Benchmarking: Bond - Kanowna Belle - Revision history

Munashe Kurisa: /* Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model */

2020-05-19T21:02:17Z

Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model

Munashe Kurisa: /* Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model */

2020-05-19T18:26:53Z

Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model

Munashe Kurisa: /* Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model */

2020-05-19T18:20:02Z

Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model

Alex Doll: /* Discussion */

2016-09-23T19:46:57Z

Discussion

Alex Doll: /* Design Criteria */

2016-09-23T19:44:24Z

Design Criteria

Alex Doll at 19:30, 27 May 2014

2014-05-27T19:30:47Z

Alex Doll: /* Discussion */

2014-05-27T19:29:35Z

Discussion

Alex Doll at 19:28, 27 May 2014

2014-05-27T19:28:41Z

Alex Doll: /* Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model */

2014-05-27T18:58:50Z

Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model

Alex Doll: Created page with "==Benchmarking: Bond/Barratt SABC Circuit Specific Energy Consumption - Kanowna Belle == ''Lunt, D.J., Thompson, A. and Ritchie, I.'' '''The Design and Operation of the Kanow..."

2014-05-27T18:50:35Z

Created page with "==Benchmarking: Bond/Barratt SABC Circuit Specific Energy Consumption - Kanowna Belle == ''Lunt, D.J., Thompson, A. and Ritchie, I.'' '''The Design and Operation of the Kanow..."

New page

==Benchmarking: Bond/Barratt SABC Circuit Specific Energy Consumption - Kanowna Belle ==

''Lunt, D.J., Thompson, A. and Ritchie, I.'' '''The Design and Operation of the Kanowna Belle Milling Circuit''', SAG 1996, Pages 81-96.

Paper describes the design criteria for the circuit and one survey.

===Design Criteria===
The reported mill conditions during the survey are,
* throughput: 170 tonnes/hour
* SAG feed size, F80: 150 mm
* BM cyclone product size, P80: 71 µm
* SAG: 2134 kW power draw at mill shell (ESAG = 12.6 kWh/t)
* Ball mill: 1649 kW power draw at mill shell (ESAG = 9.70 kWh/t)
* transfer size: 300 µm
The pebble crusher isn't described, assume it is a 7-foot cone crusher with 300 HP motor drawing 168 kW (Epeb = 1.0 kWh/t). Total circuit specific energy consumption Etotal is 23.2 kWh/t.

Several samples are given in the text. It is assumed that the survey period looks similar to "Lowes West", the 'median' hardness sample of the non-oxidized samples. The Lowes West sample gives similar predictions to the "Pilot Plant" sample tested at A.R. MacPherson, which is claimed to have been selected to be representative of the sulphides.

Lowes West sample:
* WiC 26.7 (metric)
* WiRM 22.7 (metric)
* WiBM 16.1 (metric)
Density isn't given, assume 2.7 t/m3

===Modelling, mill power draw===
Adjust the SAG and ball mill models to get the shell power draws reported in the paper. Actual conditions don't matter because there isn't enough detail to properly model the mills -- treat them just as sources of output kW.

===Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model===
The Lowes West sample is predicted to have Essbm of 22.3 kWh/t, add 10% to give Etotal prediction of 24.6 kWh/t. Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T80 needed to balance the circuit is about 1370 µm.

The predicted overall Etotal is within 5.6% of the survey value.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! !! Survey !! Model !! Difference
|-
| ESAG || 12.55 kWh/t || 13.27 kWh/t || +5.7%
|-
| Eball || 9.70 kWh/t || 10.24 kWh/t || +5.6%
|-
| Epeb || 0.99 kWh/t || 1.04 kWh/t || +5.2%
|-
| Etotal || 23.24 kWh/t || 24.55 kWh/t || +5.6%
|}

===Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model===
The Lowes West sample is predicted to have Etotal of 29.1 kWh/t. Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T80 needed to balance the circuit is about 530 µm.

The predicted overall Etotal is 25.0% higher than the survey value.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! !! Survey !! Model !! Difference
|-
| ESAG || 12.55 kWh/t || 15.70 kWh/t || +25.1%
|-
| Eball || 9.70 kWh/t || 12.12 kWh/t || +24.9%
|-
| Epeb || 0.99 kWh/t || 1.23 kWh/t || +24.5%
|-
| Etotal || 23.24 kWh/t || 29.05 kWh/t || +25.0%
|}

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:02, 19 May 2020
Line 66:		Line 66:
	\|}		\|}

		+	<gallery>
		+	File:Kanowna-raw-Lowe.png\|thumb\|Screenshot of the Model, Lowes West sample
		+	File:Kanowna-raw-PilotPlant.png\|Screenshot of the Model, Pilot Plant sample
		+	</gallery>

	===Discussion===		===Discussion===

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ===Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model===
 The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>ssbm</sub> of 22.3 kWh/t, add 10% to give E<sub>total</sub> prediction of 24.6 kWh/t.  Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 1370 &micro;m.  The 'pilot plant' sample predicts a  T<sub>80</sub> prediction of 540 &micro;m and an E<sub>total</sub> of 26.8 kWh/t.
@@ Line 47: / Line 44: @@
 | E<sub>total</sub>  || 23.24 kWh/t || 24.55 kWh/t || +5.6% || 26.82 kWh/t || +15.4%
 |}
 ===Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model===

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:20, 19 May 2020
Line 30:		Line 30:

	===Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model===		===Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model===
		+	[[File:Kanowna-Lowe.png\|thumb\|Screenshot of the Model, Lowes West sample]]
		+	[[File:Kanowna-PilotPLant.png\|thumb\|Screenshot of the Model, Pilot Plant sample]]
		+
	The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>ssbm</sub> of 22.3 kWh/t, add 10% to give E<sub>total</sub> prediction of 24.6 kWh/t. Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 1370 µm. The 'pilot plant' sample predicts a T<sub>80</sub> prediction of 540 µm and an E<sub>total</sub> of 26.8 kWh/t.		The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>ssbm</sub> of 22.3 kWh/t, add 10% to give E<sub>total</sub> prediction of 24.6 kWh/t. Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 1370 µm. The 'pilot plant' sample predicts a T<sub>80</sub> prediction of 540 µm and an E<sub>total</sub> of 26.8 kWh/t.

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 ===Discussion===
-The rod mill work index values in this survey were based on results from Amdel which is believed to have used a non-standard rod mill using a smooth liner.  Bond rod mill work index determinations are supposed to be done in a mill employing a wave liner.  The "pilot plant" sample rod mill work index was determined at the A.R. MacPherson - Hazen laboratory in the USA which is believed to have a wave liner.  The ratio of Wi<sub>RM</sub>:Wi<sub>BM</sub> for the Pilot Plant sample (1.05) is dramatically different from the ratio for the samples tested in Australia (avg 1.40).  In spite of this, the Lowes West sample, which is an "average sulphide" sample for Kawnowna Belle, gives similar throughput predictions to the Pilot Plant sample.
+The rod mill work index values in this survey were based on results from Amdel which is believed to have used a non-standard rod mill using a smooth liner.  Bond rod mill work index determinations are supposed to be done in a mill employing a wave liner.  The "pilot plant" sample rod mill work index was determined at the A.R. MacPherson - Hazen laboratory in the USA which has a wave liner.  The ratio of Wi<sub>RM</sub>:Wi<sub>BM</sub> for the Pilot Plant sample (1.05) is dramatically different from the ratio for the samples tested in Australia (avg 1.40).  In spite of this, the Lowes West sample, which is an "average sulphide" sample for Kawnowna Belle, gives similar throughput predictions to the Pilot Plant sample.
 The predicted phantom cyclone effect is very significant, depending upon which sample is used for the "laboratory" work index value:

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 * BM cyclone product size, P<sub>80</sub>: 71 &micro;m
 * SAG: 2134 kW power draw at mill shell (E<sub>SAG</sub> = 12.6 kWh/t)
-* Ball mill: 1649 kW power draw at mill shell (E<sub>SAG</sub> = 9.70 kWh/t)
+* Ball mill: 1649 kW power draw at mill shell (E<sub>ball</sub> = 9.70 kWh/t)
 * transfer size: 300 &micro;m
 The pebble crusher isn't described, assume it is a 7-foot cone crusher with 300 HP motor drawing 168 kW (E<sub>peb</sub> = 1.0 kWh/t).  Total circuit specific energy consumption E<sub>total</sub> is 23.2 kWh/t.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:30, 27 May 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[category: Benchmarking]]
		+	[[category: Bond/Barratt Model]]
		+	[[category:Bibliography]]
	==Benchmarking: Bond/Barratt SABC Circuit Specific Energy Consumption - Kanowna Belle ==		==Benchmarking: Bond/Barratt SABC Circuit Specific Energy Consumption - Kanowna Belle ==

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 Several samples are given in the text.  It is assumed that the survey period looks similar to "Lowes West", the 'median' hardness sample of the non-oxidized samples.  The Lowes West sample gives similar predictions to the "Pilot Plant" sample tested at A.R. MacPherson, which is claimed to have been selected to be representative of the sulphides.
-Lowes West sample:
+Lowes West sample {pilot plant sample}:
-* Wi<sub>C</sub> 26.7 (metric)
+* Wi<sub>C</sub> 26.7 (metric) {not tested}
-* Wi<sub>RM</sub> 22.7 (metric)
+* Wi<sub>RM</sub> 22.7 (metric) {19.3 metric}
-* Wi<sub>BM</sub> 16.1 (metric)
+* Wi<sub>BM</sub> 16.1 (metric) {18.3 metric}
 Density isn't given, assume 2.7 t/m<sup>3</sup>
@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 ===Modelling, Optimized Bond/Barratt SABC model===
-The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>ssbm</sub> of 22.3 kWh/t, add 10% to give E<sub>total</sub> prediction of 24.6 kWh/t.  Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 1370 &micro;m.
+The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>ssbm</sub> of 22.3 kWh/t, add 10% to give E<sub>total</sub> prediction of 24.6 kWh/t.  Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 1370 &micro;m.  The 'pilot plant' sample predicts a  T<sub>80</sub> prediction of 540 &micro;m and an E<sub>total</sub> of 26.8 kWh/t.
 {| class="wikitable"
 |-
-!  !! Survey !! Model !! Difference
+!  !! Survey !! Model, Lowes<br>West sample !! Difference !! Model, Pilot<br>Plant sample !! Difference
 |-
-| E<sub>SAG</sub> || 12.55 kWh/t || 13.27 kWh/t || +5.7%
+| E<sub>SAG</sub> || 12.55 kWh/t || 13.27 kWh/t || +5.7%  || 14.49 kWh/t || +15.4%
 |-
-| E<sub>ball</sub>  || 9.70 kWh/t || 10.24 kWh/t || +5.6%
+| E<sub>ball</sub>  || 9.70 kWh/t || 10.24 kWh/t || +5.6% || 11.19 kWh/t || +15.4%
 |-
-| E<sub>peb</sub>  || 0.99 kWh/t || 1.04 kWh/t || +5.2%
+| E<sub>peb</sub>  || 0.99 kWh/t || 1.04 kWh/t || +5.2% || 1.14 kWh/t || +15.4%
 |-
-| E<sub>total</sub>  || 23.24 kWh/t || 24.55 kWh/t || +5.6%
+| E<sub>total</sub>  || 23.24 kWh/t || 24.55 kWh/t || +5.6% || 26.82 kWh/t || +15.4%
 |}
 ===Modelling, Raw Bond/Barratt SABC model===
-The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>total</sub> of 29.1 kWh/t.  Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 530 &micro;m.
+The Lowes West sample is predicted to have E<sub>total</sub> of 29.1 kWh/t.  Based on the split of SAG + BM power, the T<sub>80</sub> needed to balance the circuit is about 530 &micro;m. The 'pilot plant' sample predicts a  T<sub>80</sub> prediction of 377 &micro;m and an E<sub>total</sub> of 29.5 kWh/t.
 {| class="wikitable"
 |-
-!  !! Survey !! Model !! Difference
+!  !! Survey !! Model, Lowes<br>West sample !! Difference !! Model, Pilot<br>Plant sample !! Difference
 |-
-| E<sub>SAG</sub> || 12.55 kWh/t || 15.70 kWh/t || +25.1%
+| E<sub>SAG</sub> || 12.55 kWh/t || 15.70 kWh/t || +25.1%  || 15.93 kWh/t || +26.9%
 |-
-| E<sub>ball</sub>  || 9.70 kWh/t || 12.12 kWh/t || +24.9%
+| E<sub>ball</sub>  || 9.70 kWh/t || 12.12 kWh/t || +24.9% || 12.30 kWh/t || +26.8%
 |-
-| E<sub>peb</sub>  || 0.99 kWh/t || 1.23 kWh/t || +24.5%
+| E<sub>peb</sub>  || 0.99 kWh/t || 1.23 kWh/t || +24.5% || 1.25 kWh/t || +26.5%
 |-
-| E<sub>total</sub>  || 23.24 kWh/t || 29.05 kWh/t || +25.0%
+| E<sub>total</sub>  || 23.24 kWh/t || 29.05 kWh/t || +25.0% || 29.48 kWh/t || +26.8%
 |}
@@ Line 67: / Line 63: @@
 The rod mill work index values in this survey were based on results from Amdel which is believed to have used a non-standard rod mill using a smooth liner.  Bond rod mill work index determinations are supposed to be done in a mill employing a wave liner.  The "pilot plant" sample rod mill work index was determined at the A.R. MacPherson - Hazen laboratory in the USA which is believed to have a wave liner.  The ratio of Wi<sub>RM</sub>:Wi<sub>BM</sub> for the Pilot Plant sample (1.05) is dramatically different from the ratio for the samples tested in Australia (avg 1.40).  In spite of this, the Lowes West sample, which is an "average sulphide" sample for Kawnowna Belle, gives very similar model predictions to the Pilot Plant sample.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:58, 27 May 2014
Line 61:		Line 61:
	\| E<sub>total</sub> \|\| 23.24 kWh/t \|\| 29.05 kWh/t \|\| +25.0%		\| E<sub>total</sub> \|\| 23.24 kWh/t \|\| 29.05 kWh/t \|\| +25.0%
	\|}		\|}
		+
		+
		+	===Discussion===
		+
		+	The rod mill work index values in this survey were based on results from Amdel which is believed to have used a non-standard rod mill using a smooth liner. Bond rod mill work index determinations are supposed to be done in a mill employing a wave liner. The "pilot plant" sample rod mill work index was determined at the A.R. MacPherson - Hazen laboratory in the USA which is believed to have a wave liner. The ratio of Wi<sub>RM</sub>:Wi<sub>BM</sub> for the Pilot Plant sample (1.05) is dramatically different from the ratio for the samples tested in Australia (avg 1.40). In spite of this, the Lowes West sample, which is an "average sulphide" sample for Kawnowna Belle, gives very similar model predictions to the Pilot Plant sample.
		+
		+	The transfer size observed is very fine, 300 µm. The Raw Bond/Barratt model prediction is closer to the observed value (530 µm versus