Template:Tests by size class - Revision history

Alex Doll at 16:49, 25 March 2023

2023-03-25T16:49:22Z

Alex Doll at 15:27, 28 July 2016

2016-07-28T15:27:04Z

Alex Doll at 17:01, 22 April 2015

2015-04-22T17:01:28Z

Alex Doll: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" border="1" |- ! Model ! Fine size ! Medium size ! Coarse size |- | Bond/Barratt | Wi_BM | Wi_RM | Wi_C |- | SMC | Mi_{b
2012-12-26T18:25:03Z
Created page with "{| class="wikitable" border="1" |- ! Model ! Fine size ! Medium size ! Coarse size |- | Bond/Barratt | WiBM | WiRM | WiC |- | SMC | Mib</..."
New page
{| class="wikitable" border="1"

|-

! Model

! Fine size

! Medium size

! Coarse size

|-

| Bond/Barratt

| WiBM

| WiRM

| WiC

|-

| SMC

| Mib

| Mia

| Mic &dagger;

|-

| SAGDesign

| WiBM(modified)

| SAGDesign

| —

|-

| CEET 1

| WiBM

| SPI

| —

|-

| CEET 2 ‡

| WiBM

| SPI

| CI

|-

| JK SimMet ‡

| WiBM, ta

| A, b

| —

|}

&dagger; The Mic is not a true measurement of coarse hardness because the measurement is conducted at a medium size and extrapolated based on a database thought to consist of largely competent ores. It is unlikely to represent the hardness of heterogeneous ores where the breakage of coarse sizes is controlled by fractures rather than by the matrix of rock.

‡ JK SimMet is actually a population-balance model rather than regular power model. CEET 2 is a hybrid having properties of a population-balance model and a power model. Both tend to be more complicated and have more "tuning factors" that are appropriate to fitting mill surveys as opposed to initial design. Specialized software is needed to operate both models.}

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 | Wi<sub>C</sub>
 |-
-| SMC
+| Morrell Mi (SMC)
 | Mi<sub>b</sub>
 | Mi<sub>a</sub>

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 | &mdash;
 |}
-<sup>&dagger;</sup> The Mi<sub>c</sub> is not a true measurement of coarse hardness because the measurement is conducted at a medium size and extrapolated based on a database thought to consist of largely competent ores.  It is unlikely to represent the hardness of heterogeneous ores where the breakage of coarse sizes is controlled by fractures rather than by the matrix of rock.
+<sup>&dagger;</sup> The Mi<sub>c</sub> is not a true measurement of coarse hardness because the measurement is conducted at a medium size and extrapolated based on a database.
 <sup>‡</sup> JK SimMet is actually a population-balance model rather than a power model.  CEET 2 is a hybrid model having properties of a population-balance model and a power model.  Both tend to be more complicated and have more "tuning factors" that are appropriate to fitting mill surveys as opposed to initial design.  Specialized software is needed to operate both models.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:01, 22 April 2015
Line 38:		Line 38:
	<sup>&dagger;</sup> The Mi<sub>c</sub> is not a true measurement of coarse hardness because the measurement is conducted at a medium size and extrapolated based on a database thought to consist of largely competent ores. It is unlikely to represent the hardness of heterogeneous ores where the breakage of coarse sizes is controlled by fractures rather than by the matrix of rock.		<sup>&dagger;</sup> The Mi<sub>c</sub> is not a true measurement of coarse hardness because the measurement is conducted at a medium size and extrapolated based on a database thought to consist of largely competent ores. It is unlikely to represent the hardness of heterogeneous ores where the breakage of coarse sizes is controlled by fractures rather than by the matrix of rock.

−	<sup>‡</sup> JK SimMet is actually a population-balance model rather than ~~regular~~ power model. CEET 2 is a hybrid having properties of a population-balance model and a power model. Both tend to be more complicated and have more "tuning factors" that are appropriate to fitting mill surveys as opposed to initial design. Specialized software is needed to operate both models.	+	<sup>‡</sup> JK SimMet is actually a population-balance model rather than a power model. CEET 2 is a hybrid model having properties of a population-balance model and a power model. Both tend to be more complicated and have more "tuning factors" that are appropriate to fitting mill surveys as opposed to initial design. Specialized software is needed to operate both models.