Anlisis granulomtrico: Arena de Mar N 1 (15 MINUTOS)

Abertura
Tamiz
(m)

10#
16#
20#
30#
50#
70#
100#
120#
200#
270#
Fondo
Total

2000
1180
850
600
300
212
150
125
75
53
-

Porcentaje

Peso
Bruto
Tamiz
(gr)

349.8
326.7
335.8
292.7
256.3
243.8
233.3
232.8
226.2
218.7
305.6

100

Peso
Tamiz+
Arena
Neto
(gr)
Retenido
(gr)

399.1
667.8
719.7
390.0
264.8
243.9
233.4
232.8
226.2
218.7
305.6

49.3
341.1
383.9
97.3
8.5
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
880.3

%
% Retenido
Retenido
Parcial

Acumulado

f3 (x)

R3 (x)

5.60
38.75
43.61
11.05
0.97
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

5.60
44.35
87.96
99.01
99.98
99.99
100.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

Pasante
F3(x)

94.40
55.65
12.04
0.99
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

(% ) A c u m u la d o P a s a n te

% Acumulado

Anlisis Gra
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0

(% ) A c u m u la d o P a s a n te

(15 MINUTOS)

500

1000
Abe

Anlisis Gran
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
10

100

Aber

Anlisis Granulomtrico Arena

500

1000
1500
Abertura Malla (m)

2000

2500

Anlisis Granulomtrico Arena

100

1000
Abertura Malla (m)

10000

Funciones de Distribucin
Constante:
p =

1000 kg/m3

= densidad de partcula
Columnas Adicionales para clculos estadsticos:

0.01
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
7.50
8.00
8.50
9.00
Total:

0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
7.50
8.00
8.50
9.00
9.50

Clculos:
Dp,am =
=
[LN(Dp)],am =
ln(g) =

0.49
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50

0.255
0.75
1.25
1.75
2.25
2.75
3.25
3.75
4.25
4.75
5.25
5.75
6.25
6.75
7.25
7.75
8.25
8.75
9.25

16
159
235
200
133
97
55
36
24
15
10
6
5
3
2
1
1
1
1
1000

N(Dp,j)/nt =
f(Dp,j) = nj/(ntDp,j) =
porcentaje de nmero de partculas
partculas
normalizado por
acumulado
rango de clase

0.016
0.159
0.235
0.2
0.133
0.097
0.055
0.036
0.024
0.015
0.01
0.006
0.005
0.003
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
1

1.6
17.5
41
61
74.3
84
89.5
93.1
95.5
97
98
98.6
99.1
99.4
99.6
99.7
99.8
99.9
100

= promedio aritmtico de LN(Dp) = [njLN(Dp,j)] / nt

0.593

= logaritmo natural de la desvicin gemetrica estndar= SQRT {nj([LN(Dp)],am-LN(Dp,j))2] / (nt-1) }

Dp,gm =

49.1165
251.2598
134.6950
13.2180
7.8483
53.5372
84.9668
109.3597
120.7366
112.8542
105.1653
84.0567
90.0119
67.4859
54.9764
32.9811
38.9741
45.4670
52.4599
1509.1703

distribucin de masa:

nj{[LN(Dp)],amnjln(Dp,j)
LN(Dp,j)}2
(para el clculo
ln(Dp,j)
de Dp,gm y (para el clculo
[LN(Dp)],am)
de ln(g))
-1.366492
-0.287682
0.223144
0.559616
0.81093
1.011601
1.178655
1.321756
1.446919
1.558145
1.658228
1.7492
1.832581
1.909543
1.981001
2.047693
2.110213
2.169054
2.224624

-21.8639
-45.7414
52.4387
111.9232
107.8537
98.1253
64.8260
47.5832
34.7261
23.3722
16.5823
10.4952
9.1629
5.7286
3.9620
2.0477
2.1102
2.1691
2.2246
527.7256

57.4089515267
105.7174690278
21.801008876
0.2033962696
10.6672424335
22.711121743
23.3039962719
22.6974223376
20.2779935112
15.926448964
12.7803575253
8.9519955016
8.5132435655
5.7282535199
4.2240212525
2.3103002904
2.5042668694
2.6939577921
2.8794625122
351.3009

mj = masa
de una
esfera en
la clase j
(kg)

njmj = masa
en clase j

8.68198765
220.893233
1022.65386
2806.16219
5964.1173
10889.2183
17974.1642
27611.6542
40194.3873
56115.0625
75766.3791
99541.036
127831.732
161031.167
199532.04
243727.049
294008.894
350770.273
414403.887

138.91180236
35122.024119
240323.65677
561232.43759
793227.60134
1056254.1738
988579.03202
994019.55055
964665.29419
841725.93793
757663.79075
597246.21588
639158.66162
483093.50157
399064.07931
243727.04881
294008.89373
350770.2735
414403.88719
1.0654E+07

mj/mt =
fraccin
msica

Mj/mt =
fraccin de
masa
acumulada
(%)

1.3038E-05
3.2965E-03
2.2556E-02
5.2676E-02
7.4451E-02
9.9138E-02
9.2786E-02
9.3296E-02
9.0541E-02
7.9002E-02
7.1113E-02
5.6056E-02
5.9990E-02
4.5342E-02
3.7455E-02
2.2876E-02
2.7595E-02
3.2922E-02
3.8895E-02

0.001
0.331
2.587
7.854
15.299
25.213
34.492
43.821
52.875
60.776
67.887
73.492
79.491
84.026
87.771
90.059
92.818
96.110
100.000

= desvicin estndar = SQRT {nj(Dp,am-Dp,j)2] / (nt-1) }

= desvicin gemetrica estndar = EXP{SQRT(LN[1+(/Dp,am)2])}

1.758 m
Varias formas de clcular Dp,gm:

Dp,gm =

4.08
119.25
293.75
350
299.25
266.75
178.75
135
102
71.25
52.5
34.5
31.25
20.25
14.5
7.75
8.25
8.75
9.25
2007.08

= diametro promedio basado en nmero= (njDp,j) / nt

g =

Dp,gm =

0.0326530612
0.318
0.47
0.4
0.266
0.194
0.11
0.072
0.048
0.03
0.02
0.012
0.01
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002

0.528

= desivicin geometrica estndar = EXP[LN(g)] (Exact)

1.809 m
Forma Alternatica para calcular g (valido slo para distribucin log-normal ):

Dp,gm =

njDp,j
nj(Dp,am-Dp,j)
(para el clculo (para el clculo de
de Dp,am)
)
2

2.007 m
1.229 m

g =

1.695 m
1.695 m

= diametro promedio gemetrico = EXP[ (1/nt) n jLN(Dp,j) ] (Exacto)

1.712 m
1.700 m

= diametro promedio gemetrico = D p,amEXP(-(LNg)2/2)

=diametro promedio gemetrico = EXP{ [LN(Dp)],am } (Exacto)

= diametro promedio gemetrico = D p,50 para grfico de distribucin acumulativa (asumiendo distribucin log-normal )

Funcin de Distribucin de partcula

Funcin de Distribucin de partcula

f(Dp j)

0.5

Histograma
0.25

0.5
f (Dp j)

f r a c c i n m s ic a d e p a r t c u la s p o r c la s e n j/ n t

0.4

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.15
0.1

0.05

0
1

8
9
10 11 12 13
nmero d e clase j

14

15

16

17

18

19

Funcin de Distribucin Acumulada

5
6
Dp (micrones)

-2

10

Funcin de Distribucin Acumulada

120

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0.5
1
Ln(Dp)

1.5

2.5

100.000

100.000

90.000

120

90.000

80.000
100

F (Dp)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

F (Dp)

=
j
nmero
de clase

nj/nt =
Dp,max,j =
Dp,j =
Dp,j =
nj = nmero
fraccin
diametro rango de
punto
de partculas
msica de
mayor de
clase medio de
por clase partculas por
clase (m)
(m) clase (m)
clase

Dp,min,j =
dimetro
menor de
clase (m)

80

100

40

40

30.000

20

20

20.000

2.00

3.00

4.00 5.00 6.00

Dp (micrones

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

0
0.10

60.000

50.000

60

1.00

70.000

60.000

80

60

0
0.00

80.000

70.000

50.000

40.000

40.000
30.000
20.000

10.000
1.00
Dp (micrones

10.00

10.000

0.000
0

10

0.000
0.1

10

Se ha hecho un anlisis granulomtrico del producto de

Completar por extrapolacin la distribucin de tamaos

Malla Tylerdi (in)

[-10, +14] 0.0555
[-14, +20] 0.0394
[-20, +28] 0.0280
[-28, +35] 0.0198
[-35, +48] 0.0140
[-48, +65] 0.0099
[-65, +100] 0.0070
[-100, +150]0.0050
[-150, +200]0.0035
[-200, ]

xi (di/di+1)
0.075 1.4086294
0.136 1.4071429
0.158 1.4141414
0.154 1.4142857
0.133 1.4141414
0.106 1.4142857
0.082
1.4
0.056 1.4285714
0.043
0.057
1.4126497

1.4142135624

di (in)

excedente

xi xi ajustada

0.00247
0.00175
0.00124

0.032
0.023
0.008

0.032
0.023
0.002

Total

0.063

0.057

0.006

di (in)
0.0555
0.0394
0.0280
0.0198
0.0140
0.0099
0.0070

xi
0.075
0.136
0.158
0.154
0.133
0.106
0.082

Anlisis
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
xi

0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02

0.16
0.14

xi

0.12

0.0050
0.0035
0.00247
0.00175
0.00124

0.056
0.043
0.032
0.023
0.002

0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0.0000

0.0100

xi

trico del producto de la molienda de ilmenita.

tribucin de tamaos bajo malla 200.

Anlisis Granulometrico Ilmenita

xi (lineal)

xi (logaritmico)

f(x) = 2784.0357717677x^3 - 394.2154184974x^2 + 14.746150504x - 0.0048023184

0.1

0.01
0.00100

0.01000
di (in)

Anlisis Granulomtrico (Lineal)

0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02

0.10000

xi

0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0.0000

0.0100

0.0200

0.0300
di (in)

0.0400

0.0500

0.0600

Anlisis Granulom

Ilmenita
1

xi (lineal)

.746150504x - 0.0048023184

xi (logaritmico)

0.1

0.01

0.001
0.00100

0.10000

0.01000
di (in)

Anlisis Granulomtrico (bilogaritmico)

1

xi

0.1

0.01

xi

0.1

0.01

0.001
0.0010

0.0100
di (in)

0.1000

nlisis Granulometrico Ilmenita

0.01000
di (in)

ogaritmico)

0.10000

0.1000

Eff ect of classifi cation effi ciency (E) and circulating load (C)
on product size distribution (Jankovic and Valery, 2012).

Example of size distributions produced from semi-autogenous grinding / autogenous grinding circui

Examples of size distributions produced from compressed bed breakage and impact breakage: (A)
mill for a nickel sulfi de ore (Crosbie et al, 2005) and (B) piston and die breakage versus hammer m

Because of the wider size distribution produced from ball

milling, they are almost always operated in closed circuit
with classifi cation at full scale. Classifi cation results in more
selective breakage of the coarser sizes because the fi nes
are removed preferentially from the circuit and therefore
a steeper size distribution curve is produced. This was
demonstrated by Armstrong (1960), who compared open and
closed circuit ball milling and rod milling in the laboratory.
He concluded that the size distribution from a laboratory
rod mill gave a similar-shaped size distribution to that of a
closed circuit laboratory ball mill. He also demonstrated how
a laboratory rod mill gave a similar shape of size distribution
to a 36 inch (0.8 m) Hardinge ball mill in closed circuit with a
rake classifi er treating the same ore. It seems to be this piece
of work that is the origin for the commonly held perception
that laboratory grinding should be performed in a rod mill to
produce a similar shape of size distribution to the full-scale
comminution circuit. Does this axiom still hold, however, as
grinding and classifi cation technologies used in comminution
circuits have evolved?

Grinding mills have become much larger and cyclones

are now widely used for classifi cation. Current industrial
scale ball mills, for instance, are usually about 4 to 5 m in
diameter, which is much larger than the 0.8 m mill used in
Armstrongs comparative study. Energies of breakage are
therefore much larger and classifi cation effi ciency has likely
changed. Cyclones, rather than rake classifi ers, are largely
used for classifi cation, and fi ne screening technology has
advanced to the point where it is now starting to be employed
within conventional grinding circuits to increase effi ciencies
of separation. Jankovic and Valery (2012) have demonstrated
in the laboratory how both the size of the recirculating load
and the classifi cation effi ciency can have a signifi cant effect on
the sharpness of the product size distribution curve produced
from milling (Figure 3).

/ autogenous grinding circuits (Morrell, 2011).

Crusher/rod milling circuits have been superceded largely

by SAG and autogenous grinding (AG) mills, which enable
greater tonnage rates. SAG/AG mills are similar to ball mills

in that breakage largely occurs due to the tumbling action of

the charge and indiscriminate impact of balls/particles on
the toe of the charge. The resulting product size distribution
will vary as the breakage rates and transfer rates of particles
through the mill vary as a consequence of the mill operating
parameters (eg ball load, ball size, total mill load, operating
speed, diameter, length and trommel diameter) and the
hardness of the ore (Morrell, 2004). Product size distributions
produced from SAG/AG circuits exhibit a wide variation in
shape but are typically wider than that observed from a ball
mill in closed circuit with a cyclone (Figure 4, referenced from
Morrell, 2011).

e and impact breakage: (A) vertical roller mill versus conventional tumbling
breakage versus hammer mill for a copper sulfi de ore (Vizcarra, 2010).

Compressed breakage comm

vertical roller mills or VRM) ar
size distributions than conven
a compressed bed, the coarse
the fi ner particles and prefere
For example, Crosbie et al (20
work found that the VRM prod
distributions for the same ore
mills (Figure 5a). Vizcarra (20
distribution produced from a p
than in a hammer mill a dev
impact breakage to particles (

It is therefore concluded that p

from operating plants are likel
on the grinding technology em
conditions of these technolog

speed, rolls pressure), the typ

versus closed circuit), the clas
of the recirculating loads. Its a
distributions produced in the l
testing will be different to that
be demonstrated later in the p

ompressed breakage comminution devices (eg HPGR,

ertical roller mills or VRM) are reported to produce sharper
ze distributions than conventional tumbling mills because in
compressed bed, the coarser particles take the load, shielding
e fi ner particles and preferentially break (Hawkins, 2007).
or example, Crosbie et al (2005) in laboratory and pilot plant
ork found that the VRM produced sharper product size
stributions for the same ore than conventional tumbling
ills (Figure 5a). Vizcarra (2010) found a sharper product size
stribution produced from a piston and die compressed bed
an in a hammer mill a device that applies indiscriminate
mpact breakage to particles (Figure 5b).

is therefore concluded that product size distributions

om operating plants are likely to vary widely depending
n the grinding technology employed, the size and operating
onditions of these technologies (eg diameter, ball load,

peed, rolls pressure), the type of circuit employed (eg open

ersus closed circuit), the classifi cation effi ciency and the size
the recirculating loads. Its also likely that the shape of the
stributions produced in the laboratory for geometallurgical
sting will be different to that of the full-scale cells. This will
e demonstrated later in the paper in two case studies.