,000 1500 160
M10,000 10,000 3000 250
M50,000 50,000 8000 1000

758

Selection Criteria
General
• When selecting a technology for fine grinding, the following should be
considered:
- Feed and product size required
- Capital cost
- Operating cost (media/power consumption and maintenance)
- Availability
- Operability
- Downstream process requirements (chemistry, density, etc.)
- Accuracy and reliability of sizing
 759

Conclusion
Highlights
• Fine grinding is becoming more and more of a requirement in effectively
processing the fine-grained, low-grade deposits of today
• There are several technologies available on the market today to accomplish
fine grinding, each having different attributes
• Accurate determination of the energy requirement of a certain technology and
duty is key in its sizing
• Always consider the total cost of ownership and the accuracy and reliability of
the sizing

760

Energy Efficiency in Mining

Bern Klein
N. Emre Altun
Andrew Bamber
Jeff Drozdiak
Stefan Nadolski
Persio Rosario
Chengtie Wang
AJ Gunson
Trent Weatherwax
Reem Roufail
Jennifer Parry
Libin Tong
Robert Hall
Malcolm Scoble
Mario Morin
Scott Dunbar
 761

Energy and Mining

Mining and non-ferrous metal smelting accounted for
 7% of Canada’s industrial energy consumption (2009)
 6% of direct industrial GHG emissions of Canada (2009)
 Mining is #2 energy consumer in British Columbia accounting for 5% of
BC Hydro’s power generation (primarily open pit mining)
 Comminution is principal energy consumer (50-70%)
 Material handling (haulage) # 2
 Water/dewatering #3
 Estimates for UG Mining 40% of energy goes to comminution, 40% to
ventillation
Source: A Review of Energy Consumption and Related Data: Canadian Mining and Metal Smelting and Refining Industries 1990 to 2009. Nyboeer, J., Rudd, S., March
2011, Canadian Industrial Energy End-use Data and Analysis Centre, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

762

Motivation for Reducing Energy Usage

 Energy usage represents a significant operating cost for mines

 Cost of energy will increase in the future

 Energy Conservation and GHG Reduction a priority in Canada

 Canada GHG Emissions and Intensity Legislation 2013 (potential)
 BC Clean Energy Act 2009 - BC Hydro is mandated to save 66% of
new load growth
 TSM Initiative – GHG and energy efficiency guidance document
(MAC)
 CMIC – Energy efficiency - The 40% Mine
 763

Motivations for Improving Energy Efficiency

Energy Intensity Indicators for Metal Mining

Source: A Review of Energy Consumption and Related Data: Canadian Mining and Metal Smelting and Refining Industries 1990 to 2009. Nyboeer, J., Rudd, S., March
2011, Canadian Industrial Energy End-use Data and Analysis Centre, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

764

Motivations for Improving Energy Efficiency

Energy Intensity Indicators for Non-Metal Mining

Source: A Review of Energy Consumption and Related Data: Canadian Mining and Metal Smelting and Refining Industries 1990 to 2009. Nyboeer, J., Rudd, S., March
2011, Canadian Industrial Energy End-use Data and Analysis Centre, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
 765

Motivations for Improving Energy Efficiency

Spot Crude Oil Price 1990-2011
120 150
Price Change

Change in Spot Crude Oil Price (%)

Spot Crude Oil Price ($ US/Barrel) 100
100

80
50
60
0
40

-50
20

0 -100
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year

Electrical energy ~ ½ price of diesel – incentive to electrify

Source: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/inflation-cpi; STCA – Statistics Canada

766

Total Energy and Potential Savings in Metal Mining

Blasting
50

Diesel Equipment
Specific Energy Requirement (kWhe/ton)

45

Drilling
40

Digging
35

Ventilation
30

Dewatering
25

Crushing
20

Grinding
15

Separation & Floatation

10

Ancillary Operations
5

0
Current Best Practice Practical Theoretical
Minimum Minimum

Source: Industrial Technologies Program, USDOE, June 2007

 767

Emerging and Enabling Technologies

 Comminution (HPGR, stirred mills)

 Application of sensors, pre-concentration & waste rejection
 (sorting technologies)
 Hydromet (Galvanox, Electrowinning)
 Improved energy efficiency through optimized water usage
 Energy recovery
 Increasing trend of electrifying technologies

768

Comminution
 769

Energy Efficiency

 Trommans and Meech
 Selective Comminution

770

Energy Efficient Comminution Technologies

 High Pressure Grinding Roll (HPGR)’s versus AG/SAG circuits

 Stirred Mills versus Ball Mills

 Novel circuits

 HPGR - ISA Mill Circuit

 AG HPGR circuit for high clay ores
 771

HPGR’s
 Potential Benefits
 Energy savings
 Improved metallurgy (liberation)
 Considered only for hard ores
 Other Potential Applications
 HPGR of pebble crusher product
 High clay ores
 Deposits with ores of variable hardness

772

High Pressure Grinding Rolls (HPGR)

UBC-Koeppern HPGR
 773

High Speed Stirred Mills

 Potential Benefits
 Energy savings
 Selective Comminution
 Considered primarilly for fine grinding
 Other Potential Applications
 Primary Grind

774

ISA Mill
 775

Stirred Media Detritor

776

Crusher Ball Mill vs HPGR Ball Mill

vs HPGR ISA Mill
(a)
(b)

 
(c)

J. Droizdiak MASc
 777

Energy Comparison
Comparison of specific energy consumption for each circuit

Energy consumption in the HPGR / stirred mill circuit

Unit Operation Feed f80 Product p80 Specific Energy Consumption Specific Energy Consumption
(mm) (mm) with Dry Screening (kWh/t) with Wet Screening (kWh/t)
First Stage HPGR 21 7.68 1.54 1.54
Second Stage HPGR 7.68 0.35 2.91 3.58
Stirred Mill 0.34 0.075 9.73 9.73
TOTAL 14.18 14.85

778

SABC Circuit versus HPGR Circuit

 779

SABC Circuit versus HPGR Circuit

SABC Circuit Power HPGR Circuit Power
P80 = 160 um
Operation Power (kW) Operation Power (kW)
SAG Mill 7435 HPGR 3175
Crusher 149 Crusher 332
Ball Mill 8167 Ball Mill 8839
Material Handling 736 Material Handling 1090.4
Total 16487 13436.4
Energy Savings % 19

780

HPGR – ISA Mill Circuit

 781

SABC vs HPGR vs HPGR-ISA Circuit

SAG Circuit HPGR Circuit HPGR-Stirred Mill
P80 = 75 um
Power Power Power
Operation (kW) Operation (kW) Operation (kW)
SAG Mill 7950 HPGR 3175 HPGR 7141
Crusher 87 Crusher 332 Crusher 332
Ball Mill 9079 Ball Mill 12133 Stirred Mill 4143
Material Material Material
Handling 762.4 Handling 1282.4 Handling 953.4
Total 17878.4 16922.4 12569.4

Energy
Savings % 5 30

782

AG - HPGR Circuit
- Soft Ores Containing Clays

Crusher Feed Bin

Trommel
HPGR
Screen
Cone Crusher
Washing
Screen
Autogenous
Diverter
Mill/Scrubber

To Ball Mills
Coarse Ore

P. Rosario – PhD Thesis

 783

AG - HPGR Circuit versus SABC Circuit

AG - HPGR SABC Total
Feed Savings
Feed rate ( 1 line / 2 lines) 81,600 69,485 t/d
Availability 85% 94%
Fresh Feed / Total w. Rec Solids 4,000 3,080 t/h
F80 123 123 mm
Sub Specific Energy (Fresh/Total) 4.29 7.79 kWh/t 44.9%
Trommel&Screen 0
Aperture 12.7 15.9 mm
Total U/S - T80 4.880 5.361 mm
Bond WI 15.0 15.0 kWh/t
Cyclone O/F P80 200 1 µm
HPGR Specific Energy
(Fresh/Total) 7.03 7.41 kWh/t
Sub Specific Energy (Fresh/Total) 11.32 15.21 kWh/t 25.5%

784

Acknowledgements
 Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
 Canada Foundation for Innovation
 Teck Ltd
 Inco
 Falconbridge
 Xstrata Technology
 COREM
 Vale
 Xstrata
 Knelson
 Metso Minerals
 BC Hydro
 CSIRO Australia
 Koeppern
 CAMIRO
 Placer Dome
 Barrick
 SGS