%

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL & METALLURGY
METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING

PRCTICAL 2: COMMINUTION

NAME: ANNIKIE
SURNAME: MASHAO
STUDENTNO: 218040284
SUBJECT: MINERAL PROCESSING
DATE: 05/08/2022
MARKING RUBRIC

Criteria Maxi Poor Average Good Mark Mark

mum Obtained Obtained
Mark Examiner Moderato
r
Language and 5 1-2 2.5-3.5 4-5
grammar Spelling Few spelling No spelling
mistakes & mistakes, few mistakes,
repeated grammar errors, grammar is
grammar, abbreviations good,
abbreviations not are explained, abbreviations are
being explained, and vocabulary explained, and
and poor is not formal vocabulary is
vocabulary. enough. formal enough.
Appearance and 5 1-2 2.5-3.5 4-5
format The report does The report The report
not follow the follows the follows the
specified specified specified
structure & structure & structure &
layout, and fonts layout; some layout, and fonts
are not the fonts are not the are the same. In
same, the same, the addition, the
numbering of numbering of numbering of
chapters and chapters and chapters and
sections are not sections are not sections is clear.
clear. consistent.
Introduction and 15 1-3 4-6 7-10
literature review There is There is Good There is
insufficient literature review sufficient
literature review to support literature review
to support research to support
research problem & research
problem & research problem &
research question but research
question, no elements are question, good
referencing, no missing, for referencing,
coherence, and example; what coherence
irrelevant have previous structured with
information. studies covered, logic and
and some relevant
referencing are information.
missing,
moderate
coherence and
information is
relevant.
Summary/Abstract 10 1-3 4-6 7-10 Sufficient
does not contain contains some summary of the
the whole details about the reports including
summary of the whole report introduction,
report although not result and
sufficient discussion
approach,
conclusion, and
recommendation
s
Data Analysis 30 1-10 10-20 20-30
Data analysis is Data analysis is Data analysis is
incorrect, mostly correct, correct,

2|Page
 inadequate and adequately comprehensive
not supportive of supportive of the & supportive of
the research research the research
questions. questions. questions.
Results, graphs, Results, graphs, Results, graphs,
tables & figures tables& figures tables, & figures
are incorrectly are mostly are correctly
presented. correctly presented.
Validation and presented. Validation and
verification are Validation and verification are
not addressed. verification are correctly
primarily addressed.
addressed.
Findings/Discussi 30 1-10 10-20 20-30
ons Unable to assess Partially able to Proficient
the significance assess the assessment of
of the results and significance of the significance
no the results and of the results and
understanding of no shows a
the nature and understanding of proficient
purpose of the the nature and understanding of
research purpose of the the nature and
content. research purpose of the
content. research
content.
Conclusions 10 1-2 2.5-3.5 7-10
Conclusions are Conclusions are Conclusions are
not related to the partially related related to the
research to the research research
questions & not questions & not questions & well
supported by the supported by the supported by the
research method research method research method
and data and data and data
analyses. analyses. analyses.
Recommendations 5 1-2 2.5-3.5 4-5
Poor Recommendatio Recommendatio
recommendation ns are adequate. ns flow from the
s. conclusions.
Total 100

3|Page
ABSTRACT

Comminution is a mineral processing techniques that seeks reduce particle size of ore to
ease transportation, liberate mineral of interest from gangue minerals for further
processing of extraction and recovery. The further processes require fine particles and
commonly 80% passing 75µm sieve. This is to minimize reagent losses and speed up
processing. It is therefore important to learn and understand working techniques and
important factors of comminution circuits to be able to optimize the efficiency.

This experiment was carried to determine the effect of time on the particle size distribution
of the sample, the efficiency of the ball mill, to determine the energy input and mainly
acquaint student with milling and sieving techniques. The sample was sieved with 250
micrometers, split, analyzed for PSD before being milling for different time interval until
15 minutes.

The results were analyzed and they expected results were not achieved, factors such as
contamination, inefficiency of the mill and overcharge of the balls, it is recommended that
proper procedure should be followed, ball charge be reduced to at least 55%

4|Page
Table of Contents
MARKING RUBRIC ................................................................................................................................... 2
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. 4
1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................... 6
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 7
3 METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................................. 10
3.1 Apparatus........................................................................................................................................ 10
3.2 Experimental Procedure ............................................................................................................... 10
4.1.1 Grind analysis graph .................................................................................................................. 12
4.1.2 P80 grind analysis ...................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................. 12
4.1.2 P80 grind analysis ...................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................. 13
5 CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................... 14
6 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 15
7 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 16
8 APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................................... 17
8.1 samples grind analysis over time ................................................................................................ 17

5|Page
1 INTRODUCTION

Comminution is a group of mineral processing techniques used in extractive metallurgy

to reduce the particle sizes of rocks. Comminution processes are used to turn rocks into
powder because subsequent processing generally requires finer particle sizes. A particle
becomes liberated when the mineral of interest is physically free the gangue minerals,
which are those minerals with no economic value.

The equipment used for comminution can be divided into broad classes based on the size
of the fragments they produce. Devices producing relatively coarse chunks are called
crushers and those that produce finer particles are called grinders/mills. Grinding mill is
of interest in the experiment.

The comminution test can be used to determine the energy required to easily break down
𝟏 𝟏
particles of the ore (grindability) by following this formula𝑬 = 𝟏𝟎 × 𝑾𝒊 × ( − ),
√𝑷𝟖𝟎 √𝑭𝟖𝟎

Where: E is the energy (kilowatt hour per metric or short ton), Wi is the work index
measured in a laboratory ball mill (kilowatt-hour per metric or short ton), P80 is the mill
circuit product size (microns) and F80 is the mill circuit product size (microns)

The aim of the experiment is to acquainted with the milling and particle size distribution
techniques, to determine the effect of time on grinding, determine the efficiency of the mill
and to also determine the specific energy input.

6|Page
2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Minerals naturally occur in the crust of the earth also called geological deposits, they can
be define as natural inorganic compounds with definite crystalline structure. The term
mineral extends to label substances with economic value that can be extracted from
earth, such as gold, iron, PGMs and many others. However these minerals mostly occur
finely disseminated and strongly entangled with gangue (with no economic value)
minerals in agglomeration called ore and they must be liberated before being extracted
and recovered (Anon, 1979)

This can be achieved by comminution in which the particle sizes of the ore are
progressively reduced until the clean particles of mineral can be separated/extracted.
Comminution in its earliest stages is carried out in order to make freshly excavated ore in
mines easier to transport to processing plants. During blasting explosives are used to
remove ore from their natural beds, blasting can be regarded as first stage of comminution
(B.A Wills, 2006).

Comminution theory is concerned with the relationship between energy input and the
particle size made from a given feed size. Various theories have been expounded, none
of which is entirely satisfactory (Wills and Atkinson, 1993). The greatest problem lies in
the fact that most of the energy input to a crushing or grinding machine is absorbed by
the machine itself, and only a small fraction of the total energy is available for breaking
the material.

It is to be expected that there is a relationship between the energy required to break the
material and the new surface produced in the process, but this relationship can only be
made manifest if the energy consumed in creating new surface can be separately
measured. In a ball mill, for instance, it has been shown that less than 1% of the total
energy input is available for actual size reduction, the bulk of the energy being utilized in
the production of heat.

7|Page
Another factor is that a material which is plastic will consume energy in changing shape,
a shape which it will retain without creating significant new surface. All the theories of
comminution assume that the material is brittle, so that no energy is adsorbed in
processes such as elongation or contraction which is not finally utilised in breakage. The
oldest theory is that of Von Rittinger (1867), which states that the energy consumed in
the size reduction is proportional to the area of new surface produced.

The surface area of a known weight of particles of uniform diameter is inversely

proportional to the diameter, hence Rittinger's law equates to (E=K(1/D2 – 1/D1), where
E is the energy input, D1~ is the initial particle size, D 2 is the final particle size, and K is
a constant.

Grinding within a tumbling mill is influenced by the size, quantity, the type of motion, and
the spaces between the individual pieces of the medium in the mill. As opposed to
crushing, which takes place between relatively rigid surfaces, grinding is a more random
process, and is subject to the laws of probability. The degree of grinding of an ore particle
depends on the probability of the ore entering a zone between the medium shapes and
the probability of some occurrence taking place after entry. Grinding can be done by
several mechanisms, including impact or compression, due to forces applied almost
normally to the particle surface; chipping due to oblique forces; and abrasion due to forces
acting parallel to the surfaces These mechanisms distort the particles and change their
shape beyond certain limits determined by their degree of elasticity, which causes them
to break.

Grinding is usually performed wet, although in certain applications dry grinding is used.
When the mill is rotated, the mixture of medium, ore, and water, known as the mill charge,
is intimately mixed, the medium comminuting the particles by any of the above methods
depending on the speed of rotation of the mill and the shell liner structure. Most of the
kinetic energy of the tumbling load is dissipated as heat, noise, and other losses, only a
small fraction being expended in actually breaking the particles.

8|Page
Apart from laboratory testing, grinding in mineral processing is a continuous process,
material being fed at a controlled rate from storage bins into one end of the mill and
overflowing at the other end after a suitable dwell time. Control of product size is exercised
by the type of medium used, the speed of rotation of the mill, the nature of the ore feed,
and the type of circuit used. he motion of the charge in a tumbling mill The distinctive
feature of tumbling mills is the use of loose crushing bodies, which are large, hard, and
heavy in relation to the ore particles, but small in relation to the volume of the mill, and
which occupy slightly less than half the volume of the mill. Due to the rotation and friction
of the mill shell, the grinding medium is lifted along the rising side of the mill until a position
of dynamic equilibrium is reached, when the bodies cascade and cataract down the free
surface of the other bodies, about a dead zone where little movement occurs, down to
the toe of the mill charge

9|Page
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Apparatus

1. Oven
2. Sample
3. Weighing balance
4. Sieve shaker
5. Set of sieves(250,150, 106, 90, 75, 53, 38 m)
6. Brush
7. Ball mill
8. Sample splitter

3.2 Experimental Procedure

1. Dry the given sample
2. Sieve the sample with 250m
3. Weigh of 2kg of material provided & split into ten samples, each weighing 200g.
4. Take one samples before milling and determine its particle size distribution as
follows:
5. Arrange the set of sieves with the coarsest on top and the pan at the bottom.
6. Place the sample on the 150 m sieve and close with the lid.
7. Load the whole set of sieves on the sieve shaker.
8. Run the sieve shaker for 10 minutes at constant amplitude.
9. Unload the sieves and weigh the fractions of each sieve and record.
10. Repeat the above steps with the sample milled for 15 minutes.

10 | P a g e
3.2.2 Milling

1. Charge a steel batch mill as follows:

a. Add 1100g sample of -250m material to a clean,

2. Add grinding media to 70% on mill

3. Close and secure the mills.

4. Place the mills on rollers and mill for 2.5 minutes at 150r.p.m.

5. Remove the mills from the rollers.

6. Open the mills carefully and brush off all solids adhering to the lid down into the mill.
Remove the grinding media singly from the mill (ensure minimum loss of solids).

7. Slowly and carefully dry screen the total content of the mill on the 150m screen.
Ensuring that no solids are left in the mill. Retain oversize and undersize separately.

8. Weigh the fractions separately and record the weight.

Repeat step 4 – 10 for milling times of 5, 7.5, 10 & 15 minutes

11 | P a g e
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSSION

4.1.1 Grind analysis graph

4.1.2 P80 grind analysis

4.2 DISCUSSION

Figure 1: psd analysis of samples milled at time interval

4.1.2 P80 grind analysis

Feed Milled after Milled after Milled after Milled after Milled after
Sieve size (µm) 0 min 2.5 min 5min 7.5min 10min 15min

Sample weight 177.6 1101 966.7 1004.3 1008.2 972.8

plus 150µm 147.5 1062.5 950.9 972.3 1005.1 962.8

minus 150µm 30 38.5 15.3 31.8 3 9.6

% Passing 16.89189 3.496821072 1.582704045 3.166384546 0.297560008 0.986842105

80% Passing 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mass loss 0.1 0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4

% Mass loss 0.056306 0 0.051722354 0.019914368 0.009918667 0.041118421

variace 0 76.50317893 78.41729596 76.83361545 79.70243999 79.01315789
Figure 2: P80 analysis table of samples

12 | P a g e
4.2 DISCUSSION

According to figure 1: grind analysis graph: the particle size distribution as conducted by
a vibrating sieve shaker, it can be seen that most of the particles are above 150 microns
because the graph is at low percentage at smaller sieve sizes. The 2.5 minute milled
sample seems to have higher cumulative passing percentage than all the other samples
milled.

The screening objective to mainly obtain particle size distributions, and it was conducted
under dry conditions. The graphs are not following a typical PSD shape for all the graphs
per sample milled at different time interval. The milling process proves to have not been
effective because the products did not have any 80% passing through at least 150
microns sieve size. Also the percentage variance for al milling time s lies between 76 to
79 percentages which is way more than it should be.

The total mill feed was 3.67kg which was consisting of 70% still ball and 30% sample,
which explain the low grinding efficiency because of a lot of ball-on-ball grinding as
opposed to the balls grinding the sample, the mill is rubber lined to prevent damage to
the shell, however with that much of steel balls the lining is likely to wear off.

13 | P a g e
5 CONCLUSION

The aim to obtain product 80 passing was not obtained. This may be a result of several
factors such that the sample was contaminated with new fresh sample to obtain a feed
size of 1.1kg that was a deviation from the procedure and impacted badly on the results.
Also the balls were way too much for the sample size in question. To conclude, the
grinding was not efficient.

14 | P a g e
6 RECOMMENDATIONS

Given the results it is mainly recommended that the procedure is strictly followed to obtain
true results, also the ball mass of the feed should be at least reduced 55% to obtain more
sample grinding surface.

15 | P a g e
7 REFERENCES

1. Berry, T.F. and Bruce, R.M. (1966). A simple method of determining the grindability
of ores, Can. Min. J.
2. Bond, F.C. (1952). The third theory of comminution, Trans. AIMF, 193, 484.
3. Bwalya, B.W., Moys, M.H., and Hinde, A.L. (2001). The use of discrete element
method and fracture mechanics to improve grinding rate predictions, Minerals
Engng.,14(6), 565-573Choi,
4. W.Z., Adel, G.T., and Yoon, R.H. (1988). Esti mation of model parameters for
liberation and size reduction, Min. Metall. Proc., 5 (Feb.), 33. Cleary, P.W. (1998).
Predicting charge motion power draw, segregation and wear in ball mill using
discrete element methods, Minerals Engng., 11(11),1061-1080.
5. Anon. (1982). Grinding mills - rod, ball and autogenous, Min. Mag. (Sept.), 197.
6. Anon. (1990). Modern tube mill design for the mineral industry - Part I. Mining Mag.,
163(Jul.), 20. Arbiter, N. and Harris, C.C. (1984). Scale-up problems with large ball
mills, Min. Metall. Proc., l(May), 23.

16 | P a g e
 8 APPENDICES
8.1 samples grind analysis over time

FEED 7.5 min milled product

Retained Cum Wt.
Retained Cum Wt.
Aperture Wt. of Ret. Material Passing
Aperture Wt. of Ret. Material cum wt. Passing
(µm) Fraction. (g) (%) (%)
(µm) Fraction. (g) (%) retained % (%)
150 972.3 96.8137011 96.8137011 3.186299
150 147.5 83.0985915 83.0985915 16.90141
106 0.8 0.07965747 96.8933586 3.106641
106 23.4 13.1830986 96.2816901 3.71831
90 0.8 0.07965747 96.973016 3.026984
90 0.9 0.50704225 96.7887324 3.211268
75 29 2.88758339 99.8605994 0.139401
75 3.3 1.85915493 98.6478873 1.352113
53 0.6 0.0597431 99.9203425 0.079657
53 0.9 0.50704225 99.1549296 0.84507
38 0.8 0.45070423 99.6056338 0.394366
38 0.6 0.0597431 99.9800856 0.019914
PAN 0.7 0.3943662 100 PAN 0.2 0.01991437 100
Total 177.5 100 Total 1004.3 100
Losses, g 0.1 Losses, g -37.6
Losses, % 0.056306306 Losses, % -21.1711712
2.5 min milled product 10 min milled product
Retained Cum Wt. Retained Cum Wt.
Aperture Wt. of Ret. Material cum wt. Passing Aperture Wt. of Ret. Material cum wt. Passing
(µm) Fraction. (g) (%) retained % (%) (µm) Fraction. (g) (%) retained % (%)
150 1062.5 96.5031789 96.5031789 3.496821 150 1005.1 99.6925213 99.6925213 0.307479
106 0.9 0.08174387 96.5849228 3.415077 106 0.6 0.059512 99.7520333 0.247967
90 0.9 0.08174387 96.6666667 3.333333 90 0.3 0.029756 99.7817893 0.218211
75 35 3.17892825 99.8455949 0.154405 75 1.5 0.14878 99.9305693 0.069431
53 0.7 0.06357856 99.9091735 0.090827 53 0.3 0.029756 99.9603253 0.039675
38 0.5 0.04541326 99.9545867 0.045413 38 0.3 0.029756 99.9900813 0.009919
PAN 0.5 0.04541326 100 PAN 0.1 0.00991867 100
Total 1101 100 Total 1008.2 100
Losses, g 0 Losses, g -3.9
Losses, % 0 Losses, % -2.19594595
5 min milled product 15 min milled product
Retained Cum Wt. Retained Cum Wt.
Aperture Wt. of Ret. Material cum wt. Passing Aperture Wt. of Ret. Material cum wt. Passing
(µm) Fraction. (g) (%) retained % (%) (µm) Fraction. (g) (%) retained % (%)
150 950.9 98.3655736 98.3655736 1.634426 150 962.8 98.9720395 98.9720395 1.027961
106 5 0.51722354 98.8827971 1.117203 106 0.9 0.09251645 99.0645559 0.935444
90 1.3 0.13447812 99.0172753 0.982725 90 1.3 0.13363487 99.1981908 0.801809
75 6.6 0.68273508 99.7000103 0.29999 75 5.2 0.53453947 99.7327303 0.26727
53 1.1 0.11378918 99.8137995 0.1862 53 0.9 0.09251645 99.8252467 0.174753
38 1.3 0.13447812 99.9482776 0.051722 38 1.3 0.13363487 99.9588816 0.041118
PAN 0.5 0.05172235 100 PAN 0.4 0.04111842 100
Total 966.7 100 Total 972.8 100
Losses, g 134.3 Losses, g 35.4
Losses, % 75.61936937 Losses, % 19.93243243

17 | P a g e