Difference between revisions of "Benchmarking: Ball Mill Power Draw Models"

From SAGMILLING.COM
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "Category:Bibliography Category:Models Category:Benchmarking ==Benchmarking: Ball Mill Power Draw - Fimiston== * ''Nelson, M; Valery, W; Morrell, S'', '''Performanc...")
 
(→‎Benchmarking: Ball Mill Power Draw - Fimiston)
Line 28: Line 28:
   
 
[[Benchmarking: Fimiston Ball Mills|See details of benchmarking]]
  
[[Benchmarking: Fimiston Ball Mills|See details of benchmarking]]
  +
  +
==Benchmarking: Ball Mill Power Draw - Meadowbank==
  +
  +
* ''Muteb, P. & Allaire, J.'', '''Meadowbank Mine Process Plant Throughput Increase''', Proceedings of the Canadian Mineral Processors Annual General Meeting, Ottawa, Canada, January 2013.
  +
  +
The ball mill design given as:
  +
* Diameter inside shell: 18 ft
  +
* Length (assumed to be flange-to-flange length): 29 ft
  +
* Effective grinding length: 28.5 ft (from block flow diagram)
  +
* Motor size: horsepower ( kW)
  +
* Overflow mill assumed
  +
  +
The operating conditions of the May 2012 survey, including the pre-crushing circuit given as:
  +
* Mill speed 14.19 rpm (75% critical)
  +
* Volumetric filling 30.6% v/v
  +
* Ball charge 30.6% v/v
  +
* Ore density 2.93 kg/L
  +
* Grindability: A&times;b 38.6; Wi<sub>BM</sub> 10.9 kWh/t
  +
  +
Liners assumed to be an effective thickness of 3 inches. DCS power is assumed to be indicated (mill power measurements &times; 0.985 pinion &times; 0.96 motor eff equals power "at mill shell"). Model power measurements are shown "at DCS".
  +
  +
{| class="wikitable" border="1"
  +
|-
  +
!
  +
! DCS Power, kW
  +
! Mill filling
  +
! Morrell Model, kW
  +
! Loveday/Barratt model, kW
  +
! Austin model, kW
  +
|-
  +
| May 2012
  +
| 4,341
  +
| 30.6% v/v
  +
| (-3.3%)
  +
| (+7.3%)
  +
| (-3.0%)
  +
|}

Revision as of 23:04, 26 January 2013

Benchmarking: Ball Mill Power Draw - Fimiston

  • Nelson, M; Valery, W; Morrell, S, Performance Characteristics and Optimisation of the Fimiston (KCGM) SAG Mill Circuit, Page 233 - 248, SAG 1996 Conference, Vancouver, Canada.
Survey Survey Power,
kW at input 		Mill speed,
%critical 		Total load,
%v/v 		Pulp %solids,
w/w 		Morrell SAG Model,
kW at input / shell 		Nordberg Model,
kW at input / shell
Survey 1 3,864 68.3 38.7 72.0 3,933 / 3,776 3,592 / 3,345
  • Morrell model predicts 2% high
  • Nordberg model predicts 7% low

See details of benchmarking

Benchmarking: Ball Mill Power Draw - Meadowbank

  • Muteb, P. & Allaire, J., Meadowbank Mine Process Plant Throughput Increase, Proceedings of the Canadian Mineral Processors Annual General Meeting, Ottawa, Canada, January 2013.

The ball mill design given as:

  • Diameter inside shell: 18 ft
  • Length (assumed to be flange-to-flange length): 29 ft
  • Effective grinding length: 28.5 ft (from block flow diagram)
  • Motor size: horsepower ( kW)
  • Overflow mill assumed

The operating conditions of the May 2012 survey, including the pre-crushing circuit given as:

  • Mill speed 14.19 rpm (75% critical)
  • Volumetric filling 30.6% v/v
  • Ball charge 30.6% v/v
  • Ore density 2.93 kg/L
  • Grindability: A×b 38.6; WiBM 10.9 kWh/t

Liners assumed to be an effective thickness of 3 inches. DCS power is assumed to be indicated (mill power measurements × 0.985 pinion × 0.96 motor eff equals power "at mill shell"). Model power measurements are shown "at DCS".

DCS Power, kW Mill filling Morrell Model, kW Loveday/Barratt model, kW Austin model, kW
May 2012 4,341 30.6% v/v (-3.3%) (+7.3%) (-3.0%)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.sagmilling.com/index.php?title=Benchmarking:_Ball_Mill_Power_Draw_Models&oldid=352"