Data Analysis of Electrostatic Charge in Finish Ball Mills

Research & Development Information
PCA R&D Serial No. 2855
Data Analysis of Electrostatic

Charge in a Finish Ball Mill
by Medgar L. Marceau and Ann M. Caffero
© Portland Cement Association 2005

All rights reserved
This information is copyright protected. PCA grants permission to electronically share this document with
other professionals on the condition that no part of the file or document is changed.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
Background ......................................................................................................................................1
Summary of Testing.....................................................................................................................1
Phase 1. ....................................................................................................................................1
Phase 2. ....................................................................................................................................2
Phase 3. ....................................................................................................................................2
Data Reduction.................................................................................................................................2
Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................................2
Parameters Related to Level of Grinding Aid..............................................................................3
Power consumption of motors. ................................................................................................3
Total electric demand per ton. .................................................................................................3
Rejection rate. ..........................................................................................................................4
Water flow. ..............................................................................................................................4
Separator speed. .......................................................................................................................4
Mill vibrations..........................................................................................................................4
Parameters Related to Electrostatic Charge.................................................................................4
Power consumption of motors. ................................................................................................4
Total electric demand per ton. .................................................................................................5
Grinding aid. ............................................................................................................................5
Water flow. ..............................................................................................................................5
Parameters Related to Fineness ...................................................................................................5
Separator feed blains................................................................................................................5
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................6
Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................6
Appendix A Electro-Tech Systems, Inc., Audit Report (Phase 1)...............................................A1
Appendix B Additional Mill Data (Phase 1)................................................................................B1
Appendix C Electro-Tech Systems, Inc., Test Report (Phase 2) .................................................C1
Appendix D Additional Mill Data (Phase 2) ...............................................................................D1
Appendix E Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc., Data Analysis (Phase 3)................... E1
ii
Data Analysis of Electrostatic
Charge in a Finish Ball Mill
by Medgar L. Marceau and Ann M. Caffero *
INTRODUCTION
This project represents Phase 3 of an ongoing evaluation of the effects of grinding aid and
electrostatic charge on grinding finish mills in cement plants. Data reduction and analysis was
performed on grinding parameters and grinding aid data collected during Phase 2 of the
evaluation. The purpose of this report is to present the reduced data and the results of the
analysis.
BACKGROUND
Electrostatic charge is reported to exist in grinding finish mills. It is commonly held that this
electrostatic charge reduces the efficiency of the grinding process and lowers productivity.
Current industry practice to reduce electrostatic charge is to introduce a grinding aid at the finish
mill to facilitate the grinding process. Previously, the Manufacturing Technical Committee’s
Task Committee 1, Materials Preparation and Finishing, evaluated a technology† that claimed to
reduce electrostatic charge without using grinding aid. The results were inconclusive and a report
was never published. However, the results did raise a number of questions regarding electrostatic
charge in grinding finish mills, in particular: how should the buildup of electrostatic charge be
measured? and what is its polarity and magnitude?
Task Committee 1 initiated a project to investigate electrostatic charge in grinding finish

mills. Phase 1 measured and determined the magnitude and polarity of electrostatic charge in a
ball mill with and without grinding aid. The purpose of Phase 2 was to optimize the amount of
grinding aid needed to reduce electrostatic charge. Although several dozen grinding parameters
were monitored and recorded, the relationship between these parameters, electrostatic charge,
and optimum level of grinding aid was not obvious. The goal of Phase 3 (this project); therefore,
is to reduce and organize the data so that relationships among the parameters can be observed.
Summary of Testing
Phase 1. Electro-Tech Systems, Inc. (ETS) monitored electrostatic charge in the No. 5 Finisher
(a ball mill) at Monarch Cement Company, Humboldt, Kansas, on November 6, 2002.
Electrostatic charge measurements were taken with ETS Model 222 Electrostatic Fieldmeter
equipped with a custom detector probe. Ambient temperature and humidity were monitored
*
Building Science Engineer and Associate Microscopist, respectively, Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc.,
5400 Old Orchard Road, Skokie, IL, 60077, (847) 965-7500. www.CTLGroup.com
†
ECOFOR manufactured by ECOFOR Company, 168 Leninskiy Prospekt, Saint Petersburg, 196191, Russia.
www.ecofor.com
1
throughout the test and remained fairly constant. Temperature ranged from 20.4 to 20.8°C (68.7
to 69.4°F) and humidity ranged from 24.3 to 30.2 % over a period of approximately 3 hours.
Grinding aid was turned off approximately 17 hours before the first set of readings were
taken to purge the system of grinding aid. While the grinding aid remained off, the first set of
measurements was taken in the recovery chute and in the discharge duct of the ball mill. The
grinding aid was turned back on and the second set of measurements was taken in the same
locations. Grinding aid usage rate was 0.83 lb/ton of cement‡. The results show that
(i) electrostatic charge is detected, (ii) once grinding aid is introduced, electrostatic charge is
reduced, and (iii) the polarity of the cement particles is negative. The ETS audit report is
presented in Appendix A. Additional mill data, which were not part of the ETS report, are
presented in Appendix B.
Phase 2. ETS again monitored electrostatic charge and grinding parameters at the same plant
but on a different ball mill—one equipped with a high efficiency separator. The magnitude and
polarity of electrostatic charge was monitored on June 23 and 24, 2003, as incrementally greater
doses of grinding aid were added to the mill. The grinding aid is a mixture of HEA2 and MTDA,
both manufactured by W.R. Grace & Co. When sprayed into the mill, it is diluted at a rate of
20% grinding aid to 80% water. The dosage increments were 0, 25, 50, 87.5, and 100% of
normal use, where the normal use rate in this mill is 0.74 lb active solids/ton of cement. The
duration between increases was approximately 2 hours. Throughout the test, the production rate
was held constant and the feed rate was varied. Consequently, the recirculating load (reject rate)
varied. The amount of data collected was tremendous and there was no clear indication of an
optimum level of grinding aid. The ETS test report is presented in Appendix C; however, it does
not include all the data because it is too voluminous. Additional mill data, which were not part of
the ETS report, are presented in Appendix D.
Phase 3. The rest of this report is devoted to Phase 3. This phase of the project consists of
reduction and analysis of the data collected in Phase 2. No additional testing was conducted.
DATA REDUCTION
Data reduction consists of identifying the data to be used in the subsequent analysis. Much of the
data collected in Phase 2 is superfluous because it was measured and recorded with temporal
resolution much greater than the dependent variable (electrostatic charge). Figure 1 shows a flow
diagram of the finish mill system. The reduced data are shown in Table 1. Abbreviated names for
the grinding parameters are shown in Table 2. Figure 2 shows a sample of the reduced data. It
shows the variations in electrostatic charge over the course of testing. All other data are show in
Appendix E as part of the data analysis.
DATA ANALYSIS
Using statistical analysis, Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. (CTL) determined which
grinding parameters significantly affect performance of the ball mill. The data were analyzed
using the method of least squares. In this method, a model is sought that can explain and predict,
‡
The original ETS report incorrectly reported 0.83 lb/ton clinker.
2
with a specified level of confidence§, the performance of the grinding mill as it relates to
grinding aid and electrostatic charge.
How well a model fits the data can be measured in many ways. For example, one simple
measure is the regression coefficient, R-squared (R-sq)**. In the discussion below, the following
qualitative terms are used to describe how well a model fits the data:
• A very good fit describes a model with a regression coefficient greater than 85%,
satisfying statistical tests of significance, and satisfying all assumptions for least
squares regression††.
• A good fit describes a model with a regression coefficient between 75 and 85%
satisfying statistical tests of significance, and satisfying all assumptions for least
squares regression.
• A somewhat good fit describes a model with a regression coefficient between 75
and 80%, satisfying statistical tests of significance, and satisfying most
assumptions for least squares regression.
The following sections discuss the grinding parameters that significantly affect
performance of the ball mill. They also discuss parameters that should affect performance but in
fact show no statistical correlation. The complete analysis is presented in the Appendix E.
Parameters Related to Level of Grinding Aid

Power consumption of motors. The best model (R-sq = 83.2%) relating the level of
grinding aid to power consumption of individual motors (mill power, elevator power, air sweep
fan power and separator fan power) is:
Grind.aid = 546 + 0.237 Mill.pow - 7.19 Elev.pow - 11.3 AS.fan.pow - 0.822 Sep.fan.pow
This relation (see page E13) is conditional because elevator power and separator fan power are
strongly negatively correlated (-0.79) (see page E57). As the amount of grinding aid increases,
the mill power also increases; however, the elevator, air sweep fan, and separator fan power
decrease. The amount of grinding aid has no significant effect on the power consumption of the
air compressors.
Total electric demand per ton. There is no simple linear relation between total electric
demand per ton of material output (kW/ton) and level of grinding aid. Nor does the analysis
suggest a polynomial model. However, the raw data show the lowest average total demand
(42.78 kW/ton) occurs when the level of grinding aid is at 62.5% of the normal addition rate (see
page E19).
§
The level of confidence is set at 95%, resulting in level of significance for a Type I error of α = 5%. The value of α
is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is in fact true. In other words, it is the
probability of finding a significant association when one does not really exist.
**
R-squared is the proportion of the variability in the response that is explained by the model. The remainder of the
variability is assumed to be due to random error.
††
In order for a least squares regression model to be valid, the error component (also called the residual) must be a
standard normal random variable with constant variance.
3
Rejection rate. The third degree polynomial regression equation relating rejection rate to the
level of grind aid is a very good fit (R-sq = 87.2%):
Rej.rate = 151 + 2.74 Grind.aid - 0.0987 Grind.aid^2 + 0.000647 Grind.aid^3
The maximum rejection rate occurs when the level of grinding aid is 16.6% (see page E21). The
lowest rejection rate is achieved when the grinding aid is at 85.1%. Above 85.1%, rejection rate
increases.
Water flow. Water flow represents the amount of water used to cool the cement. The linear
regression equation relating water flow at the inlet of the grinding mill (wat.flo1) to level of
grinding aid is a somewhat good fit (R-sq = 78.6%). It shows that 78.6% of the decrease in water
flow can be attributed to the increase in level of grinding aid (see page E22):
Wat.flo1 = 2.96 - 0.0122 Grind.aid
Separator speed. The second-degree polynomial regression equation relating separator speed
to the level of grind aid squared is a somewhat good fit (R-sq = 85.7%):
Sep.speed = 150 + 0.00143 Grind.aid^2
Separator speed is at a minimum when grinding aid is zero and at a maximum when grinding aid
is at 100% (see page E28).
Mill vibrations. The third degree polynomial regression equation relating vibrations at the
inlet of the grinding mill (Sound.c1) to the level of grind aid is a very good fit (R-sq = 94.8%):
Sound.c1 = 32.20 + 0.2899 Grind.aid + 0.002343 Grind.aid^2 - 0.000033 Grind.aid^3.
It shows that vibrations increase with increasing levels of grinding aid up to a maximum of
82.7% and then decrease (see page 30D).
However, since the variables Sound.c1 and Sound.c2 are not strongly correlated (30%),
they can be combined into a regression model (see pages D37 and D38). The resulting linear
regression equation shows a very good fit between the level of grinding aid and the difference in
sound readings (R-sq 94.6%):
Grind.aid = 88.0 + 3.33 Sound.c1 - 3.69 Sound.c2
or
Grind.aid = 69.6 + 3.38 (Sound.c1 - Sound.c2)
Parameters Related to Electrostatic Charge

Power consumption of motors. The best model (R-sq = 79.3%) relating the electric charge
to the power consumption of individual motors (mill power, elevator power, air sweep fan power
and separator fan power) is:
4
Elec.charge = 16.2 – 0.00259 Mill.pow – 0.0275 Sep.fan.pow + 0.0468 Elev.pow
This relation (see page E54) is conditional because elevator power and separator fan power are
strongly negatively correlated (-0.79) (see page E57). Electric charge increases as elevator power
increases; however, electric charge decreases as mill power and separator fan power increase.
The power consumption of the air sweep fan and air compressors has no significant correlation
to level of electric charge.
Total electric demand per ton. There is no simple linear relation between electric charge
and total electric demand per ton (kW/ton) (see page E42). Nor does the analysis suggest a
polynomial model. However, the raw data show that when electric charge is low, electric
demand per ton is low.
Grinding aid. The third degree polynomial regression equation relating electric charge to the
level of grinding aid squared is a somewhat better fit than a linear relation (R-sq = 67.5% versus
R-sq = 51.7%) (see pages D63 and D65). However, in both cases the necessary assumptions for
least-squares regression are not met. Therefore, neither model is very useful:
Elec.charge = 2.52 + 0.0339 Grind.aid - 0.00146 Grind.aid^2 + 0.000011 Grind.aid^3
and
Elec.charge = 2.57 - 0.0127 Grind.aid
However, the linear model shows that electric charge generally decreases with increasing levels
of grinding aid. In addition, the raw data show that the minimum average electric charge
(1.21 kV) occurs when grinding aid is 65.2%.
Water flow. Water flow represents the amount of water used to cool the cement. The linear
regression equation relating water flow at the inlet of the grinding mill (wat.flo1) to level of
electric charge is a somewhat good fit (R-sq = 82.4%). It shows that 82.4% of the increase in
water flow can be attributed to the increase in level of electric charge (see page E70):
Wat.flo1 = 0.9770 + 0.7080 Elec.charge
Parameters Related to Fineness

Separator feed blains. The fineness of cement as measured at the separator feed in blains
(average cm2/g) is directly related to the level of grinding aid (R-sq = 94.1%). This is a very
good fit; however, there are only six data points and the assumptions for least-squares regression
are not met:
Sep.feed.bl = 1847 + 6.39 Grind.aid
The fineness of the separator feed increases with increasing levels of grinding aid (see page
E76).
5
CONCLUSION
This project, which represents Phase 3 of an ongoing evaluation of the effects of grinding aid and
electrostatic charge on grinding finish mills in cement plants, consisted of data reduction and
data analysis. Using the method of least squares, CTL determined which grinding parameters
significantly affect performance of the ball mill. In addition, the grinding parameters that should
affect performance but in fact showed no statistical correlation were also discussed. The
complete analysis is presented in the Appendix E.
Many conclusions can be drawn from the charts in Appendix E. For example, increasing the
amount of grinding aid results in a combination of a greater fineness and lower energy use. The
reader is encouraged to study the charts in Appendix E and draw their own conclusions.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research reported in this paper (PCA R&D Serial No. 2855) was conducted by Construction
Technology Laboratories, Inc., with the sponsorship of the Portland Cement Association (PCA
Project Index No. M04-05a). The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are
responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented. The contents do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Portland Cement Association.
6
Figure 1. The flow diagram of the finish mill system shows the grinding parameters that were monitored during Phase 2 testing.
7
Table 1. Reduced Data
Air sweep DC fan
Air sweep DC fan
Air compressor 1
Separator DC fan
Separator DC fan
inlet temperature
inlet temperature
FK pump current
Mill motor power
Actual separator
Airflow through
Actual feed rate
Air compressor
Compt 1 sound
Compt 2 sound
outlet pressure
Elevator power
Compt 1 water
Compt 2 water
scan vibration
Mill discharge
Unfiltered mill
inlet pressure
inlet pressure
Air sweep DC
Air sweep DC
Air sweep DC
Separator DC
Separator DC
Separator DC
F505 gypsum
Separator DC
Separator DC
Grinding aid
F501 clinker
F502 clinker
temperature
temperature
differential
differential
Reject rate
Calculated
discharge
Separator
separator
pressure
pressure
flow rate
flow rate
2 power
Voltage
airslide
Charge
current
current
current
kW/ton
Recirc
feeder
power
power
power
feeder
feeder
speed
ear
ear
Vairable
FK.pump.cur
Sep.dis.temp
Mill.dis.temp
Sep.diff.pres
Sep.out.pres
Sep.inl.temp
Sep.fan.pow
Sep.inl.pres
AS.diff.pres
AS.inl.temp
AS.fan.pow
Sep.fan.cur
Clink.feed1
Clink.feed2
AS.inl.pres
AS.fan.cur
Sep.speed
Air.comp1
Air.comp2
Sound.c1
Sound.c2
Grind.aid
Unfil.vibr
Elev.pow
Gyp.feed
Mill.pow
wat.flo1
wat.flo2
Rej.rate
Sep.cur
Voltage
Ac.feed
Charge
Recirc.
thr.sep
kW/ton
Abbreviated name
Unit % kV TPH TPH TPH kW TPH kW % % % °F GPM GPM Amps kW in. WC in. WC °F SCFM kW Amps Amps in. WC in. WC in. WC °F °F RPM Amps kW kW kW/ton TPH TPH TPH
6/23/04 17:15 0 2.64 100 145 99.63 3124.5 144.28 34.07 32.34 52.56 86.40 178.17 2.88 20.25 108.13 72.08 6.65 6.43 197.62 58015 267.51 47.59 138.69 11.15 5.91 17.06 152.21 150.41 150.31 117.85 70.02 70.27 42.64 47.70 47.67 3.75
6/23/04 17:16 0 2.77 100 145 99.56 3124.5 162.10 30.77 33.20 53.23 87.60 178.37 2.87 20.25 108.03 72.31 6.46 6.93 197.76 58171 270.14 47.59 150.35 11.43 5.84 17.27 152.62 150.64 150.31 145.80 79.72 80.30 42.86 47.62 48.21 3.73
6/23/04 17:17 0 2.94 100 145 100.42 3133.8 136.06 31.67 32.08 52.56 86.21 178.17 2.87 20.25 109.26 72.92 6.59 6.44 197.07 58476 272.03 47.59 138.48 11.00 5.92 16.92 152.62 150.25 151.06 94.40 66.86 66.66 42.35 48.45 48.17 3.80
6/23/04 17:18 0 2.98 100 145 99.34 3115.5 141.73 33.47 32.30 52.75 85.34 178.37 2.86 20.25 108.37 72.67 6.54 6.85 197.07 58626 273.12 47.59 137.94 11.01 5.76 16.77 152.41 150.25 150.31 175.20 93.81 94.66 43.00 47.70 47.96 3.68
6/23/04 17:19 0 2.47 100 145 100.16 3183.3 140.48 32.26 31.85 52.97 87.56 178.17 2.90 20.25 107.81 72.19 6.35 7.05 197.21 58775 270.14 47.59 143.35 11.15 5.67 16.82 152.62 150.25 151.06 126.26 77.23 77.03 43.14 48.45 47.96 3.75
6/23/04 17:20 0 2.48 100 145 99.53 3226.2 169.10 33.31 32.60 52.71 87.33 178.17 2.88 20.25 107.69 72.19 6.41 6.73 197.21 58928 266.39 47.59 150.03 11.43 5.83 17.26 152.62 149.86 151.06 96.18 65.74 66.21 43.62 47.75 47.92 3.86
6/23/04 17:21 0 2.45 100 145 100.05 3147.1 139.85 35.42 31.92 52.29 87.56 178.51 2.88 20.25 108.81 72.67 6.53 6.86 197.76 58476 269.02 46.47 148.85 11.29 5.90 17.19 152.62 150.64 150.93 111.38 69.68 69.92 42.71 47.75 48.46 3.85
6/23/04 17:22 0 2.45 100 145 99.91 3075.0 146.37 35.28 31.25 52.18 87.52 178.51 2.87 20.25 107.91 72.43 6.67 6.47 197.76 58476 265.97 46.47 138.69 10.93 5.90 16.83 152.62 150.41 150.93 124.45 73.20 73.08 42.07 48.04 47.92 3.95
6/23/04 17:23 0 2.41 100 145 100.07 3124.5 165.82 35.13 32.26 52.75 84.55 178.17 2.87 20.25 108.48 72.31 6.37 6.72 197.21 58321 267.86 46.47 148.95 11.20 5.90 17.10 152.41 150.10 150.93 110.18 68.79 68.47 42.66 47.79 48.17 3.62
6/23/04 17:24 0 2.40 100 145 99.46 3174.2 142.50 33.31 31.55 52.06 84.48 178.51 2.87 20.25 107.81 71.94 6.45 6.65 197.21 58011 265.97 46.47 149.71 11.14 5.68 16.82 152.96 150.41 150.93 248.78 97.19 98.02 43.73 47.54 47.96 3.96
6/23/04 17:25 0 2.40 100 145 99.24 3203.5 149.26 36.63 31.59 52.82 86.36 178.37 2.87 20.25 108.81 73.03 6.65 6.43 197.21 58015 265.24 46.47 144.96 10.93 5.82 16.75 152.76 150.41 150.93 177.22 89.41 90.57 43.98 47.79 47.67 3.78
6/23/04 17:26 0 2.40 100 145 98.51 3124.5 153.88 32.42 33.09 52.85 87.19 178.37 2.83 20.25 108.13 71.58 6.52 6.87 197.62 57708 265.24 46.47 144.86 11.00 5.83 16.83 152.76 150.80 150.93 125.80 71.48 72.19 43.21 46.96 47.67 3.89
6/23/04 17:27 0 2.40 100 145 97.80 3133.8 158.22 34.52 32.64 52.56 86.47 178.37 2.87 20.25 108.37 71.83 6.60 6.43 197.21 57864 265.62 46.47 141.50 10.93 5.83 16.76 152.96 150.64 150.93 143.09 81.97 83.13 43.76 47.17 46.88 3.75
6/23/04 17:28 0 2.40 100 145 97.27 3079.4 153.53 34.66 32.96 52.22 86.36 178.37 2.87 20.25 107.91 72.67 6.54 6.61 197.62 57664 268.60 46.47 149.50 11.14 5.90 17.03 152.76 150.96 150.93 111.98 68.33 68.91 43.20 46.92 46.55 3.80
6/23/04 17:29 0 2.40 100 145 97.67 3135.9 147.33 31.36 30.94 52.33 86.36 177.83 2.86 20.25 108.03 72.19 6.30 6.98 197.07 58321 267.51 46.47 147.65 11.07 5.76 16.83 152.41 150.64 150.93 118.90 69.68 70.49 43.59 47.12 46.84 3.71
6/23/04 18:00 25 2.51 100 190 94.87 3169.8 180.69 35.88 34.97 52.56 86.21 177.26 2.86 20.25 108.03 72.19 6.70 6.95 195.43 57717 257.35 46.47 147.98 10.04 6.11 16.15 152.62 150.41 150.81 169.55 88.40 89.22 45.67 45.43 45.85 3.59
6/23/04 18:05 25 2.50 100 190 94.74 3142.6 190.61 37.39 32.90 52.29 88.31 176.87 2.88 20.25 107.13 70.75 6.80 7.04 195.43 58025 256.27 46.47 149.38 10.18 6.04 16.22 152.21 150.25 150.81 141.90 83.77 83.35 45.08 45.64 45.56 3.54
6/23/04 18:10 25 2.46 100 190 95.96 3160.5 175.33 35.13 38.17 53.31 87.41 176.73 2.83 20.25 108.03 71.83 7.00 6.49 194.88 57102 257.00 45.53 149.16 9.76 6.19 15.95 152.21 150.10 150.81 160.55 79.49 79.53 44.72 45.72 46.64 3.62
6/23/04 18:15 25 2.58 100 175 95.10 3124.5 172.59 36.63 40.43 52.23 87.52 176.52 2.85 20.25 107.01 72.06 7.08 6.56 195.29 55360 257.00 45.53 150.25 9.62 6.39 16.02 151.86 150.10 150.81 146.71 80.96 82.34 44.81 45.68 45.85 3.57
6/23/04 18:20 25 2.48 100 175 94.81 3190.0 172.68 37.23 40.73 53.38 87.38 176.52 2.85 20.25 107.59 72.06 7.14 6.64 194.75 56795 253.99 45.53 142.47 9.56 6.33 15.88 151.86 150.64 150.81 106.42 67.32 67.79 45.33 45.64 45.68 3.49
6/23/04 18:25 25 2.56 100 175 94.86 3133.8 191.68 34.66 43.07 53.95 90.31 175.84 2.81 20.25 107.69 72.58 7.45 6.28 194.54 58048 255.88 45.53 142.47 9.49 6.48 15.95 150.97 150.41 150.81 129.87 72.84 73.31 44.72 45.93 45.64 3.54
6/23/04 18:30 25 2.42 100 175 95.07 3223.7 165.64 36.94 43.67 53.46 89.41 175.63 2.81 20.25 106.80 71.35 7.19 6.70 194.33 56655 255.53 45.53 143.87 9.69 6.25 15.94 150.43 149.86 150.81 135.74 73.85 74.00 45.70 45.68 45.81 3.59
6/23/04 18:35 25 2.44 100 165 95.44 3133.8 161.45 33.61 46.23 53.23 88.24 174.95 2.81 20.25 107.02 71.10 6.97 7.11 194.20 57741 256.62 45.53 142.15 9.62 6.37 16.00 149.54 149.55 150.06 132.42 77.69 77.49 44.63 45.85 45.89 3.70
6/23/04 18:40 25 2.55 100 145 94.94 3118.0 148.81 33.31 45.36 53.42 87.49 175.29 2.83 19.26 107.59 71.58 7.14 6.70 194.20 56963 254.72 46.28 149.50 9.82 6.03 15.85 149.54 149.00 150.81 168.50 82.43 83.13 44.79 45.16 46.14 3.62
6/23/04 18:45 50 2.57 100 145 95.37 3214.9 138.73 34.23 46.49 53.23 90.35 174.95 2.81 19.02 107.81 71.94 7.10 6.62 193.79 58199 254.37 45.35 141.08 9.31 6.25 15.56 148.44 148.61 150.06 149.12 83.09 83.13 45.62 45.68 46.10 3.59
6/23/04 18:50 50 2.51 100 145 94.84 3192.1 153.00 33.93 46.97 52.59 94.26 175.29 2.75 18.61 108.59 72.79 7.19 6.41 194.20 57289 254.37 45.35 147.23 9.35 6.26 15.61 148.85 146.61 150.81 188.36 79.95 81.09 45.59 45.85 45.39 3.60
6/23/04 18:55 50 2.57 100 145 94.55 3176.3 151.33 32.42 48.18 52.93 94.26 188.24 2.78 18.44 107.35 71.83 7.10 6.97 207.69 56824 253.25 45.35 145.62 9.29 6.23 15.52 162.14 162.13 150.81 140.55 73.18 74.56 45.53 45.35 45.56 3.64
6/23/04 19:00 50 2.55 100 145 95.50 3133.8 142.80 28.65 49.38 51.50 94.26 175.36 2.75 18.29 106.68 73.27 7.31 7.08 194.13 56664 255.14 45.16 144.43 9.33 6.21 15.67 148.71 148.38 150.93 112.72 68.56 67.47 44.44 45.88 46.14 3.48
6/23/04 19:05 50 2.59 100 145 94.77 3135.9 124.47 32.56 47.54 51.77 94.26 175.09 2.79 18.07 107.35 71.10 7.28 6.97 195.43 56962 255.53 45.16 138.81 9.22 6.09 15.24 147.89 148.06 150.19 124.90 71.71 72.29 44.83 45.72 45.64 3.41
6/23/04 19:10 50 2.54 100 145 94.40 3158.4 147.26 31.36 47.35 52.41 94.26 175.29 2.76 17.55 107.59 72.08 7.11 6.95 195.64 55719 253.99 45.16 141.50 9.35 6.24 15.67 147.89 147.75 150.93 99.51 64.95 65.42 45.08 44.89 45.85 3.68
6/23/04 19:15 50 2.59 100 129 95.14 3142.6 126.76 31.67 48.37 52.18 94.26 175.63 2.75 17.70 107.47 71.47 7.23 6.93 195.98 56664 251.75 45.16 141.18 9.30 5.75 15.25 148.30 147.75 150.93 134.83 74.29 74.22 44.73 45.64 45.81 3.69
6/23/04 19:20 50 2.52 100 129 94.93 3160.8 120.87 31.97 49.42 51.73 94.26 175.63 2.79 16.99 108.03 72.31 7.10 6.91 196.87 56669 250.62 45.16 136.87 9.15 6.02 15.17 147.89 147.20 150.31 89.58 61.79 62.49 44.97 45.72 45.60 3.62
6/23/04 19:25 50 2.56 100 129 94.91 3201.4 124.77 32.26 49.91 52.75 94.26 176.16 2.76 16.93 107.81 71.71 7.15 6.92 197.62 56510 251.36 45.16 129.10 9.01 5.81 14.82 146.10 147.20 151.06 133.02 74.07 75.80 45.47 45.68 45.64 3.59
6/24/04 8:55 50 1.61 102 95 101.98 3165.4 98.00 26.85 46.97 53.64 90.54 178.85 2.07 20.25 108.13 72.08 6.47 6.92 201.05 55867 279.53 48.90 137.64 11.67 6.15 17.60 149.54 147.20 155.73 218.27 87.27 89.22 42.48 49.11 48.58 4.04
6/24/04 8:56 50 1.58 102 95 101.98 3183.3 89.76 29.58 47.05 54.33 89.41 176.85 2.03 20.25 108.37 72.19 6.47 6.79 201.05 56655 283.63 48.90 136.76 11.67 5.80 17.60 149.54 147.20 155.73 280.37 87.71 89.91 42.81 49.11 48.58 4.04
6/24/04 8:57 50 1.47 102 95 101.98 3176.3 98.95 26.56 49.27 55.31 88.28 176.85 2.06 20.25 109.04 71.94 6.47 6.89 201.05 56023 282.90 48.90 134.81 11.67 6.06 17.60 149.54 147.20 155.73 136.63 78.24 80.19 42.40 49.11 48.58 4.04
6/24/04 8:58 50 1.49 102 95 102.01 3174.2 90.68 28.20 48.14 54.52 91.36 176.85 2.06 20.25 108.26 71.83 6.54 6.97 201.39 56340 281.39 48.90 139.13 11.33 6.15 17.38 149.74 147.36 155.73 211.35 80.50 81.88 42.20 49.11 48.75 4.15
6/24/04 8:59 50 1.84 102 95 102.50 3190.0 84.11 29.72 48.71 54.85 90.20 178.85 2.03 20.25 108.13 71.83 6.48 6.91 201.18 56164 281.74 48.90 138.91 11.44 6.19 17.50 150.08 146.66 155.73 149.87 77.69 79.29 42.32 49.19 49.16 4.15
6/24/04 9:05 62.5 1.48 102 90 102.50 3167.5 88.50 29.10 47.81 53.69 88.43 178.85 2.03 20.25 108.48 71.83 6.48 6.74 201.18 56023 284.02 48.90 134.49 11.44 6.22 17.59 150.08 146.66 155.73 122.65 71.60 71.85 42.24 49.19 49.16 4.15
6/24/04 9:10 62.5 1.21 102 90 102.34 3199.1 100.02 28.06 49.12 54.59 91.36 178.51 2.05 20.25 107.69 71.47 6.49 6.88 200.84 55862 281.01 48.90 137.94 11.59 6.02 17.69 149.74 146.27 155.11 158.29 88.97 90.80 42.93 49.07 48.99 4.28
6/24/04 9:15 62.5 1.21 102 90 102.34 3219.3 93.96 27.91 49.50 54.14 88.39 178.51 2.02 20.25 108.37 71.71 6.49 6.97 200.84 56184 277.64 48.90 139.13 11.59 6.02 17.69 149.74 146.27 155.11 232.11 85.46 87.41 43.07 49.07 48.99 4.28
6/24/04 9:20 62.5 1.24 102 90 101.37 3199.1 97.02 27.01 50.25 54.78 89.52 178.37 2.05 20.25 108.48 72.08 6.61 7.10 200.50 55667 281.01 48.90 139.35 11.81 6.16 17.58 149.33 146.66 158.70 142.21 74.64 76.02 42.81 48.86 48.62 3.89
6/24/04 9:25 62.5 1.16 102 90 101.37 3151.7 99.25 26.56 52.51 54.71 91.17 178.37 2.02 20.25 107.81 71.83 6.61 6.50 200.50 55547 281.01 48.90 138.69 11.81 6.09 17.56 149.33 146.66 158.70 139.05 78.14 80.19 42.30 48.86 48.62 3.89
6/24/04 9:30 62.5 1.27 102 90 101.88 3219.3 87.64 29.42 51.00 53.83 91.40 178.37 2.01 20.25 108.59 72.31 6.80 7.01 200.64 56179 280.66 49.09 139.03 11.67 6.10 17.70 149.33 146.81 158.08 162.65 82.30 83.81 42.96 48.86 48.99 4.03
6/24/04 9:35 62.5 1.15 102 90 101.88 3214.9 89.10 28.81 50.89 53.91 89.52 176.37 2.02 20.25 108.03 71.58 6.80 6.97 200.64 58023 281.74 49.09 138.91 11.67 6.09 17.70 149.33 146.81 158.08 144.61 80.50 82.67 42.75 48.86 48.99 4.03
6/24/04 9:40 62.5 1.19 102 90 101.53 3178.7 89.22 28.67 50.66 52.97 90.20 176.72 2.05 20.25 108.59 71.47 6.55 6.80 200.50 55705 281.74 49.09 134.60 11.66 6.25 17.70 149.54 146.81 158.82 207.30 82.19 83.69 42.71 48.70 48.87 3.97
6/24/04 9:45 62.5 1.23 102 90 101.53 3169.8 92.82 28.37 52.62 51.54 90.20 178.72 2.00 20.25 108.48 71.83 6.55 7.04 200.50 55705 284.02 49.09 138.48 11.66 6.03 17.70 149.54 146.81 158.82 161.90 79.72 81.09 42.28 48.70 48.87 3.97
6/24/04 9:50 62.5 1.22 102 90 102.07 3187.7 95.52 26.85 52.92 53.42 91.21 177.83 2.01 20.25 108.13 71.83 6.55 6.52 200.19 55862 279.53 49.09 134.91 11.68 5.94 17.83 149.74 147.36 158.82 203.38 87.71 89.66 42.86 49.19 49.08 3.83
6/24/04 9:55 62.5 1.24 102 90 101.88 3219.3 86.48 28.37 52.88 51.27 91.55 178.17 1.98 20.25 108.03 71.94 6.72 6.91 200.09 55867 281.39 49.09 134.16 11.61 6.04 17.55 149.74 148.06 158.82 197.68 79.82 81.33 42.81 48.66 49.12 4.10
6/24/04 10:00 62.5 1.10 102 85 101.88 3248.6 91.29 27.46 51.94 53.04 88.54 178.17 1.94 20.25 109.15 72.31 6.72 6.59 200.09 56179 282.51 49.09 136.55 11.61 6.09 17.55 149.74 148.06 158.82 161.28 96.73 97.68 43.70 48.66 49.12 4.10
6/24/04 10:10 62.5 1.21 102 85 101.53 3176.3 82.97 26.10 52.58 53.99 88.50 176.87 1.97 20.25 108.92 72.67 6.72 6.48 199.20 56184 282.16 49.09 142.69 11.47 6.16 17.63 148.85 146.81 158.02 126.42 70.92 71.28 42.31 48.86 48.79 3.88
6/24/04 10:20 62.5 1.11 102 85 102.19 3223.7 89.45 27.46 53.83 53.64 90.23 176.52 1.97 20.25 108.13 71.71 6.60 6.78 198.65 58179 280.27 49.09 137.73 11.68 5.95 17.63 149.33 147.05 158.70 264.42 95.05 95.76 42.97 48.91 49.33 3.96
6/24/04 10:30 62.5 1.14 102 85 101.48 3214.9 90.36 27.75 54.65 52.56 90.20 176.52 1.97 20.25 108.92 72.67 6.50 6.51 198.65 55869 281.01 49.09 139.13 11.68 6.09 17.70 149.33 147.59 158.70 254.51 87.61 88.65 43.03 48.91 48.58 4.00
6/24/04 10:40 87.5 1.20 102 68 102.53 3214.9 86.48 27.75 54.54 53.04 89.52 175.84 1.95 20.25 108.48 72.92 6.85 6.86 197.96 56184 279.53 49.09 134.15 11.67 6.16 17.70 149.54 147.59 158.70 129.12 73.40 74.22 42.59 49.40 49.08 4.06
6/24/04 10:50 87.5 1.37 102 68 102.41 3244.0 78.23 26.40 54.20 53.01 91.17 175.98 1.95 20.25 108.03 71.83 6.87 6.57 198.17 56184 278.38 49.09 136.65 11.53 6.03 17.42 149.33 147.75 158.08 199.62 94.03 95.31 42.94 49.36 49.04 4.01
6/24/04 11:00 87.5 1.30 102 68 102.21 3259.8 70.80 27.46 53.86 52.14 90.35 176.63 1.90 20.25 107.81 71.35 7.00 7.02 198.31 58340 278.38 49.09 130.82 11.59 6.04 17.56 148.99 147.75 158.82 228.06 84.90 86.06 43.18 49.36 48.83 4.02
6/24/04 11:10 87.5 1.45 102 68 102.40 3248.6 72.45 26.70 54.65 53.01 89.52 175.29 1.93 20.25 108.80 70.87 6.82 7.08 198.31 56023 279.11 49.09 136.65 11.38 6.04 17.49 148.85 147.75 158.82 209.85 82.43 83.35 43.35 49.36 49.04 3.99
6/24/04 11:20 87.5 1.43 102 68 101.82 3278.1 69.26 25.96 54.35 49.36 91.21 174.74 1.89 20.25 107.24 71.83 6.87 6.91 198.31 56023 279.11 49.26 135.89 11.59 6.24 17.70 148.99 147.75 161.54 139.20 75.65 76.74 43.11 48.57 49.33 3.92
6/24/04 11:30 87.5 1.48 102 68 102.34 3282.3 69.70 25.96 52.96 48.27 90.35 176.52 1.91 20.25 108.03 72.19 6.82 6.96 200.84 56023 278.76 49.45 127.90 11.40 5.89 17.49 150.08 148.61 161.54 152.12 77.58 78.84 43.14 49.36 48.83 4.15
6/24/04 11:40 87.5 1.56 102 68 102.62 3239.5 70.63 25.96 53.41 49.36 90.42 177.62 1.87 20.25 107.59 72.08 6.83 6.79 201.53 56023 279.11 48.90 134.60 11.40 5.90 17.49 150.29 148.61 161.54 227.29 86.38 87.07 43.20 49.11 49.28 4.22
6/24/04 11:50 87.5 1.64 102 68 101.80 3228.2 74.56 28.56 54.92 49.28 91.40 177.62 1.88 20.25 107.24 71.58 6.70 7.02 202.62 56023 276.13 48.90 135.36 11.53 5.96 17.56 151.18 149.71 161.54 176.47 83.88 84.48 43.16 49.11 48.50 4.19
6/24/04 12:00 87.5 1.66 102 68 103.04 3219.3 75.25 27.15 54.09 48.64 92.30 177.83 1.91 20.25 107.47 71.24 6.76 7.08 202.62 55862 278.03 48.90 133.95 11.46 6.02 17.42 151.18 149.16 161.54 246.38 85.91 88.85 42.93 49.36 49.57 4.10
6/24/04 12:10 87.5 1.40 102 68 101.96 3190.0 74.87 26.26 53.34 49.51 89.41 177.96 1.89 20.25 107.24 71.47 6.64 6.86 202.26 55705 278.03 48.90 136.65 11.40 5.96 17.42 151.18 149.17 161.54 154.14 91.22 92.15 42.68 49.07 48.87 4.04
6/24/04 12:20 87.5 1.68 102 68 101.51 3250.9 74.21 26.85 53.86 47.58 89.37 176.72 1.85 20.25 106.80 70.99 6.74 7.08 202.83 55705 278.38 48.72 135.25 11.46 5.83 17.35 150.77 149.39 161.54 218.86 84.90 86.75 43.00 48.33 49.08 4.11
6/24/04 12:30 87.5 1.54 102 68 101.66 3219.3 72.16 26.56 52.85 48.79 90.35 178.51 1.85 20.25 107.02 71.24 6.86 7.08 203.17 55862 275.75 48.72 135.36 11.45 5.97 17.28 150.77 149.55 161.54 184.73 65.59 86.97 43.26 48.62 48.91 4.13
6/24/04 12:40 87.5 1.68 102 68 102.34 3190.0 74.03 27.46 52.43 47.17 88.47 180.15 1.85 20.25 106.91 70.99 6.86 6.45 204.47 55547 276.91 48.72 136.55 11.45 5.91 17.49 151.52 149.86 161.54 199.17 84.67 85.96 42.63 49.11 49.25 3.98
6/24/04 12:50 87.5 1.71 102 68 101.90 3194.5 76.60 27.32 51.87 46.95 88.20 179.95 1.83 20.25 106.80 71.10 6.81 6.95 204.81 55379 277.26 48.90 134.60 11.52 6.17 17.49 151.73 149.86 161.54 132.88 74.07 75.12 42.73 48.37 49.57 3.96
6/24/04 13:00 87.5 1.75 102 68 102.39 3176.3 77.00 27.61 51.94 46.16 88.54 180.84 1.85 20.25 107.02 71.24 6.74 7.02 204.82 55379 276.13 48.90 133.40 11.53 6.07 17.52 151.73 149.86 161.54 137.85 81.40 83.46 42.19 49.32 49.08 3.99
6/24/04 13:10 87.5 1.77 102 68 102.14 3233.0 78.13 26.85 52.62 47.21 91.17 181.05 1.84 20.25 107.59 71.83 6.67 6.51 206.05 55862 281.01 48.90 141.29 11.53 6.07 17.53 151.52 149.71 161.65 137.85 74.86 76.02 42.89 48.91 49.28 3.95
6/24/04 13:20 100 1.66 102 68 102.07 3237.4 80.09 26.85 52.25 46.69 89.33 182.14 1.81 20.25 106.34 70.51 6.69 6.62 206.05 55547 278.03 48.90 140.43 11.67 6.08 17.69 151.73 150.25 164.75 239.33 85.35 86.18 43.13 49.07 49.33 3.68
6/24/04 13:30 100 1.75 102 68 102.33 3237.4 76.76 26.26 51.87 44.46 89.52 181.59 1.83 20.25 106.46 71.24 6.69 6.86 206.60 55869 277.00 48.90 131.89 11.54 6.13 17.69 151.18 150.96 164.75 152.71 76.34 77.16 43.26 48.91 49.41 4.02
6/24/04 13:40 100 1.67 102 68 101.25 3248.6 69.29 26.85 50.89 43.97 88.39 182.28 1.83 20.25 107.13 71.47 6.80 6.78 207.35 56184 279.53 48.90 133.85 11.47 6.00 17.54 150.43 150.41 164.75 206.39 86.03 87.30 43.26 48.62 48.58 4.06
6/24/04 13:50 100 1.86 102 68 101.90 3219.3 68.22 26.56 51.57 44.16 90.20 182.83 1.81 20.25 107.02 71.47 6.63 6.50 208.79 56500 283.28 48.90 130.28 11.54 6.00 17.68 150.29 150.64 164.75 142.50 75.77 76.02 42.50 48.82 48.99 4.08
8
Table 2. Grinding Parameters and the corresponding Abbreviated Name
Grinding parameters Unit Abbreviated name

Grinding aid (as a percent of normal addition) % Grind.aid
Voltage (electrostatic charge) kV Voltage
Charge ton/hour Charge
Recirculating load ton/hour Recirc
Actual feed rate ton/hour Ac.feed
Mill motor power kW Mill.pow
Reject rate ton/hour Rej.rate
Elevator power kW Elev.pow
Compt 1 sound ear % Sound.c1
Compt 2 sound ear % Sound.c2
Unfiltered mill scan vibration % Unfil.vibr
Mill discharge airslide temperature °F Mill.dis.temp
Compt 1 water flow rate gallon/min wat.flo1
Compt 2 water flow rate gallon/min wat.flo2
Air sweep DC fan current Amps AS.fan.cur
Air sweep DC fan power kW AS.fan.pow
Air sweep DC inlet pressure in. WC AS.inl.pres
Air sweep DC differential pressure in. WC AS.diff.pres
Air sweep DC inlet temperature °F AS.inl.temp
Airflow through separator SCFM thr.sep
Separator DC fan power kW Sep.fan.pow
Separator DC fan current amps Sep.fan.cur
Separator current amps Sep.cur
Separator DC inlet pressure in. WC Sep.inl.pres
Separator DC differential pressure in. WC Sep.diff.pres
Separator DC outlet pressure in. WC Sep.out.pres
Separator DC inlet temperature °F Sep.inl.temp
Separator DC discharge temperature °F Sep.dis.temp
Actual separator speed RPM Sep.speed
FK pump current amps FK.pump.cur
Air compressor 1 power kW Air.comp1
Air compressor 2 power kW Air.comp2
Calculated kW/ton kW/ton kW/ton
F501 clinker feeder ton/hour Clink.feed1
F502 clinker feeder ton/hour Clink.feed2
F505 gypsum feeder ton/hour Gyp.feed
Separator tails blains cm2/g Sep.tail.bl
Separator fines blains cm2/g Sep.fines.bl
Separator feed blains cm2/g Sep.feed.bl
Average electric charge kV El.charge.avg
9
Electrostatic charge, kV
0.75
1.25
1.75
2.25
2.75
3.25
06/23 17:00
06/23 18:00
06/23 19:00
06/23 20:00
06/24 08:00
10
06/24 09:00
06/24 10:00
06/24 11:00
06/24 12:00
06/24 13:00
06/24 14:00
Figure 2. The electrostatic charge in the ball mill varied during Phase 2 testing.
06/24 15:00
APPENDIX A
ELECTRO-TECH SYSTEMS, INC., AUDIT REPORT (PHASE 1)
A1
APPENDIX B
ADDITIONAL MILL DATA (PHASE 1)
B1
APPENDIX C
ELECTRO-TECH SYSTEMS, INC., TEST REPORT (PHASE 2)
C1
APPENDIX D
ADDITIONAL MILL DATA (PHASE 2)
D1
APPENDIX E
CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES, INC.,

DATA ANALYSIS (PHASE 3)
E1
Appendix E Table of Contents
Various Matrix Plots ..................................................................................................................... E4

Best Subsets Regression: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ................................................ E8
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Grind.aid ......................................................................... E9
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2.................................................. E10
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2, Grind.aid^3............................. E11
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ... ................................................. E12
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Elev.pow, AS.fan.pow, Sep.fan.pow............................ E13
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, AS.fan.pow, and Sep.fan.pow .... E14
Regression Analysis: Mill.pow versus Grind.aid ....................................................................... E15
Regression Analysis: AS.fan.pow versus Grind.aid ................................................................... E16
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.pow versus Grind.aid .................................................................. E17
Regression Analysis: Air.comp1 versus Grind.aid ..................................................................... E18
Regression Analysis: Air.comp2 versus Grind.aid ..................................................................... E18
Regression Analysis: Unfil.vibr versus Grind.aid ...................................................................... E19
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Grind.aid .......................................................................... E20
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Grind.aid.......................................................................... E21
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2, Grind.aid^3 ............................... E22
Regression Analysis: Wat.flo1 versus Grind.aid ........................................................................ E23
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.cur versus Grind.aid .................................................................... E24
Regression Analysis: Sep.inl.pres versus Grind.aid ................................................................... E25
Regression Analysis: Sep.out.pres versus Grind.aid .................................................................. E26
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Grind.aid ...................................................................... E27
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2 ................................................. E28
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Grind.aid^2 .................................................................. E29
Regression Analysis: Sound.c1 versus Grind.aid ....................................................................... E30
Regression Analysis: Sep.cur versus Grind.aid .......................................................................... E34
Regression Analysis: AS.inl.temp versus Grind.aid................................................................... E35
Polynomial Regression Analysis: AS.inl.temp versus Grind.aid ............................................... E36
Regression Analysis: Thr.sep versus Grind.aid .......................................................................... E37
Best Subsets Regression: Grind.aid versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2................................................ E38
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2 ...................................................... E38
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Sound.dif....................................................................... E39
Best Subsets Regression: Rej.rate versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2................................................... E40
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2......................................................... E40
Best Subsets Regression: kW/ton versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2 ................................................... E41
Best Subsets Regression: Elec.charge versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2 ............................................ E41
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Sound.c1.................................................................... E42
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Elec.charge....................................................................... E43
Regression Analysis: Mill.pow versus Elec.charge.................................................................... E45
E2
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Elec.charge ................................................................... E46
Regression Analysis: AS.fan.pow versus Elec.charge................................................................ E47
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.pow versus Elec.charge............................................................... E48
Regression Analysis: Air.comp1 versus Elec.charge ................................................................. E49
Regression Analysis: Air.comp2 versus Elec.charge ................................................................. E50
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow.................................................................... E51
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow.............................................. E52
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, ............................................ E53
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, Elev.pow............................. E55
Multicollinearity ......................................................................................................................... E58
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, Elev.pow............................. E59
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Sep.fan.pow, Mill.pow.............................................. E60
Regression Analysis: Voltage versus T.Mill.pow, T.Elev.pow, ................................................ E61
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ... .................................................... E62
Regression Analysis of all power parameters............................................................................. E62
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow ......................................................... E63
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid ................................................................... E64
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid ................................................ E65
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid ................................................ E66
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2, ... ......................................... E66
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Ac.feed ...................................................................... E67
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Ac.feed................................................... E68
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Elec.charge ...................................................................... E69
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus kW/ton............................................................................. E70
Regression Analysis: Wat.flo1 versus Elec.charge..................................................................... E71
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.cur versus Elec.charge ................................................................ E73
Regression Analysis: Sep.inl.pres versus Elec.charge................................................................ E74
Regression Analysis: Sep.out.pres versus Elec.charge............................................................... E75
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Elec.charge................................................................... E76
Regression Analysis: Sep.feed.bl versus Grind.aid .................................................................... E77
Regression Analysis: Sep.tails.bl versus Grind.aid .................................................................... E78
Regression Analysis: Sep.fines.bl versus Grind.aid ................................................................... E79
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Sep.feed.bl, Sep.tails.bl, ... ........................................... E80
Regression Analysis: El.charge.avg versus Grind.aid ................................................................ E81
E3
Matrix Plot of Grind.aid, Mill.pow, Elev.pow, AS.fan.pow, ... Matrix Plot of Grind.aid, Sound.c1, Sound.c2, Unfil.vibr, Mill.dis.tem
Grind.aid
Grind.aid
3300
3200
Mill.pow
50
3100
35 40 Sound.c1
30 Elev.pow
30
25 55
73
72 50
AS.fan.pow Sound.c2
71
45
280 95
265 Sep.fan.pow
90
250
100 Unfil.vibr
80 85
Air.comp1
60
100 185
180 Mill.dis.temp
80
Air.comp2
175
60
0 50 100 3100 3200 3300
25 30 35 71 72 73 250 265 280 60 80 100 0 50 10030 40 50 45 50 55 85 90 95
Matrix Plot of Grind.aid, Elec.charge, Ac.feed, Rej.rate, ... Matrix Plot of Grind.aid, AS.fan.cur, AS.inl.pres, AS.inl.temp, ...
Grind.aid
Grind.aid
3
2 Elec.charge 109
1
104 108
AS.fan.cur
100 107
Ac.feed
96 7.5
200
150 7.0
Rej.rate AS.inl.pres
100
6.5
3.0
2.5
Wat.flo1 205
2.0
200 AS.inl.temp
19.5
195
18.5 Wat.flo2 59000
17.5
46
57000
Thr.sep
44
kW/ton
42 55000
0 50 1001 2 3 96 100 104 100 150 200 2.0 2.5 3.0 17.5 18.5 19.5 0 50 100 107 108 109 6.5 7.0 7.5 195 200 205
E4
Matrix Plot of Grind.aid, Sep.fan.cur, Sep.inl.pres, Sep.diff.pre, ...
Grind.aid
50.0
47.5
Sep.fan.cur
45.0
11
10 Sep.inl.pres
9
6.4
6.0 Sep.diff.pres
5.6
18.0
16.5
Sep.out.pres
15.0
160
155
Sep.inl.temp
150
160
155
Sep.dis.temp
150
162
156 Sep.speed
150
0 50 100
45.0 47.5 50.0
9 10 11 5.6 6.0 6.4 15.0 16.5 18.0 150 155 160 150 155 160
E5
Matrix Plot of kW/ton, Grind.aid, Elec.charge, Ac.feed, Rej.rate, ... Matrix Plot of kW/ton, Sound.c1, Sound.c2, Unfil.vibr, ...
kW/ton
kW/ton
100 50
40 Sound.c1
50
Grind.aid
30
55
0
3
50
Sound.c2
2 45
Elec.charge 95
1
104 90
Unfil.vibr
100 85
Ac.feed
185
96
180 Mill.dis.temp
200
175
150 3.0
Rej.rate 2.5
100
Wat.flo1
2.0
150
19.5
140
Sep.cur 18.5 Wat.flo2
130 17.5
42 44 46 0 50 1001 2 3 96 100 104 100 150 200 42 44 46

30 40 50 45 50 55 85 90 95
175 180 185 2.0 2.5 3.0
Matrix Plot of kW/ton, Mill.pow, Elev.pow, AS.fan.pow, ... Matrix Plot of kW/ton, AS.fan.cur, AS.inl.pres, AS.inl.temp, Thr.sep
kW/ton
kW/ton
3300
3200
Mill.pow 109
3100
108
35 AS.fan.cur
107
30 Elev.pow
7.5
25
73
7.0
72
AS.fan.pow AS.inl.pres
71
6.5
280
265 Sep.fan.pow 205
250
100 200 AS.inl.temp
195
80
Air.comp1 59000
60
100
57000
Thr.sep
80
Air.comp2
60 55000
42 44 46 3100 3200 3300
25 30 35 71 72 73 250 265 280 60 80 100 42 44 46 107 108 109 6.5 7.0 7.5 195 200 205
E6
Matrix Plot of kW/ton, Sep.fan.cur, Sep.inl.pres, Sep.diff.pre, ...
kW/ton
50.0
47.5
Sep.fan.cur
45.0
11
10 Sep.inl.pr es
9
6.4
6.0 Sep.diff.pr es
5.6
18.0
16.5
Sep.out.pr es
15.0
160
155
Sep.inl.temp
150
160
155
Sep.dis.temp
150
162
156 Sep.speed
150
42 44 45.0
46 47.5 50.0
9 10 11 5.6 6.0 6.4 15.0 16.5 18.0 150 155 160 150 155 160
E7
Best Subsets Regression: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ...
Response is Grind.aid
S
A e
S p A A
M E . . i i
i l f f r r
l e a a . .
l v n n c c
. . . . o o
p p p p m m
Mallows o o o o p p
Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S w w w w 1 2
1 67.1 66.6 60.5 18.925 X
1 53.5 52.9 113.7 22.477 X
2 76.1 75.4 27.1 16.245 X X
2 73.9 73.1 35.7 16.975 X X
3 80.4 79.6 11.9 14.790 X X X
3 79.9 79.0 14.2 15.012 X X X
4 83.2 82.2 3.0 13.809 X X X X
4 80.8 79.7 12.5 14.767 X X X X
5 83.2 82.0 5.0 13.909 X X X X X
5 83.2 82.0 5.0 13.909 X X X X X
6 83.2 81.7 7.0 14.014 X X X X X X
Best Subsets Regression: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ...
Response is Grind.aid
S
E A e
l S p A A
M E e . . i i
i l v f f r r
l e . a a . .
l v p n n c c
. . o . . o o
p p w p p m m
Mallows o o ^ o o p p
Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S w w 2 w w 1 2
1 67.1 66.6 71.4 18.925 X
1 65.4 64.9 78.4 19.391 X
2 76.1 75.4 35.0 16.245 X X
2 75.5 74.8 37.5 16.443 X X
3 80.4 79.6 18.4 14.790 X X X
3 80.0 79.1 20.3 14.963 X X X
4 83.2 82.2 8.6 13.809 X X X X
4 82.4 81.3 12.2 14.146 X X X X
5 84.7 83.6 4.1 13.264 X X X X X
5 83.2 82.0 10.6 13.909 X X X X X
6 84.7 83.4 6.0 13.355 X X X X X X
6 84.7 83.4 6.1 13.359 X X X X X X
7 84.8 83.1 8.0 13.456 X X X X X X X
E8
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Grind.aid
The regression equation is

Fitted Line Plot
Elev.pow = 34.7 - 0.0889 Grind.aid Elev.pow = 34.72 - 0.08890 Grind.aid
37.5 S 2.05442
R-Sq 67.1%
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P R-Sq(adj) 66.6%
Constant 34.7186 0.4408 78.77 0.000
Grind.aid -0.088897 0.007395 -12.02 0.000 35.0
S = 2.05442 R-Sq = 67.1% R-Sq(adj) = 66.6%

32.5
Elev.pow
Analysis of Variance
30.0
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 610.01 610.01 144.53 0.000
Residual Error 71 299.67 4.22
Total 72 909.67 27.5
Unusual Observations 25.0

0 20 40 60 80 100
Obs Grind.aid Elev.pow Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
Grind.aid
17 25 37.390 32.496 0.303 4.894 2.41R
19 25 36.630 32.496 0.303 4.134 2.03R
20 25 37.230 32.496 0.303 4.734 2.33R
22 25 36.940 32.496 0.303 4.444 2.19R Residual Plots for Elev.pow
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual. Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
99.9
Standardized Residual
99 2
90
1
Percent
50
0
10
-1
1
-2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 25.0 27.5 30.0 32.5 35.0
Standardized Residual Fitted Value
Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
16 2
12
Frequency
8 0
4 -1
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Standardized Residual Observation Order
E9
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2

Fitted Line Plot
Elev.pow = 34.4 - 0.0612 Grind.aid - 0.000304 Grind.aid^2 Elev.pow = 34.41 - 0.06120 Grind.aid
- 0.000304 Grind.aid**2
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 37.5 S 2.04825

R-Sq 67.7%
Constant 34.4135 0.5082 67.71 0.000
R-Sq(adj) 66.8%
Grind.aid -0.06120 0.02432 -2.52 0.014
Grind.aid^2 -0.0003036 0.0002540 -1.20 0.236 35.0
32.5
Elev.pow
S = 2.04825 R-Sq = 67.7% R-Sq(adj) = 66.8%
Analysis of Variance 30.0

Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 2 616.00 308.00 73.41 0.000
Residual Error 70 293.67 4.20 27.5
Total 72 909.67
25.0
Source DF SS F P 0 20 40 60 80 100
Linear 1 610.006 144.53 0.000
Grind.aid
Quadratic 1 5.993 1.43 0.236
Unusual Observations Residual Plots for Elev.pow

Obs Grind.aid Elev.pow Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
17 25 37.390 32.694 0.344 4.696 2.33R 99.9
20 25 37.230 32.694 0.344 4.536 2.25R 99 2
22 25 36.940 32.694 0.344 4.246 2.10R 90
1
Percent
36 50 26.560 30.595 0.360 -4.035 -2.00R
50
0
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.
10 -1
1
-2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 25.0 27.5 30.0 32.5 35.0

16
2
12
1
Frequency
8 0
4 -1
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E10
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2, Grind.aid^3

Fitted Line Plot
Elev.pow = 33.7 + 0.240 Grind.aid - 0.00898 Grind.aid^2 + Elev.pow = 33.73 + 0.2405 Grind.aid
0.000060 Grind.aid^3 - 0.008984 Grind.aid**2 + 0.000060 Grind.aid**3
37.5 S 1.63201
R-Sq 79.8%
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P
R-Sq(adj) 78.9%
Constant 33.7263 0.4188 80.52 0.000
Grind.aid 0.24049 0.05081 4.73 0.000 35.0
Grind.aid^2 -0.008984 0.001367 -6.57 0.000
Grind.aid^3 0.00006008 0.00000935 6.42 0.000
32.5
Elev.pow
S = 1.63201 R-Sq = 79.8% R-Sq(adj) = 78.9%
30.0
Source DF SS MS F P 27.5
Regression 3 725.89 241.96 90.85 0.000
Total 72 909.67 25.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Sequential Analysis of Variance
Grind.aid
Source DF SS F P
Linear 1 610.006 144.53 0.000
Quadratic 1 5.993 1.43 0.236 Residual Plots for Elev.pow
Cubic 1 109.895 41.26 0.000
Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
99.9
Unusual Observations 99
2
90 1
Percent
Obs Grind.aid Elev.pow Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
25 50 34.230 30.799 0.289 3.431 2.14R 50
0
34 50 26.850 30.799 0.289 -3.949 -2.46R -1
10
36 50 26.560 30.799 0.289 -4.239 -2.64R
-2
70 100 26.850 28.008 0.672 -1.158 -0.78 X 1
71 100 26.260 28.008 0.672 -1.748 -1.17 X 0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 25.0 27.5 30.0 32.5 35.0
72 100 26.850 28.008 0.672 -1.158 -0.78 X Standardized Residual Fitted Value
73 100 26.560 28.008 0.672 -1.448 -0.97 X
16
X denotes an observation whose X value gives it large influence. 2
12 1
Frequency
0
8
-1
4
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E11
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ...

Grind.aid = 546 + 0.239 Mill.pow - 7.17 Elev.pow - 11.4 AS.fan.pow -
0.809 Sep.fan.pow - 0.009 Air.comp1 - 0.027 Air.comp2

Constant 545.9 296.0 1.84 0.070
Mill.pow 0.23854 0.04708 5.07 0.000 <-- negative
Elev.pow -7.1711 0.8619 -8.32 0.000 multicollinarity
AS.fan.pow -11.355 3.182 -3.57 0.001 w/ Elev.pow
Sep.fan.pow -0.8090 0.2627 -3.08 0.003
Air.comp1 -0.0086 0.6970 -0.01 0.990 ∴ conclude β = 0
S = 14.0138 R-Sq = 83.2% R-Sq(adj) = 81.7%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 6 64227 10705 54.51 0.000
Residual Error 66 12961 196
Total 72 77189
Source DF Seq SS
Mill.pow 1 41317
Elev.pow 1 17398
AS.fan.pow 1 3381
Sep.fan.pow 1 2126
Air.comp1 1 5
Air.comp2 1 0
Unusual Observations
Obs Mill.pow Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

2 3125 0.00 28.05 3.29 -28.05 -2.06R
5 3183 0.00 32.86 2.45 -32.86 -2.38R
6 3226 0.00 38.99 5.18 -38.99 -2.99R
10 3174 0.00 28.64 4.83 -28.64 -2.18R
12 3125 0.00 28.77 3.40 -28.77 -2.12R
15 3136 0.00 30.38 2.93 -30.38 -2.22R
28 3134 50.00 47.14 7.71 2.86 0.24 X
54 3215 87.00 56.97 4.39 30.03 2.26R
65 3219 87.00 88.41 13.61 -1.41 -0.42 X

X denotes an observation whose X value gives it large influence.
E12
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Elev.pow, AS.fan.pow, Sep.fan.pow
Residual Plots for Grind.aid
The regression equation is Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
Grind.aid = 1555 - 8.82 Elev.pow - 14.2 AS.fan.pow - 0.788 Sep.fan.pow
99.9
99 2
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 90 1
Percent
Constant 1554.9 255.8 6.08 0.000 50 0
Elev.pow -8.8188 0.9078 -9.71 0.000
10
-1
AS.fan.pow -14.247 3.538 -4.03 0.000
Sep.fan.pow -0.7880 0.2894 -2.72 0.008 1 -2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 0 25 50 75 100
S = 16.2474 R-Sq = 76.4% R-Sq(adj) = 75.4% Standardized Residual Fitted Value

Analysis of Variance 20
2
Source DF SS MS F P 15 1
Frequency
Regression 3 58974 19658 74.47 0.000
10 0
Total 72 77189 -1
5
-2
0
Source DF Seq SS -2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Elev.pow 1 51761 Standardized Residual Observation Order
AS.fan.pow 1 5256
Sep.fan.pow 1 1957
Error distribution is approx. normal, error variance is approx. constant, and time dependance of error
terms is due to increasing levels of grinding aid over time.
Obs Elev.pow Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

2 30.8 0.00 40.43 2.39 -40.43 -2.52R
12 32.4 0.00 40.14 2.62 -40.14 -2.50R
15 31.4 0.00 39.01 2.24 -39.01 -2.42R
17 37.4 25.00 15.21 6.74 9.79 0.66 X
26 33.9 50.00 18.15 4.67 31.85 2.05R
28 28.7 50.00 57.27 8.54 -7.27 -0.53 X
54 27.8 87.00 50.97 4.64 36.03 2.31R

E13
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, AS.fan.pow, and Sep.fan.pow
Grind.aid = 546 + 0.237 Mill.pow - 7.19 Elev.pow - 11.3 AS.fan.pow
99.9 40
- 0.822 Sep.fan.pow 99
90 20
Residual
Percent
Constant 545.9 290.3 1.88 0.064 50 0
Mill.pow 0.23685 0.04515 5.25 0.000
Elev.pow -7.1930 0.8315 -8.65 0.000 10 -20
AS.fan.pow -11.264 3.060 -3.68 0.000 1
Sep.fan.pow -0.8217 0.2461 -3.34 0.001 0.1 -40
-50 -25 0 25 50 0 25 50 75 100
S = 13.8087 R-Sq = 83.2% R-Sq(adj) = 82.2% Residual Fitted Value

20
Source DF SS MS F P 20
15
Frequency
Residual
Regression 4 64223 16056 84.20 0.000
0
Residual Error 68 12966 191 10
Total 72 77189
-20
5
0 -40
Source DF Seq SS -32 -16 0 16 32 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Mill.pow 1 41317 Residual Observation Order
Elev.pow 1 17398
AS.fan.pow 1 3381
Sep.fan.pow 1 2126 Error terms are independent, normally distributed with mean equal zero and
constant variance.
Unusual Observations Residual Plots for Grind.aid

Obs Mill.pow Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
2 3125 0.00 28.20 3.09 -28.20 -2.10R 99.9 40
Grind.aid Grind.aid
5 3183 0.00 32.76 2.24 -32.76 -2.40R 99
0 0
6 3226 0.00 38.44 3.75 -38.44 -2.89R 25 20 25
90
50 50
Residual
Percent
10 3174 0.00 29.30 2.26 -29.30 -2.15R 62
62
12 3125 0.00 28.58 3.13 -28.58 -2.13R 50
87
0 87
15 3136 0.00 30.16 2.54 -30.16 -2.22R 100 100
10 -20
28 3134 50.00 47.15 7.51 2.85 0.25 X
54 3215 87.00 56.74 4.09 30.26 2.29R 1
0.1 -40
-50 -25 0 25 50 0 25 50 75 100
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual. Residual Fitted Value
Mill.pow Elev.pow AS.fan.pow Sep.fan.pow
6.0 Grind.aid 40 Grind.aid
Max 3282 37 73 284 0 0
Min 3075 26 71 250 25 20 25
4.5
Frequency
Avg 3185 30 72 271 50 50
Residual
62
Std dev 45.6 3.5 0.6 10.7 62
3.0 87 0
87
100 100
This is the best model relating the power consumption of individual motors 1.5 -20
versus the level of grinding aid. Mill power increased with increasing
levels of grinding aid. Elevator, air sweep fan, and separator fan power 0.0 -40
decrease with increasing levels of grinding aid. The power consumtoin of the -32 -16 0 16 32 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Residual Observation Order
air compressors have no significant correlation to the level of grinding
aid.
E14
Regression Analysis: Mill.pow versus Grind.aid
Fitted Line Plot
The regression equation is Mill.pow = 3134 + 1.025 Grind.aid
Mill.pow = 3134 + 1.02 Grind.aid
3300 S 31.4888
R-Sq 53.5%
Constant 3133.85 6.76 463.86 0.000
Grind.aid 1.0249 0.1133 9.04 0.000 3250
S = 31.4888 R-Sq = 53.5% R-Sq(adj) = 52.9%

3200
Mill.pow
3150
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 81088 81088 81.78 0.000
Total 72 151487 3100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Obs Grind.aid Mill.pow Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid Grind.aid
6 0 3226.16 3133.85 6.76 92.31 3.00R
11 0 3203.51 3133.85 6.76 69.66 2.26R
22 25 3223.74 3159.48 4.65 64.26 2.06R
Residual Plots for Mill.pow
99.9
99
2
90
Percent
50
0
10
1
0.1
-2
-4 -2 0 2 4 3150 3175 3200 3225 3250

16
12 2
Frequency
8
0
4
0 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Error variance is normal, relatively constant and error terms are independent.
E15
Regression Analysis: AS.fan.pow versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
AS.fan.pow = 72.29 - 0.008178 Grind.aid AS.fan.pow = 72.29 - 0.008178 Grind.aid
73.5 S 0.504135
R-Sq 22.2%
S = 0.504135 R-Sq = 22.2% R-Sq(adj) = 21.1%
R-Sq(adj) 21.1%
73.0
72.5
AS.fan.pow
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 5.1618 5.16182 20.31 0.000
Error 71 18.0448 0.25415 72.0
Total 72 23.2066
71.5
71.0
70.5
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for AS.fan.pow

99.9 3.0
99
90 1.5
Percent
50 0.0
10
-1.5
1
0.1 -3.0
-4 -2 0 2 4 71.4 71.6 71.8 72.0 72.2

24 3.0
18 1.5
Frequency
12 0.0
6 -1.5
0 -3.0
-2.4 -1.2 0.0 1.2 2.4 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E16
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.pow versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Sep.fan.pow = 262.6 + 0.1732 Grind.aid Sep.fan.pow = 262.6 + 0.1732 Grind.aid
285 S 9.28657
R-Sq 27.4%
S = 9.28657 R-Sq = 27.4% R-Sq(adj) = 26.4% R-Sq(adj) 26.4%
280
Sep.fan.pow
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 2314.38 2314.38 26.84 0.000 270
Error 71 6123.07 86.24
Total 72 8437.45 265
260
255
250
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for Sep.fan.pow

99.9
99 1
90
Percent
0
50
-1
10
1 -2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 265 270 275 280

12
1
9
Frequency
0
6
-1
3
-2
0
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E17
Regression Analysis: Air.comp1 versus Grind.aid

Air.comp1 = 76.17 + 0.05980 Grind.aid
S = 7.98956 R-Sq = 5.7% R-Sq(adj) = 4.4%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 276.07 276.071 4.32 0.041
Error 71 4532.14 63.833
Total 72 4808.21
Regression Analysis: Air.comp2 versus Grind.aid

Air.comp2 = 76.42 + 0.07899 Grind.aid
S = 8.03002 R-Sq = 9.5% R-Sq(adj) = 8.2%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 481.63 481.628 7.47 0.008
Error 71 4578.17 64.481
Total 72 5059.79
E18
Individual Value Plot of Unfil.vibr vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Unfil.vibr = 87.54 + 0.03911 Grind.aid
95.0
95.0 S 2.07185
R-Sq 27.9%
R-Sq(adj) 26.9%
92.5
92.5
Unfil.vibr
Unfil.vibr
90.0
90.0
87.5 87.5
85.0 85.0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Unfil.vibr versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Unfil.vibr
Unfil.vibr = 87.54 + 0.03911 Grind.aid 99.9
99 4
90
S = 2.07185 R-Sq = 27.9% R-Sq(adj) = 26.9% 2
Residual
Percent
50
0
-2
1
Source DF SS MS F P 0.1 -4
Regression 1 118.062 118.062 27.50 0.000 -5.0 -2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 88 89 90 91 92
Error 71 304.772 4.293 Residual Fitted Value
Total 72 422.834
12
4
9
2
Frequency
Residual
6 0
3 -2
0 -4
-3.0 -1.5 0.0 1.5 3.0 4.5 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E19
Individual Value Plot of kW/ton vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
kW/ton = 43.83 - 0.007843 Grind.aid
46
46 Regression
95% PI
S 1.02008
45 45 R-Sq 6.0%
R-Sq(adj) 4.7%
44
kW/ton
kW/ton
44
43
43
42
42 41
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for kW/ton
kW/ton = 43.8 - 0.00784 Grind.aid
99.9
99 2
Constant 43.8343 0.2189 200.28 0.000 90 1
Residual
Percent
Grind.aid -0.007843 0.003672 -2.14 0.036 50
0
S = 1.02008 R-Sq = 6.0% R-Sq(adj) = 4.7% 10
-1
1
0.1 -2
Analysis of Variance -4 -2 0 2 4 43.0 43.2 43.4 43.6 43.8
Residual Fitted Value
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 4.748 4.748 4.56 0.036 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
Residual Error 71 73.880 1.041 20
2
Total 72 78.628
15
1
Frequency
Residual
Unusual Observations 10 0
Obs Grind.aid kW/ton Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 5 -1

16 25 45.670 43.638 0.151 2.032 2.01R -2
0
22 25 45.700 43.638 0.151 2.062 2.04R -1.6 -0.8 0.0 0.8 1.6 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
25 50 45.620 43.442 0.119 2.178 2.15R Residual Observation Order
26 50 45.590 43.442 0.119 2.148 2.12R
27 50 45.530 43.442 0.119 2.088 2.06R
33 50 45.470 43.442 0.119 2.028 2.00R Error terms are not normally distributes. Note that the 95% prediction
interval is almost as wide as range of values of kW/ton.
E20
Individual Value Plot of Rej.rate vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Rej.rate = 163.6 - 0.9817 Grind.aid
200
Regression
200 95% PI
175
S 19.7016
R-Sq 73.0%
R-Sq(adj) 72.6%
150 150
Rej.rate
Rej.rate
125
100
100
50
75
50 0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Rej.rate
Rej.rate = 164 - 0.982 Grind.aid
99.9 60
99
40
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 90
Residual
Percent
Constant 163.617 4.227 38.71 0.000 20
50
Grind.aid -0.98170 0.07091 -13.84 0.000 0
10
1 -20
S = 19.7016 R-Sq = 73.0% R-Sq(adj) = 72.6% 0.1
-50 -25 0 25 50 60 90 120 150
20
Regression 1 74389 74389 191.65 0.000
40
Frequency
Residual
Total 72 101948 20
10
0
-20
0
Obs Grind.aid Rej.rate Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -20 0 20 40 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
17 25 190.61 139.07 2.91 51.54 2.64R
21 25 191.68 139.07 2.91 52.61 2.70R
Error terms are not normally distributes. Nowever, the cubic polynominal is
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual. a much better fit.
E21
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2, Grind.aid^3

Fitted Line Plot
Rej.rate = 151 + 2.74 Grind.aid - 0.0987 Grind.aid^2 + 0.000647 Grind.aid^3 Rej.rate = 151.0 + 2.740 Grind.aid
- 0.09866 Grind.aid**2 + 0.000647 Grind.aid**3
Regression
95% PI
Constant 150.999 3.532 42.76 0.000
Grind.aid 2.7404 0.4284 6.40 0.000 S 13.7606
175
Grind.aid^2 -0.09866 0.01152 -8.56 0.000 R-Sq 87.2%
Grind.aid^3 0.00064683 0.00007886 8.20 0.000 R-Sq(adj) 86.6%
150
Rej.rate
S = 13.7606 R-Sq = 87.2% R-Sq(adj) = 86.6% 125
Regression 3 88883 29628 156.47 0.000
Total 72 101948 50
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Source DF SS F P
Linear 1 74389.5 191.65 0.000
Quadratic 1 1754.2 4.76 0.033 Residual Plots for Rej.rate
Cubic 1 12739.3 67.28 0.000
99.9 40
90 20
Residual
Percent
Obs Grind.aid Rej.rate Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
26 50 153.00 122.23 2.43 30.77 2.27R 50 0
27 50 151.33 122.23 2.43 29.10 2.15R
10 -20
35 50 89.76 122.23 2.43 -32.47 -2.40R
37 50 90.68 122.23 2.43 -31.55 -2.33R 1
0.1 -40
38 50 84.11 122.23 2.43 -38.12 -2.81R
-50 -25 0 25 50 80 100 120 140 160
70 100 80.09 85.28 5.66 -5.19 -0.41 X Residual Fitted Value
71 100 76.76 85.28 5.66 -8.52 -0.68 X
72 100 69.29 85.28 5.66 -15.99 -1.28 X Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
73 100 68.22 85.28 5.66 -17.06 -1.36 X
20 40
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual. 20

15
Frequency
Residual
10 0
5 -20
0 -40
-32 -16 0 16 32 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Error terms are approximately normally distributed.
E22
Individual Value Plot of Wat.flo1 vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Wat.flo1 = 2.957 - 0.01222 Grind.aid
3.0
3.0 S 0.209952
R-Sq 78.6%
2.8 R-Sq(adj) 78.3%
2.8
2.6 2.6
Wat.flo1
Wat.flo1
2.4 2.4
2.2
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.6
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Wat.flo1 versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Wat.flo1
Wat.flo1 = 2.96 - 0.0122 Grind.aid
99.9
99 0.4

0.2
Residual
Percent
Constant 2.95683 0.04505 65.64 0.000 50
Grind.aid -0.0122178 0.0007557 -16.17 0.000 0.0
10
-0.2
1
S = 0.209952 R-Sq = 78.6% R-Sq(adj) = 78.3% 0.1 -0.4
-0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 2.0 2.5 3.0
Source DF SS MS F P
12 0.4
Regression 1 11.522 11.522 261.40 0.000
Residual Error 71 3.130 0.044 0.2
Frequency
Residual
Total 72 14.652
6 0.0
Unusual Observations 3 -0.2
0 -0.4
Obs Grind.aid Wat.flo1 Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
27 50 2.7800 2.3459 0.0246 0.4341 2.08R
29 50 2.7900 2.3459 0.0246 0.4441 2.13R
32 50 2.7900 2.3459 0.0246 0.4441 2.13R
E23
Individual Value Plot of Sep.fan.cur vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Sep.fan.cur = 46.25 + 0.02902 Grind.aid
50
50 S 1.20540
R-Sq 38.7%
R-Sq(adj) 37.8%
49
49
Sep.fan.cur
48
Sep.fan.cur
48
47
47
46 46
45 45
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.cur versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Sep.fan.cur
Sep.fan.cur = 46.3 + 0.0290 Grind.aid
99.9
99 1
Constant 46.2517 0.2586 178.84 0.000 90
0
Residual
Percent
Grind.aid 0.029020 0.004339 6.69 0.000 50
-1
S = 1.20540 R-Sq = 38.7% R-Sq(adj) = 37.8% 10
-2
1
0.1 -3
Analysis of Variance -4 -2 0 2 4 46 47 48 49
Source DF SS MS F P
12 1
Total 72 168.168
Frequency
9 0
Residual
Unusual Observations 6 -1
Obs Grind.aid Sep.fan.cur Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 3 -2

28 50 45.160 47.703 0.141 -2.543 -2.12R -3
0
29 50 45.160 47.703 0.141 -2.543 -2.12R -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
30 50 45.160 47.703 0.141 -2.543 -2.12R Residual Observation Order
31 50 45.160 47.703 0.141 -2.543 -2.12R
32 50 45.160 47.703 0.141 -2.543 -2.12R
33 50 45.160 47.703 0.141 -2.543 -2.12R
E24
Individual Value Plot of Sep.inl.pres vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Sep.inl.pres = 10.51 + 0.009184 Grind.aid
12.0
12.0 S 0.831345
R-Sq 11.7%
11.5 R-Sq(adj) 10.5%
11.5
11.0
11.0
Sep.inl.pres
Sep.inl.pres
10.5
10.5
10.0 10.0
9.5 9.5
9.0 9.0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sep.inl.pres versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Sep.inl.pres
Sep.inl.pres = 10.5 + 0.00918 Grind.aid
99.9 1
99
Constant 10.5057 0.1784 58.90 0.000 90
0
Residual
Percent
Grind.aid 0.009184 0.002992 3.07 0.003 50
-1
S = 0.831345 R-Sq = 11.7% R-Sq(adj) = 10.5% 10
1
0.1
-2
Analysis of Variance -2 -1 0 1 2 10.50 10.75 11.00 11.25 11.50
Source DF SS MS F P
Residual Error 71 49.0706 0.6911 20 1
Total 72 55.5808
15
Frequency
Residual
-1
Obs Grind.aid Sep.inl.pres Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 5
25 50 9.3100 10.9649 0.0973 -1.6549 -2.00R -2
0
27 50 9.2900 10.9649 0.0973 -1.6749 -2.03R -2.0 -1.6 -1.2 -0.8 -0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
31 50 9.3000 10.9649 0.0973 -1.6649 -2.02R
32 50 9.1500 10.9649 0.0973 -1.8149 -2.20R
33 50 9.0100 10.9649 0.0973 -1.9549 -2.37R
E25
Individual Value Plot of Sep.out.pres vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Sep.out.pres = 16.46 + 0.01042 Grind.aid
18.0
18.0 S 0.741807
R-Sq 17.7%
17.5
R-Sq(adj) 16.5%
17.5
17.0
17.0
Sep.out.pres
Sep.out.pres
16.5
16.5
16.0 16.0
15.5 15.5
15.0 15.0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sep.out.pres versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Sep.out.pres
Sep.out.pres = 16.5 + 0.0104 Grind.aid
99.9 1
99
Residual
Percent
Constant 16.4617 0.1592 103.43 0.000 50
Grind.aid 0.010419 0.002670 3.90 0.000 -1
10
1 -2
S = 0.741807 R-Sq = 17.7% R-Sq(adj) = 16.5% 0.1
-2 -1 0 1 2 16.50 16.75 17.00 17.25 17.50
16
Regression 1 8.3790 8.3790 15.23 0.000
Residual Error 71 39.0697 0.5503 12 0
Frequency
Residual
Total 72 47.4486
8
-1
-2
0
Obs Grind.aid Sep.out.pres Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -2.0 -1.6 -1.2 -0.8 -0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
31 50 15.2500 16.9826 0.0868 -1.7326 -2.35R
32 50 15.1700 16.9826 0.0868 -1.8126 -2.46R
33 50 14.8200 16.9826 0.0868 -2.1626 -2.94R
E26
Individual Value Plot of Sep.speed vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Sep.speed = 149.1 + 0.1297 Grind.aid
166
166 S 2.32338
164 R-Sq 77.2%
164 R-Sq(adj) 76.9%
162
162
160 160
Sep.speed
Sep.speed
158 158
156 156
154
154
152
152
150
150
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Grind.aid

Sep.speed = 149 + 0.130 Grind.aid
99.9 1
99
Constant 149.066 0.498 299.04 0.000 90 0
Residual
Percent
Grind.aid 0.129667 0.008363 15.51 0.000 50
-1
S = 2.32338 R-Sq = 77.2% R-Sq(adj) = 76.9% 10
1 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 16.50 16.75 17.00 17.25 17.50
Source DF SS MS F P Residual Fitted Value
Regression 1 1297.8 1297.8 240.42 0.000
Residual Error 71 383.3 5.4 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
Total 72 1681.1 1
16
Unusual Observations 12 0
Frequency
Residual
Obs Grind.aid Sep.speed Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 8
-1
25 50 150.060 155.550 0.272 -5.490 -2.38R
26 50 150.810 155.550 0.272 -4.740 -2.05R 4
27 50 150.810 155.550 0.272 -4.740 -2.05R -2
0
28 50 150.930 155.550 0.272 -4.620 -2.00R -2.0 -1.6 -1.2 -0.8 -0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
30 50 150.930 155.550 0.272 -4.620 -2.00R
31 50 150.930 155.550 0.272 -4.620 -2.00R
32 50 150.310 155.550 0.272 -5.240 -2.27R
E27
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2

Fitted Line Plot
Sep.speed = 151 - 0.0057 Grind.aid + 0.00148 Grind.aid^2 Sep.speed = 150.6 - 0.00571 Grind.aid
+ 0.001484 Grind.aid**2
166 S 1.85208
R-Sq 85.7%
Constant 150.558 0.460 327.62 0.000 164 R-Sq(adj) 85.3%
Grind.aid -0.00571 0.02199 -0.26 0.796
Grind.aid^2 0.0014838 0.0002297 6.46 0.000 162
160
Sep.speed
S = 1.85208 R-Sq = 85.7% R-Sq(adj) = 85.3%
158
156
Source DF SS MS F P
154
Regression 2 1440.97 720.49 210.04 0.000
152
Total 72 1681.09
150
Source DF Seq SS 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid 1 1297.82
Grind.aid
Grind.aid^2 1 143.15
Unusual Observations Residual Plots for Sep.speed

Obs Grind.aid Sep.speed Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
25 50 150.060 153.981 0.325 -3.921 -2.15R 99.9
29 50 150.190 153.981 0.325 -3.791 -2.08R 99
2
32 50 150.310 153.981 0.325 -3.671 -2.01R 90
Residual
Percent
0
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual. 50
10 -2
1
0.1
-4
-5.0 -2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 150 155 160 165

20
2
15
Frequency
Residual
0
10
-2
5
0 -4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E28
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Grind.aid^2

Fitted Line Plot
Sep.speed = 150 + 0.00143 Grind.aid^2 Sep.speed = 150.5 + 0.001427 Grind.aid^2
166 S 1.83987
R-Sq 85.7%
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 164 R-Sq(adj) 85.5%
Constant 150.474 0.327 460.51 0.000
Grind.aid^2 0.00142690 0.00006917 20.63 0.000
162
S = 1.83987 R-Sq = 85.7% R-Sq(adj) = 85.5% 160
Sep.speed
158
156
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 1440.7 1440.7 425.61 0.000 154
Total 72 1681.1 152
150
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Obs Grind.aid^2 Sep.speed Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
Grind.aid^2
25 2500 150.060 154.041 0.227 -3.981 -2.18R
29 2500 150.190 154.041 0.227 -3.851 -2.11R
32 2500 150.310 154.041 0.227 -3.731 -2.04R
Residual Plots for Sep.speed
99.9
99
2
90
Residual
Percent
0
50
10 -2
1
-4
0.1
-5.0 -2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 150 155 160 165

24
2
18
Frequency
Residual
0
12
-2
6
-4
0
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E29
Individual Value Plot of Sound.c1 vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Sound.c1 = 34.25 + 0.2351 Grind.aid
55
60 S 3.06359
R-Sq 86.5%
R-Sq(adj) 86.3%
50 55
50
45
Sound.c1
Sound.c1
45
40
40
35
35
30 30
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sound.c1 versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Sound.c1
Sound.c1 = 34.2 + 0.235 Grind.aid
99.9 8
99
90 4
Residual
Percent
Constant 34.2482 0.6573 52.10 0.000 50 0
Grind.aid 0.23509 0.01103 21.32 0.000
10
-4
1
S = 3.06359 R-Sq = 86.5% R-Sq(adj) = 86.3% 0.1 -8
-10 -5 0 5 10 35 40 45 50 55
Regression 1 4265.9 4265.9 454.52 0.000 12
Residual Error 71 666.4 9.4 4
Frequency
Residual
Total 72 4932.3
0
6
3 -4
0 -8
Obs Grind.aid Sound.c1 Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
23 25 46.230 40.125 0.452 6.105 2.01R
72 100 50.890 57.757 0.658 -6.867 -2.30R
73 100 51.570 57.757 0.658 -6.187 -2.07R
E30
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Sound.c1 versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Sound.c1 = 32.20 + 0.2899 Grind.aid + 0.002343 Grind.aid**2 - Sound.c1 = 32.20 + 0.2899 Grind.aid
0.000033 Grind.aid**3 + 0.002343 Grind.aid**2 - 0.000033 Grind.aid**3
55 S 1.92304
R-Sq 94.8%
S = 1.92304 R-Sq = 94.8% R-Sq(adj) = 94.6%
R-Sq(adj) 94.6%
50
Sound.c1
Regression 3 4677.11 1559.04 421.58 0.000
Error 69 255.17 3.70
Total 72 4932.28
40

35
Source DF SS F P
Linear 1 4265.90 454.52 0.000
Quadratic 1 378.24 91.89 0.000 30
Cubic 1 32.97 8.92 0.004 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid

99.9
6
99
3
90
Residual
Percent
0
50
-3
10
1 -6
0.1
-6 -3 0 3 6 30 35 40 45 50

6
20
3
Frequency
15
Residual
0
10
-3
5
-6
0
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E31
Individual Value Plot of Sound.c2 vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Sound.c2 = 54.02 - 0.04447 Grind.aid
55.0 S 2.22840
55.0 R-Sq 30.2%
R-Sq(adj) 29.2%
52.5
52.5
Sound.c2
Sound.c2
50.0
50.0
47.5 47.5
45.0 45.0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sound.c2 versus Grind.aid

Sound.c2 = 54.0 - 0.0445 Grind.aid
99.9
99 3
Residual
Percent
0
Constant 54.0196 0.4781 112.99 0.000 50
Grind.aid -0.044471 0.008021 -5.54 0.000
10 -3
1
S = 2.22840 R-Sq = 30.2% R-Sq(adj) = 29.2% 0.1 -6
-8 -4 0 4 8 50 51 52 53 54
Source DF SS MS F P
16 3
Regression 1 152.65 152.65 30.74 0.000
Frequency
Residual
Total 72 505.22 0
8
-3
0 -6
Obs Grind.aid Sound.c2 Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
72 100 43.970 49.573 0.479 -5.603 -2.57R
73 100 44.160 49.573 0.479 -5.413 -2.49R
E32
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Sound.c2 versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Sound.c2 = 52.63 - 0.04092 Grind.aid + 0.002724 Grind.aid**2 - Sound.c2 = 52.63 - 0.04092 Grind.aid
0.000031 Grind.aid**3 + 0.002724 Grind.aid**2 - 0.000031 Grind.aid**3
S 1.35644
55.0 R-Sq 74.9%
S = 1.35644 R-Sq = 74.9% R-Sq(adj) = 73.8%
R-Sq(adj) 73.8%
Sound.c2
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 3 378.265 126.088 68.53 0.000 50.0
Error 69 126.955 1.840
Total 72 505.220
47.5
Source DF SS F P 45.0
Linear 1 152.651 30.74 0.000
Quadratic 1 196.571 88.21 0.000
Cubic 1 29.042 15.78 0.000 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid

99.9 4
99
90 2
Residual
Percent
50 0
10
-2
1
0.1 -4
-5.0 -2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 46 48 50 52 54

4
20
2
15
Frequency
Residual
0
10
5 -2
0 -4
-3.2 -1.6 0.0 1.6 3.2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E33
Fitted Line Plot
Individual Value Plot of Sep.cur vs Grind.aid Sep.cur = 146.1 - 0.1255 Grind.aid
S 3.92730
150 150 R-Sq 52.6%
R-Sq(adj) 52.0%
145 145
Sep.cur
140
Sep.cur
140
135
135
130
130
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 25 50 62 87 100 Grind.aid
Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Sep.cur versus Grind.aid Residual Plots for Sep.cur

99.9 10
Sep.cur = 146 - 0.126 Grind.aid 99
5
90
Residual
Percent
Constant 146.067 0.843 173.35 0.000
Grind.aid -0.12553 0.01414 -8.88 0.000 10 -5
1
-10
0.1
S = 3.92730 R-Sq = 52.6% R-Sq(adj) = 52.0% -10 -5 0 5 10 135.0 137.5 140.0 142.5 145.0
Analysis of Variance Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
10
Regression 1 1216.3 1216.3 78.86 0.000 5
Frequency
Residual
0
Total 72 2311.4 10
-5
5
Unusual Observations -10
0
-8 -4 0 4 8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Obs Grind.aid Sep.cur Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid Residual Observation Order
4 0 137.940 146.067 0.843 -8.127 -2.12R
33 50 129.100 139.791 0.460 -10.691 -2.74R
E34
Individual Value Plot of AS.inl.temp vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
AS.inl.temp = 195.7 + 0.07279 Grind.aid
210.0
210.0 S 2.73480
R-Sq 43.5%
207.5
R-Sq(adj) 42.7%
207.5
205.0
205.0
AS.inl.temp
AS.inl.temp
202.5
202.5
200.0
200.0
197.5 197.5
195.0 195.0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: AS.inl.temp versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for AS.inl.temp
AS.inl.temp = 195.7 + 0.07279 Grind.aid
99.9 10
99
S = 2.73480 R-Sq = 43.5% R-Sq(adj) = 42.7% 90 5
Residual
Percent
50
0
1
-5
Regression 1 409.003 409.003 54.69 0.000 -10 -5 0 5 10 196 198 200 202 204
Error 71 531.017 7.479 Residual Fitted Value
Total 72 940.020
20 10
15
5
Frequency
Residual
10
0
5
-5
0
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E35
Polynomial Regression Analysis: AS.inl.temp versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
AS.inl.temp = 197.0 - 0.04530 Grind.aid + 0.001294 Grind.aid**2 AS.inl.temp = 197.0 - 0.04530 Grind.aid
+ 0.001294 Grind.aid**2
210.0 S 2.45559
S = 2.45559 R-Sq = 55.1% R-Sq(adj) = 53.8%
R-Sq 55.1%
207.5 R-Sq(adj) 53.8%
205.0
Source DF SS MS F P
AS.inl.temp
Regression 2 517.925 258.963 42.95 0.000
Error 70 422.094 6.030 202.5
Total 72 940.020
200.0
197.5
Source DF SS F P
Linear 1 409.003 54.69 0.000 195.0
Quadratic 1 108.923 18.06 0.000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for AS.inl.temp

99.9
10
99
90
5
Residual
Percent
50
0
10
1
-5
0.1
-10 -5 0 5 10 198 200 202 204 206

10
16
12
Frequency
Residual
8
0
4
-5
0
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E36
Individual Value Plot of Thr.sep vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
Thr.sep = 58000 - 24.67 Grind.aid
59000
59000 S 685.815
R-Sq 58.5%
R-Sq(adj) 57.9%
58000
58000
Thr.sep
Thr.sep
57000
57000
56000 56000
55000 55000
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Thr.sep versus Grind.aid

Residual Plots for Thr.sep
Thr.sep = 58000 - 24.67 Grind.aid
99.9
99 2000
S = 685.815 R-Sq = 58.5% R-Sq(adj) = 57.9% 90
1000
Residual
Percent
50
0
-1000
1
Source DF SS MS F P -2000
0.1
Regression 1 46978573 46978573 99.88 0.000 -2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 56000 57000 58000
Error 71 33394269 470342 Residual Fitted Value
Total 72 80372843
20 2000
Frequency
15 1000
Residual
10 0
-1000
5
-2000
0
-2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E37
Best Subsets Regression: Grind.aid versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2
Response is Grind.aid Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
99.9
S S 20
99
o o
u u 90 10
Residual
Percent
n n 50 0
d d
. . 10 -10
Mallows c c 1
Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S 1 2 -20
0.1
1 86.5 86.3 105.9 12.119 X -20 -10 0 10 20 0 25 50 75 100
1 30.2 29.2 834.5 27.544 X Residual Fitted Value
2 94.6 94.4 3.0 7.7213 X X
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2 30
20
The regression equation is 10
Frequency
20
Residual
Grind.aid = 88.0 + 3.33 Sound.c1 - 3.69 Sound.c2
0
10
-10
Constant 87.97 20.87 4.21 0.000 -20
0
Sound.c1 3.3262 0.1152 28.87 0.000 -20 -10 0 10 20 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Sound.c2 -3.6873 0.3600 -10.24 0.000 Residual Observation Order
S = 7.72135 R-Sq = 94.6% R-Sq(adj) = 94.4%

Scatterplot of Grind.aid vs Sound.dif
Analysis of Variance Recirc
100
68
Regression 2 73016 36508 612.35 0.000 90
Residual Error 70 4173 60 80 95
Total 72 77189 129
145
165
60 175
Grind.aid
Source DF Seq SS
190
Sound.c1 1 66760
Sound.c2 1 6255
40
20
Obs Sound.c1 Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
17 32.9 25.000 4.594 1.722 20.406 2.71R
23 46.2 25.000 45.467 1.045 -20.467 -2.68R
24 45.4 25.000 41.873 1.067 -16.873 -2.21R 0
72 50.9 100.000 95.112 2.850 4.888 0.68 X
73 51.6 100.000 96.673 2.781 3.327 0.46 X -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Sound.dif
E38
60
2
y = -0.0017x + 0.1141x + 52.267
2
Fitted Line Plot
R = 0.6869
Grind.aid = 69.59 + 3.382 Sound.dif
50 S 7.70925
100
R-Sq 94.5%
R-Sq(adj) 94.5%
40 80
2
y = -0.0024x + 0.4533x + 31.833
2
R = 0.942
60
Grind.aid
Grind.aid
Sound.c1
30
Sound.c2
40
20
20
10
0
0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
0 12.5 25 37.5 50 62.5 75 87.5 100 112.5 Sound.dif
Sound, %
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Sound.dif Residual Plots for Grind.aid

Grind.aid = 69.6 + 3.38 Sound.dif 99.9
99
20
90 10
Residual
Percent
Constant 69.589 1.062 65.52 0.000 50 0
Sound.dif 3.38153 0.09651 35.04 0.000 10 -10
1
-20
0.1
S = 7.70925 R-Sq = 94.5% R-Sq(adj) = 94.5% -20 -10 0 10 20 0 25 50 75 100
30
20
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 72969 72969 1227.76 0.000 10
Frequency
20
Residual
Total 72 77189 0
10 -10
Unusual Observations -20
0
-20 -10 0 10 20 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Obs Sound.dif Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid Residual Observation Order
17 -19.4 25.000 4.021 1.592 20.979 2.78R
23 -7.0 25.000 45.918 0.910 -20.918 -2.73R
24 -8.1 25.000 42.334 0.928 -17.334 -2.26R
E39
Best Subsets Regression: Rej.rate versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2
Response is Rej.rate Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
99.9
S S 60
99
o o
90 40
u u
Residual
Percent
n n 20
50
d d
0
. . 10
Mallows c c 1 -20
Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S 1 2 0.1
1 64.3 63.8 10.6 22.630 X -50 -25 0 25 50 80 100 120 140 160
1 19.2 18.1 111.4 34.063 X Residual Fitted Value
2 68.7 67.8 3.0 21.367 X X
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2 20 60
40
Frequency
Residual
Rej.rate = 108 - 3.35 Sound.c1 + 3.09 Sound.c2 20
10
0
-20
Constant 108.45 57.76 1.88 0.065
0
Sound.c1 -3.3506 0.3188 -10.51 0.000 -20 0 20 40 60 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Sound.c2 3.0933 0.9962 3.11 0.003 Residual Observation Order
S = 21.3671 R-Sq = 68.7% R-Sq(adj) = 67.8%
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 2 69990 34995 76.65 0.000
Total 72 101948
Source DF Seq SS
Sound.c1 1 65587
Sound.c2 1 4402
Obs Sound.c1 Rej.rate Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

21 43.1 191.68 131.02 3.24 60.66 2.87R
23 46.2 161.45 118.21 2.89 43.24 2.04R
72 50.9 69.29 73.95 7.89 -4.66 -0.23 X
73 51.6 68.22 72.26 7.70 -4.04 -0.20 X

E40
Best Subsets Regression: kW/ton versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2
Response is kW/ton
S S
o o
u u
n n
d d
. .
Mallows c c
Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S 1 2
1 3.3 1.9 1.7 1.0349 X
1 2.2 0.8 2.5 1.0408 X
2 4.3 1.5 3.0 1.0371 X X
Best Subsets Regression: Elec.charge versus Sound.c1, Sound.c2
Response is Elec.charge
S S
o o
u u
n n
d d
. .
Mallows c c
Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S 1 2
1 55.9 55.2 4.2 0.38686 X
1 0.8 0.0 95.3 0.57983 X
2 57.8 56.6 3.0 0.38112 X X
E41
Scatterplot of Elec.charge vs Sound.c1 Fitted Line Plot
Elec.charge = 4.336 - 0.05221 Sound.c1
3.0 Grind.aid
0 S 0.386859
3.0
25 R-Sq 55.9%
50 R-Sq(adj) 55.2%
62
2.5 87
100 2.5
Elec.charge
Elec.charge
2.0
2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
30 35 40 45 50 55 30 35 40 45 50 55
Sound.c1 Sound.c1
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Sound.c1

Residual Plots for Elec.charge
Elec.charge = 4.34 - 0.0522 Sound.c1
99.9 1.0
99
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 90 0.5
Residual
Percent
Constant 4.3358 0.2574 16.85 0.000 50
Sound.c1 -0.052215 0.005508 -9.48 0.000 0.0
10
1
-0.5
S = 0.386859 R-Sq = 55.9% R-Sq(adj) = 55.2% 0.1
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7
Regression 1 13.447 13.447 89.85 0.000 10.0
Residual Error 71 10.626 0.150 0.5
Frequency
7.5
Residual
Total 72 24.073
5.0
0.0
Unusual Observations 2.5
-0.5
0.0
Obs Sound.c1 Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
28 49.4 2.5500 1.7574 0.0490 0.7926 2.07R Residual Observation Order
31 48.4 2.5900 1.8101 0.0471 0.7799 2.03R
33 49.9 2.5600 1.7297 0.0502 0.8303 2.16R
E42
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs kW/ton Fitted Line Plot
kW/ton = 41.38 + 1.067 Elec.charge
3.0
46 S 0.849392
R-Sq 34.9%
R-Sq(adj) 33.9%
2.5
45
Elec.charge
kW/ton
2.0 44
1.5 43
1.0 42
42.07 42.30 42.48 42.66 42.81 42.96 43.11 43.20 43.62 44.44 44.81 45.47 45.70 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
kW/ton Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Elec.charge Residual Plots for kW/ton

kW/ton = 41.38 + 1.067 Elec.charge 99.9
2
99
90 1
Percent
S = 0.849392 R-Sq = 34.9% R-Sq(adj) = 33.9%
0
50
-1
10
Analysis of Variance -2
1
-4 -2 0 2 4 42.5 43.0 43.5 44.0 44.5
Regression 1 27.4042 27.4042 37.98 0.000 Standardized Residual Fitted Value
Error 71 51.2242 0.7215
Total 72 78.6284 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
20
2
Conclusion: At low levels of electric charge, energy use (kW/ton) is low. 15 1
Frequency
0
10
-1
5
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E43
Scatterplot of kW/ton vs Elec.charge
46 Grind.aid
0
25
50
62
45 87
100
kW/ton
44
43
42
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Elec.charge
E44
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Mill.pow Fitted Line Plot
Mill.pow = 3280 - 49.25 Elec.charge
3.0
3300 S 36.2085
R-Sq 38.6%
R-Sq(adj) 37.7%
2.5 3250
Elec.charge
3200
Mill.pow
2.0
3150
1.5
3100
1.0
3075.00 3124.51 3142.63 3160.53 3169.80 3183.29 3194.45 3214.89 3228.16 3243.96 3278.09 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Mill.pow Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Mill.pow versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Mill.pow
Mill.pow = 3280 - 49.25 Elec.charge
99.9
2
99
90 1
S = 36.2085 R-Sq = 38.6% R-Sq(adj) = 37.7%
Percent
50 0
Analysis of Variance 10 -1
1 -2
Regression 1 58402 58402.4 44.55 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 3140 3160 3180 3200 3220
Error 71 93085 1311.1 Standardized Residual Fitted Value
Total 72 151487
See also page 96. 2
16
1
12
Frequency
0
8
-1
4
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E45
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Elev.pow Fitted Line Plot
Elev.pow = 20.58 + 5.015 Elec.charge
3.0
37.5 S 2.06964
R-Sq 66.6%
R-Sq(adj) 66.1%
2.5 35.0
Elec.charge
32.5
Elev.pow
2.0
30.0
1.5
27.5
1.0 25.0
25.96 26.56 27.15 27.75 28.37 28.81 29.72 31.97 33.31 34.07 35.13 36.63 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Elev.pow Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Elev.pow versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Elev.pow
Elev.pow = 20.58 + 5.015 Elec.charge
99.9
2
99
90 1
S = 2.06964 R-Sq = 66.6% R-Sq(adj) = 66.1%
Percent
50 0
1 -2
Regression 1 605.550 605.550 141.37 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 25.0 27.5 30.0 32.5 35.0
Error 71 304.122 4.283 Standardized Residual Fitted Value
Total 72 909.672
16
2
12 1
Frequency
8 0
-1
4
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E46
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs AS.fan.pow Fitted Line Plot
AS.fan.pow = 71.42 + 0.2397 Elec.charge
3.0
73.5 S 0.554407
R-Sq 6.0%
R-Sq(adj) 4.6%
73.0
2.5
72.5
Elec.charge
AS.fan.pow
2.0 72.0
71.5
1.5
71.0
70.5
1.0
70.51 70.87 71.10 71.35 71.58 71.83 72.06 72.19 72.43 72.67 72.92 73.27 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
AS.fan.pow Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: AS.fan.pow versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for AS.fan.pow
AS.fan.pow = 71.42 + 0.2397 Elec.charge
99.9
99 2
S = 0.554407 R-Sq = 6.0% R-Sq(adj) = 4.6% 90 1
Percent
50 0
1 -2
Regression 1 1.3835 1.38353 4.50 0.037 ∴ conclude model is not good -4 -2 0 2 4 71.7 71.8 71.9 72.0 72.1
fit. Standardized Residual Fitted Value
Error 71 21.8231 0.30737
Total 72 23.2066 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
20
2
15 1
Frequency
10 0
-1
5
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E47
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Sep.fan.pow Fitted Line Plot
Sep.fan.pow = 301.6 - 15.69 Elec.charge
3.0
285 S 5.95159
R-Sq 70.2%
R-Sq(adj) 69.8%
280
2.5
275
Elec.charge
Sep.fan.pow
270
2.0
265
260
1.5
255
1.0 250
250.62 254.37 256.27 265.62 268.60 275.75 277.64 279.53 281.74 283.63 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Sep.fan.pow Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.pow versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Sep.fan.pow
Sep.fan.pow = 301.6 - 15.69 Elec.charge
99.9
99
90 2
S = 5.95159 R-Sq = 70.2% R-Sq(adj) = 69.8%
Percent
50
0
1
Source DF SS MS F P -2
0.1
Regression 1 5922.52 5922.52 167.20 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 260 270 280
Total 72 8437.45
20
15 2
Frequency
10
0
5
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E48
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Air.comp1 Fitted Line Plot
Air.comp1 = 89.74 - 5.470 Elec.charge
3.0
100 S 7.58801
R-Sq 15.0%
R-Sq(adj) 13.8%
2.5
90
Elec.charge
Air.comp1
2.0 80
1.5 70
1.0 60
61.79 67.32 70.02 72.84 74.07 75.77 78.14 79.95 82.19 83.88 85.91 87.71 93.81 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Air.comp1 Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Air.comp1 versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Air.comp1
99.9
99
2
S = 7.58801 R-Sq = 15.0% R-Sq(adj) = 13.8% 90
Percent
50
0
1
-2
Regression 1 720.19 720.187 12.51 0.001 -4 -2 0 2 4 75.0 77.5 80.0 82.5 85.0
Total 72 4808.21
16
2
12
Frequency
8 0
4
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E49
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Air.comp2 Fitted Line Plot
3.0
100 S 7.53923
R-Sq 20.2%
R-Sq(adj) 19.1%
2.5
90
Elec.charge
Air.comp2
2.0 80
1.5 70
1.0 60
62.49 67.79 70.49 73.08 75.12 77.16 80.19 82.34 83.69 86.18 87.41 89.91 95.31 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Air.comp2 Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Air.comp2 versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Air.comp2
99.9
99
2
S = 7.53923 R-Sq = 20.2% R-Sq(adj) = 19.1% 90
Percent
50
0
1
Regression 1 1024.15 1024.15 18.02 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 75.0 77.5 80.0 82.5 85.0
Total 72 5059.79
16
2
12
Frequency
8
0
4
0 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E50
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow
Elec.charge = 26.9 - 0.00783 Mill.pow
99.9
2
99
90
1
Percent
Constant 26.864 3.736 7.19 0.000 50 0
Mill.pow -0.007827 0.001173 -6.67 0.000
10 -1
1 -2
S = 0.456446 R-Sq = 38.6% R-Sq(adj) = 37.7% 0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
16
Regression 1 9.2809 9.2809 44.55 0.000
1
Residual Error 71 14.7923 0.2083 12
Frequency
Total 72 24.0732 0
8
-1
-2
0
Obs Mill.pow Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
8 3075 2.4500 2.7957 0.1397 -0.3457 -0.80 X Standardized Residual Observation Order
14 3079 2.4000 2.7611 0.1349 -0.3611 -0.83 X
43 3152 1.1600 2.1954 0.0662 -1.0354 -2.29R

See also page 84.
E51
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow
Elec.charge = 23.7 - 0.00366 Mill.pow - 0.0374 Sep.fan.pow
99.9
99
90 2
Percent
Constant 23.745 2.333 10.18 0.000 50
Mill.pow -0.0036596 0.0008240 -4.44 0.000 0
Sep.fan.pow -0.037437 0.003492 -10.72 0.000 10
1
0.1
-2
S = 0.282793 R-Sq = 76.7% R-Sq(adj) = 76.1% -4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
20
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 2 18.4751 9.2376 115.51 0.000 15 2
Frequency
Total 72 24.0732 10
0
5
Source DF Seq SS -2
0
Mill.pow 1 9.2809 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Sep.fan.pow 1 9.1943 Standardized Residual Observation Order
Obs Mill.pow Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

2 3125 2.7700 2.1977 0.0584 0.5723 2.07R
3 3134 2.9400 2.0930 0.0547 0.8470 3.05R
4 3115 2.9800 2.1193 0.0691 0.8607 3.14R
E52
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, ...
Elec.charge = 17.4 - 0.00337 Mill.pow - 0.0375 Sep.fan.pow +
99.9
0.0757 AS.fan.pow 99
2
90
Percent
Constant 17.389 5.652 3.08 0.003 0
Mill.pow -0.0033659 0.0008548 -3.94 0.000 10
Sep.fan.pow -0.037522 0.003479 -10.78 0.000 1
AS.fan.pow 0.07573 0.06139 1.23 0.222 ∴ conclude β = 0 0.1 -2
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
S = 0.281746 R-Sq = 77.2% R-Sq(adj) = 76.3%
16
12 2
Frequency
Source DF SS MS F P
8
Regression 3 18.5959 6.1986 78.09 0.000 0
4
Total 72 24.0732
0 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Source DF Seq SS Standardized Residual Observation Order
Mill.pow 1 9.2809
Sep.fan.pow 1 9.1943
AS.fan.pow 1 0.1208

2 3125 2.7700 2.2122 0.0594 0.5578 2.03R
3 3134 2.9400 2.1563 0.0749 0.7837 2.89R
4 3115 2.9800 2.1582 0.0757 0.8218 3.03R
E53
99.9
3
0.0457 AS.fan.pow + 0.0446 Elev.pow 99
90 2
Percent
50
Constant 12.746 5.659 2.25 0.028 0
Mill.pow -0.0024638 0.0008803 -2.80 0.007 10
Sep.fan.pow -0.028012 0.004798 -5.84 0.000 1
-1
AS.fan.pow 0.04569 0.05967 0.77 0.447 ∴ conclude β = 0 0.1
Elev.pow 0.04457 0.01621 2.75 0.008 -4 -2 0 2 4 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
S = 0.269238 R-Sq = 79.5% R-Sq(adj) = 78.3% Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
16 3
12 2
Frequency
1
8
Source DF SS MS F P
0
Regression 4 19.1439 4.7860 66.02 0.000
4
Residual Error 68 4.9293 0.0725 -1
Total 72 24.0732 0
-1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Source DF Seq SS
Mill.pow 1 9.2809
AS.fan.pow 1 0.1208
Elev.pow 1 0.5480

2 3125 2.7700 2.1562 0.0603 0.6138 2.34R
3 3134 2.9400 2.1484 0.0716 0.7916 3.05R
4 3115 2.9800 2.2318 0.0772 0.7482 2.90R
28 3134 2.5500 2.5029 0.1465 0.0471 0.21 X
73 3219 1.8600 1.3285 0.0511 0.5315 2.01R

E54
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, Elev.pow
Elec.charge = 16.2 - 0.00259 Mill.pow - 0.0275 Sep.fan.pow + 0.0468 Elev.pow
99.9 1.0
99

0.5
Residual
Percent
Constant 16.216 3.380 4.80 0.000 50
Mill.pow -0.0025891 0.0008623 -3.00 0.004
10
0.0
Sep.fan.pow -0.027478 0.004732 -5.81 0.000
Elev.pow 0.04685 0.01589 2.95 0.004 1
0.1 -0.5
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
S = 0.268429 R-Sq = 79.3% R-Sq(adj) = 78.4% Residual Fitted Value

Analysis of Variance 16 1.0
Frequency
0.5
Residual
Regression 3 19.1014 6.3671 88.37 0.000
Residual Error 69 4.9718 0.0721 8
Total 72 24.0732 0.0
4
0 -0.5
Source DF Seq SS -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Mill.pow 1 9.2809 Residual Observation Order
Elev.pow 1 0.6263

2 3125 2.7700 2.1448 0.0583 0.6252 2.39R
3 3134 2.9400 2.1110 0.0523 0.8290 3.15R
4 3115 2.9800 2.2129 0.0729 0.7671 2.97R
28 3134 2.5500 2.4337 0.1150 0.1163 0.48 X

This is the best fit for power parameters and electric charge.
E55
99.9
0.0356 AS.fan.pow + 0.0480 Elev.pow - 0.00484 Air.comp1 99 3
90 2
Percent
Constant 12.585 5.651 2.23 0.029
0
Mill.pow -0.0022431 0.0009009 -2.49 0.015 10
Sep.fan.pow -0.026305 0.005029 -5.23 0.000 1
-1
AS.fan.pow 0.03558 0.06026 0.59 0.557 0.1
Elev.pow 0.04803 0.01648 2.91 0.005 -4 -2 0 2 4 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
Air.comp1 -0.004836 0.004351 -1.11 0.270 Standardized Residual Fitted Value

S = 0.268773 R-Sq = 79.9% R-Sq(adj) = 78.4% 20
3
15 2
Frequency
10 1
Regression 5 19.2332 3.8466 53.25 0.000 5
-1
0
Total 72 24.0732 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Source DF Seq SS
Mill.pow 1 9.2809
AS.fan.pow 1 0.1208
Elev.pow 1 0.5480
Air.comp1 1 0.0892

2 3125 2.7700 2.1356 0.0630 0.6344 2.43R
3 3134 2.9400 2.1922 0.0816 0.7478 2.92R
4 3115 2.9800 2.1518 0.1054 0.8282 3.35R
28 3134 2.5500 2.4957 0.1464 0.0543 0.24 X

E56
99.9 1.0
- 0.00522 Air.comp1 99
90
0.5
Residual
Percent
Constant 15.212 3.467 4.39 0.000
10
0.0
Mill.pow -0.0023206 0.0008870 -2.62 0.011
Sep.fan.pow -0.025762 0.004921 -5.24 0.000 1
Elev.pow 0.05004 0.01605 3.12 0.003 0.1 -0.5
Air.comp1 -0.005224 0.004280 -1.22 0.227 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
S = 0.267482 R-Sq = 79.8% R-Sq(adj) = 78.6% Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
1.0
12
Frequency
9 0.5
Residual
Regression 4 19.2080 4.8020 67.12 0.000 0.0
Residual Error 68 4.8652 0.0715 3
Total 72 24.0732
0 -0.5
-0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Source DF Seq SS
Mill.pow 1 9.2809
Elev.pow 1 0.6263
Air.comp1 1 0.1066

2 3125 2.7700 2.1253 0.0603 0.6447 2.47R
3 3134 2.9400 2.1673 0.0696 0.7727 2.99R
4 3115 2.9800 2.1310 0.0989 0.8490 3.42R
E57
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, ... Multicollinearity
The regression equation is AS.fan. Sep.fan. Air. Air.

Mill.pow Elev.pow kW/ton
Elec.charge = 13.0 - 0.00220 Mill.pow - 0.0261 Sep.fan.pow + pow pow comp1 comp2
0.0290 AS.fan.pow + 0.0471 Elev.pow +
Mill.pow 1.00
0.0038 Air.comp1 - 0.0092 Air.comp2
Elev.pow -0.60 1.00
Predictor Coef SE Coef T P AS.fan.pow -0.30 0.27 1.00
Constant 12.955 5.700 2.27 0.026
Mill.pow -0.0022020 0.0009065 -2.43 0.018 Sep.fan.
0.47 -0.79 -0.13 1.00
Sep.fan.pow -0.026098 0.005059 -5.16 0.000 pow
AS.fan.pow 0.02897 0.06127 0.47 0.638 ∴ conclude β = 0 Air.comp1 0.33 -0.25 -0.20 0.36 1.00
Elev.pow 0.04714 0.01660 2.84 0.006
Air.comp1 0.00383 0.01342 0.29 0.776 ∴ conclude β = 0 Air.comp2 0.38 -0.32 -0.25 0.41 0.95 1.00
kW/ton -0.11 0.61 0.00 -0.87 -0.13 -0.16 1.00
S = 0.269851 R-Sq = 80.0% R-Sq(adj) = 78.2%

99.9
99 3
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 6 19.2671 3.2112 44.10 0.000 90 2
Percent
Residual Error 66 4.8061 0.0728 50 1
Total 72 24.0732
10
0
1 -1
Source DF Seq SS 0.1
Mill.pow 1 9.2809 -4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Sep.fan.pow 1 9.1943 Standardized Residual Fitted Value
AS.fan.pow 1 0.1208
Elev.pow 1 0.5480 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
Air.comp1 1 0.0892
16 3
Air.comp2 1 0.0339
12 2
Frequency
1
0
Obs Mill.pow Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 4
-1
2 3125 2.7700 2.1351 0.0633 0.6349 2.42R
0
3 3134 2.9400 2.2020 0.0832 0.7380 2.88R -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
4 3115 2.9800 2.1365 0.1082 0.8435 3.41R Standardized Residual Observation Order
28 3134 2.5500 2.5096 0.1484 0.0404 0.18 X
65 3219 1.5400 1.4349 0.2620 0.1051 1.63 X

E58
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Mill.pow, Sep.fan.pow, Elev.pow
99.9
99
3
90 2
Percent
Constant 16.216 3.380 4.80 0.000 50
1
Mill.pow -0.0025891 0.0008623 -3.00 0.004
0
Sep.fan.pow -0.027478 0.004732 -5.81 0.000 10
Elev.pow 0.04685 0.01589 2.95 0.004 1
-1
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
S = 0.268429 R-Sq = 79.3% R-Sq(adj) = 78.4% Standardized Residual Fitted Value

Analysis of Variance 20 3
Frequency
Regression 3 19.1014 6.3671 88.37 0.000 1
Residual Error 69 4.9718 0.0721 10
Total 72 24.0732 0
5
-1
0
Source DF Seq SS -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Mill.pow 1 9.2809 Standardized Residual Observation Order
Elev.pow 1 0.6263

2 3125 2.7700 2.1448 0.0583 0.6252 2.39R
3 3134 2.9400 2.1110 0.0523 0.8290 3.15R
4 3115 2.9800 2.2129 0.0729 0.7671 2.97R
28 3134 2.5500 2.4337 0.1150 0.1163 0.48 X

E59
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Sep.fan.pow, Mill.pow
Elec.charge = 23.7 - 0.0374 Sep.fan.pow - 0.00366 Mill.pow
99.9
99
90 2
Percent
Constant 23.745 2.333 10.18 0.000 50
Sep.fan.pow -0.037437 0.003492 -10.72 0.000 0
Mill.pow -0.0036596 0.0008240 -4.44 0.000 10
1
0.1
-2
S = 0.282793 R-Sq = 76.7% R-Sq(adj) = 76.1% -4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
20
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 2 18.4751 9.2376 115.51 0.000 15 2
Frequency
Total 72 24.0732 10
0
5
Source DF Seq SS -2
0
Sep.fan.pow 1 16.8978 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Mill.pow 1 1.5774 Standardized Residual Observation Order
Obs Sep.fan.pow Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

2 270 2.7700 2.1977 0.0584 0.5723 2.07R
3 272 2.9400 2.0930 0.0547 0.8470 3.05R
4 273 2.9800 2.1193 0.0691 0.8607 3.14R
E60
Regression Analysis: Voltage versus T.Mill.pow, T.Elev.pow, ...
Residual Plots for Voltage
These “T” parameters are transformation of original parameter by dividing by Ac.feed. Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
99.9 4
Voltage = 14.1 - 0.181 T.Mill.pow + 6.02 T.Elev.pow + 9.55 T.AS.fan.pow -
90
5.38 T.Sep.fan.pow + 0.30 T.Air.comp1 - 0.82 T.Air.comp2 2
Percent
50
0
Constant 14.055 3.962 3.55 0.001 1
T.Mill.pow -0.18148 0.07146 -2.54 0.013 -2
0.1
T.Elev.pow 6.021 1.457 4.13 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
T.AS.fan.pow 9.553 3.452 2.77 0.007 Standardized Residual Fitted Value
T.Sep.fan.pow -5.376 1.134 -4.74 0.000
T.Air.comp1 0.295 1.314 0.22 0.823 ∴ conclude β = 0 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
4
∴ conclude β = 0 16
T.Air.comp2 -0.820 1.307 -0.63 0.532
12 2
Frequency
S = 0.265137 R-Sq = 80.7% R-Sq(adj) = 79.0%
8
Note: There is strong negative multicollinearity between T.Elv.pow and
0
T.Sep.fan.pow. 4
Analysis of Variance -2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Source DF SS MS F P Standardized Residual Observation Order
Regression 6 19.4335 3.2389 46.07 0.000
Total 72 24.0732
Source DF Seq SS
T.Mill.pow 1 7.7956
T.Elev.pow 1 9.1308
T.AS.fan.pow 1 0.6488
T.Sep.fan.pow 1 1.7441
T.Air.comp1 1 0.0865
T.Air.comp2 1 0.0277
Obs T.Mill.pow Voltage Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

2 31.4 2.7700 2.2017 0.0719 0.5683 2.23R
3 31.2 2.9400 2.3774 0.0855 0.5626 2.24R
4 31.4 2.9800 2.0974 0.1049 0.8826 3.62R
28 32.8 2.5500 2.5375 0.1478 0.0125 0.06 X
65 31.7 1.5400 1.4762 0.2536 0.0638 0.82 X
73 31.6 1.8600 1.2311 0.0765 0.6289 2.48R

E61
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ...
Regression Analysis of all power parameters. Normal Probability Plot of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Fitted Values
99.9
2
kW/ton = 43.5 + 0.00829 Mill.pow + 0.0053 Elev.pow + 0.0072 AS.fan.pow -
0.106 Sep.fan.pow + 0.0000 Air.comp1 + 0.0192 Air.comp2 90
Percent
0
50

-2
Constant 43.482 7.093 6.13 0.000 1
Mill.pow 0.008293 0.001128 7.35 0.000 0.1
Elev.pow 0.00526 0.02065 0.25 0.800 ∴ conclude β = 0 -4 -2 0 2 4 42 43 44 45 46
AS.fan.pow 0.00722 0.07625 0.09 0.925 ∴ conclude β = 0
Sep.fan.pow -0.105719 0.006295 -16.79 0.000 Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
Air.comp1 0.00001 0.01670 0.00 1.000 ∴ conclude β = 0 16
Air.comp2 0.01921 0.01681 1.14 0.257 2
12
Frequency
S = 0.335809 R-Sq = 90.5% R-Sq(adj) = 89.7% 0
8
Note: There is strong negative multicollinearity between Elv.pow and 4 -2

AS.fan.pow.
0
Analysis of Variance -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 6 71.186 11.864 105.21 0.000 Best Subsets Regression: kW/ton versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ...
Total 72 78.628 Response is kW/ton
S
Source DF Seq SS A e
Mill.pow 1 0.872 S p A A
Elev.pow 1 37.072 M E . . i i
AS.fan.pow 1 1.036 i l f f r r
Sep.fan.pow 1 30.813 l e a a . .
Air.comp1 1 1.244 l v n n c c
Air.comp2 1 0.147 . . . . o o
p p p p m m
Mallows o o o o p p
Unusual Observations Vars R-Sq R-Sq(adj) C-p S w w w w 1 2
1 76.5 76.2 94.9 0.51014 X
Obs Mill.pow kW/ton Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid 1 37.5 36.6 366.8 0.83193 X
8 3075 42.0700 42.9790 0.1106 -0.9090 -2.87R 2 88.6 88.3 12.2 0.35719 X X
16 3170 45.6700 44.9881 0.1043 0.6819 2.14R 2 81.1 80.6 64.5 0.46020 X X
28 3134 44.4400 44.4747 0.1847 -0.0347 -0.12 X 3 90.5 90.1 1.1 0.32865 X X X
65 3219 43.2600 43.3542 0.3260 -0.0942 -1.17 X 3 90.3 89.9 2.3 0.33174 X X X
68 3176 42.1900 42.8958 0.0744 -0.7058 -2.16R 4 90.5 90.0 3.0 0.33086 X X X X
4 90.5 90.0 3.1 0.33100 X X X X
R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual. 5 90.5 89.8 5.0 0.33329 X X X X X
X denotes an observation whose X value gives it large influence. 5 90.5 89.8 5.0 0.33332 X X X X X
6 90.5 89.7 7.0 0.33581 X X X X X X
These kW/ton are not justified because they compare kW/ton with kW. The
comparison should be between kw/ton and kW/ton.
E62
Regression Analysis: kW/ton versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow
kW/ton = 6.05 + 0.00934 Mill.pow + 0.252 Elev.pow
99.9
2
99
Percent
Constant 6.046 8.410 0.72 0.475 0
50
Mill.pow 0.009342 0.002449 3.81 0.000
Elev.pow 0.25241 0.03160 7.99 0.000 10
-2
1
0.1
S = 0.762361 R-Sq = 48.3% R-Sq(adj) = 46.8% -4 -2 0 2 4 43.0 43.5 44.0 44.5 45.0
16
2
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 2 37.945 18.972 32.64 0.000 12
Frequency
Total 72 78.628 8
4 -2
Source DF Seq SS
0
Mill.pow 1 0.872 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Elev.pow 1 37.072 Standardized Residual Observation Order
Obs Mill.pow kW/ton Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

7 3147 42.7100 44.3855 0.1577 -1.6755 -2.25R
8 3075 42.0700 43.6771 0.2333 -1.6071 -2.21R
22 3224 45.7000 45.4856 0.2919 0.2144 0.30 X
27 3176 45.5300 43.9018 0.1061 1.6282 2.16R
28 3134 44.4400 42.5525 0.1848 1.8875 2.55R
30 3158 45.0800 43.4670 0.1035 1.6130 2.14R

These kW/ton are not justified because they compare kW/ton with kW. The
comparison should be between kw/ton and kW/ton.
E63
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Grind.aid Fitted Line Plot
3.0
3.0 S 0.404594
R-Sq 51.7%
R-Sq(adj) 51.0%
2.5
2.5
Elec.charge
Elec.charge
2.0
2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0 25 50 62 87 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid Grind.aid
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid

99.9 2
99
90 1
Percent
Constant 2.56875 0.08681 29.59 0.000 50 0
Grind.aid -0.012700 0.001456 -8.72 0.000
10
-1
1
S = 0.404594 R-Sq = 51.7% R-Sq(adj) = 51.0% 0.1 -2
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7
Regression 1 12.451 12.451 76.06 0.000
Residual Error 71 11.622 0.164 12 1
Frequency
Total 72 24.073
8 0
4 -1
0 -2
-1.6 -0.8 0.0 0.8 1.6 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Error variance appears constant but error distribution is not normal.
E64
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Elec.charge = 2.643 - 0.01946 Grind.aid + 0.000074 Grind.aid**2 Elec.charge = 2.643 - 0.01946 Grind.aid
+ 0.000074 Grind.aid**2
S = 0.401166 R-Sq = 53.2% R-Sq(adj) = 51.9% 3.0 S 0.401166

R-Sq 53.2%
R-Sq(adj) 51.9%
2.5
Source DF SS MS F P
Elec.charge
Regression 2 12.8078 6.40390 39.79 0.000
Error 70 11.2654 0.16093
Total 72 24.0732 2.0

1.5
Source DF SS F P
Linear 1 12.4508 76.06 0.000
Quadratic 1 0.3570 2.22 0.141
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid

99.9 2
99
90 1
Percent
50 0
10
-1
1
0.1 -2
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50

2
12
1
Frequency
9
0
6
3 -1
0 -2
-1.6 -0.8 0.0 0.8 1.6 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E65
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid
Fitted Line Plot
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Grind.aid, Grind.aid^2, ...
Elec.charge = 2.522 + 0.03386 Grind.aid
The regression equation is - 0.001460 Grind.aid**2 + 0.000011 Grind.aid**3
Elec.charge = 2.52 + 0.0339 Grind.aid - 0.00146 Grind.aid^2
+ 0.000011 Grind.aid^3 3.0 S 0.336927
R-Sq 67.5%
R-Sq(adj) 66.0%

Constant 2.52178 0.08647 29.16 0.000 2.5
Grind.aid 0.03386 0.01049 3.23 0.002
Elec.charge
Grind.aid^2 -0.0014601 0.0002821 -5.18 0.000
Grind.aid^3 0.00001062 0.00000193 5.50 0.000
2.0
S = 0.336927 R-Sq = 67.5% R-Sq(adj) = 66.0%
1.5
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 3 16.2403 5.4134 47.69 0.000 1.0
Residual Error 69 7.8329 0.1135 0 20 40 60 80 100
Total 72 24.0732
Grind.aid
Source DF Seq SS
Grind.aid 1 12.4508
Grind.aid^2 1 0.3570 Residual Plots for Elec.charge
Grind.aid^3 1 3.4325
99.9
2
90
1
Percent
Obs Grind.aid Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
25 50 2.5700 1.8916 0.0596 0.6784 2.05R 50
27 50 2.5700 1.8916 0.0596 0.6784 2.05R 0
10
29 50 2.5900 1.8916 0.0596 0.6984 2.11R
31 50 2.5900 1.8916 0.0596 0.6984 2.11R 1 -1
33 50 2.5600 1.8916 0.0596 0.6684 2.02R 0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50
70 100 1.6600 1.9240 0.1387 -0.2640 -0.86 X Standardized Residual Fitted Value
71 100 1.7500 1.9240 0.1387 -0.1740 -0.57 X
72 100 1.6700 1.9240 0.1387 -0.2540 -0.83 X Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data
73 100 1.8600 1.9240 0.1387 -0.0640 -0.21 X
20
2
15
Frequency
X denotes an observation whose X value gives it large i 1

10
Sequential Analysis of Variance 0
5
Source DF SS F P -1
Linear 1 12.4508 76.06 0.000 0
Quadratic 1 0.3570 2.22 0.141 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Cubic 1 3.4325 30.24 0.000 Standardized Residual Observation Order
E66
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Ac.feed Fitted Line Plot
Elec.charge = 17.28 - 0.1539 Ac.feed
3.0
3.0 S 0.356136
R-Sq 62.6%
R-Sq(adj) 62.1%
2.5
2.5
Elec.charge
Elec.charge
2.0
2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
94.40 94.84 94.94 95.44 97.80 99.53 100.07 101.48 101.82 102.01 102.33 102.50 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103
Ac.feed Ac.feed
Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Ac.feed

Elec.charge = 17.3 - 0.154 Ac.feed
99.9
99 3
90 2
Percent
Constant 17.281 1.409 12.27 0.000 50 1
Ac.feed -0.15389 0.01412 -10.90 0.000
10
0
1 -1
S = 0.356136 R-Sq = 62.6% R-Sq(adj) = 62.1% 0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7
Regression 1 15.068 15.068 118.80 0.000
Residual Error 71 9.005 0.127 15 2
Frequency
Total 72 24.073 1
10
0
-1
0
Obs Ac.feed Elec.charge Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
2 100 2.7700 1.9591 0.0417 0.8109 2.29R Standardized Residual Observation Order
3 100 2.9400 1.8267 0.0428 1.1133 3.15R
4 99 2.9800 1.9929 0.0420 0.9871 2.79R
E67
Polynomial Regression Analysis: Elec.charge versus Ac.feed

Fitted Line Plot
Elec.charge = - 365.3 + 7.613 Ac.feed - 0.03938 Ac.feed**2 Elec.charge = - 365.3 + 7.613 Ac.feed
- 0.03938 Ac.feed**2
S = 0.296001 R-Sq = 74.5% R-Sq(adj) = 73.8% 3.0 S 0.296001

R-Sq 74.5%
R-Sq(adj) 73.8%
2.5
Source DF SS MS F P
Elec.charge
Regression 2 17.9400 8.97001 102.38 0.000
Error 70 6.1332 0.08762
Total 72 24.0732 2.0

1.5
Source DF SS F P
Linear 1 15.0681 118.80 0.000
Quadratic 1 2.8720 32.78 0.000
1.0
94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103
Ac.feed

99.9
99
2
90
Percent
50
0
10
1
-2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

20
2
15
Frequency
10
0
5
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E68
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Rej.rate Fitted Line Plot
Rej.rate = 10.20 + 53.96 Elec.charge
3.0
200 S 21.1828
R-Sq 68.8%
R-Sq(adj) 68.3%
175
2.5
150
Elec.charge
Rej.rate
2.0 125
100
1.5
75
1.0 50
68.22 72.16 75.25 80.09 89.10 91.29 98.95 126.76 142.50 148.81 158.22 172.59 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Rej.rate Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus Elec.charge

Rej.rate = 10.2 + 54.0 Elec.charge
99.9
99 2
Percent
Constant 10.203 8.711 1.17 0.245 50 0
Elec.charge 53.959 4.317 12.50 0.000
10 -1
1
S = 21.1828 R-Sq = 68.8% R-Sq(adj) = 68.3% -2
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 80 100 120 140 160
2
Regression 1 70090 70090 156.20 0.000
Residual Error 71 31859 449 12 1
Frequency
Total 72 101948
8 0
4 -1
-2
0
Obs Elec.charge Rej.rate Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid -2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
17 2.50 190.61 145.10 3.48 45.51 2.18R Standardized Residual Observation Order
21 2.56 191.68 148.34 3.67 43.34 2.08R
73 1.86 68.22 110.57 2.50 -42.35 -2.01R
E69
Regression Analysis: Rej.rate versus kW/ton

Fitted Line Plot
Rej.rate = - 863 + 22.5 kW/ton Rej.rate = - 863.1 + 22.51 kW/ton
200 S 29.5799
R-Sq 39.1%
R-Sq(adj) 38.2%
Constant -863.1 145.0 -5.95 0.000 175
kW/ton 22.506 3.336 6.75 0.000
150
S = 29.5799 R-Sq = 39.1% R-Sq(adj) = 38.2%
Rej.rate
125
Regression 1 39825 39825 45.52 0.000
Total 72 101948 75
42 43 44 45 46
Obs kW/ton Rej.rate Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid
kW/ton
2 42.9 162.10 101.46 3.97 60.64 2.07R
8 42.1 146.37 83.68 5.74 62.69 2.16R
9 42.7 165.82 96.96 4.34 68.86 2.35R
99.9
99 2
90
1
Percent
50
0
10
1 -1
0.1
-4 -2 0 2 4 80 100 120 140 160
10.0 2
Frequency
7.5 1
5.0
0
2.5
-1
0.0
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E70
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Wat.flo1 Fitted Line Plot
3.0
3.2 S 0.190807
R-Sq 82.4%
3.0 R-Sq(adj) 82.1%
2.5
2.8
Elec.charge
2.6
Wat.flo1
2.0 2.4
2.2
1.5 2.0
1.8
1.0 1.6
1.81 1.84 1.87 1.89 1.91 1.94 1.97 2.00 2.02 2.05 2.07 2.76 2.79 2.83 2.86 2.88 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Wat.flo1 Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Wat.flo1 versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Wat.flo1
99.9
99 1
S = 0.190807 R-Sq = 82.4% R-Sq(adj) = 82.1% 90 0
Percent
50
-1
-2
1
Regression 1 12.0671 12.0671 331.45 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2
Total 72 14.6521
16
1
12
0
Frequency
8 -1
4 -2
0 -3
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E71
Scatterplot of Wat.flo1 vs Elec.charge
3.0 Grind.aid
0
25
2.8 50
62
87
2.6 100
Wat.flo1
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Elec.charge
E72
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Sep.fan.cur Fitted Line Plot
Sep.fan.cur = 52.11 - 2.281 Elec.charge
3.0
50 S 0.777360
R-Sq 74.5%
R-Sq(adj) 74.1%
2.5 49
Elec.charge
Sep.fan.cur
48
2.0
47
1.5
46
1.0 45
45.16 45.35 45.53 46.28 46.47 47.59 48.72 48.90 49.09 49.26 49.45 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Sep.fan.cur Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Sep.fan.cur versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Sep.fan.cur
Sep.fan.cur = 52.11 - 2.281 Elec.charge
99.9
3
99
90
2
S = 0.777360 R-Sq = 74.5% R-Sq(adj) = 74.1%
Percent
1
50
0
1
-1
Regression 1 125.263 125.263 207.29 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 45 46 47 48 49
Total 72 168.168
20 3
15 2
Frequency
1
10
0
5
-1
0
-1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E73
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Sep.inl.pres Fitted Line Plot
Sep.inl.pres = 13.10 - 1.106 Elec.charge
3.0
12.0 S 0.606843
R-Sq 53.0%
R-Sq(adj) 52.3%
11.5
2.5
11.0
Elec.charge
Sep.inl.pres
2.0 10.5
10.0
1.5
9.5
9.0
1.0
9.01 9.30 9.49 9.76 10.93 11.14 11.33 11.44 11.52 11.61 11.81 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Sep.inl.pres Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Sep.inl.pres versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Sep.inl.pres
Sep.inl.pres = 13.10 - 1.106 Elec.charge
99.9
99 2
S = 0.606843 R-Sq = 53.0% R-Sq(adj) = 52.3% 90 1
Percent
50 0
1
-2
Regression 1 29.4345 29.4345 79.93 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0
Total 72 55.5808
16 2
12 1
Frequency
8 0
-1
4
-2
0
-2 -1 0 1 2 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E74
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Sep.out.pres Fitted Line Plot
Sep.out.pres = 19.09 - 1.091 Elec.charge
3.0
18.0 S 0.514355
R-Sq 60.4%
R-Sq(adj) 59.9%
17.5
2.5
17.0
Elec.charge
Sep.out.pres
16.5
2.0
16.0
1.5 15.5
15.0
1.0
14.82 15.52 15.85 16.00 16.75 16.83 17.10 17.28 17.49 17.54 17.59 17.69 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Sep.out.pres Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Sep.out.pres versus Elec.charge

Sep.out.pres = 19.09 - 1.091 Elec.charge
99.9 3.0
99
90
1.5
S = 0.514355 R-Sq = 60.4% R-Sq(adj) = 59.9%
Percent
50 0.0
Analysis of Variance 10 -1.5

1
-3.0
Regression 1 28.6648 28.6648 108.35 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0
Total 72 47.4486
3.0
20
1.5
Frequency
15
0.0
10
-1.5
5
0 -3.0
-2.4 -1.2 0.0 1.2 2.4 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E75
Individual Value Plot of Elec.charge vs Sep.speed Fitted Line Plot
Sep.speed = 168.4 - 6.638 Elec.charge
3.0
165.0 S 2.95623
R-Sq 63.1%
R-Sq(adj) 62.6%
162.5
2.5
160.0
Elec.charge
Sep.speed
157.5
2.0
155.0
1.5 152.5
150.0
1.0
150.06 150.31 150.93 155.11 158.02 158.70 161.54 164.75 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Sep.speed Elec.charge
Regression Analysis: Sep.speed versus Elec.charge

Residual Plots for Sep.speed
Sep.speed = 168.4 - 6.638 Elec.charge
99.9
99
2
S = 2.95623 R-Sq = 63.1% R-Sq(adj) = 62.6% 90
Percent
50
0
1
Regression 1 1060.60 1060.60 121.36 0.000 -4 -2 0 2 4 150.0 152.5 155.0 157.5 160.0
Total 72 1681.09
30
2
Frequency
20
0
10
0 -2
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
E76
Regression Analysis: Sep.feed.bl versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Sep.feed.bl = 1847 + 6.39 Grind.aid Sep.feed.bl = 1847 + 6.392 Grind.aid
2600 S 67.1871
R-Sq 94.1%
2500 R-Sq(adj) 92.7%
Constant 1846.58 51.21 36.06 0.000
Grind.aid 6.3924 0.7983 8.01 0.001
2400
2300
Sep.feed.bl
S = 67.1871 R-Sq = 94.1% R-Sq(adj) = 92.7%
2200
2100
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 289440 289440 64.12 0.001
Total 5 307497
1900
1800
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for Sep.feed.bl

99 80
90 40
Residual
Percent
50 0
10 -40
1 -80
-100 0 100 1800 1950 2100 2250 2400

80
2.0
1.5 40
Frequency
Residual
1.0 0
0.5 -40
0.0 -80
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 1 2 3 4 5 6
E77
Regression Analysis: Sep.tails.bl versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Sep.tails.bl = 822 + 0.365 Grind.aid Sep.tails.bl = 821.9 + 0.3647 Grind.aid
900 S 55.0799
R-Sq 7.2%
R-Sq(adj) 0.0%
Constant 821.91 41.98 19.58 0.000 875
Grind.aid 0.3647 0.6544 0.56 0.607
850
S = 55.0799 R-Sq = 7.2% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%
Sep.tails.bl
825
Regression 1 942 942 0.31 0.607
775
Total 5 13077
750
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for Sep.tails.bl

99
50
90
Residual
Percent
0
50
-50
10
1 -100
-100 -50 0 50 100 820 830 840 850 860

3 50
Frequency
Residual
0
1 -50
0 -100
-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 1 2 3 4 5 6
E78
Regression Analysis: Sep.fines.bl versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
Sep.fines.bl = 3168 + 2.41 Grind.aid Sep.fines.bl = 3168 + 2.406 Grind.aid
S 347.161
R-Sq 7.8%
R-Sq(adj) 0.0%
Constant 3168.0 264.6 11.97 0.000
Grind.aid 2.406 4.125 0.58 0.591
3600
Sep.fines.bl
S = 347.161 R-Sq = 7.8% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%
3400
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 41000 41000 0.34 0.591 3200
Total 5 523083
3000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for Sep.fines.bl

99 500
90 250
Residual
Percent
50 0
10 -250
1 -500
-800 -400 0 400 800 3200 3250 3300 3350 3400

3 500
250
Frequency
Residual
0
1
-250
0 -500
-500 -250 0 250 500 1 2 3 4 5 6
E79
Regression Analysis: Grind.aid versus Sep.feed.bl, Sep.tails.bl, ...
Grind.aid = - 351 + 0.143 Sep.sp.bl + 0.0426 Sep.tails.bl + 0.0172
99 10
Sep.fines.bl
90 5
Residual
Percent
Constant -351.31 87.26 -4.03 0.057
Sep.feed.bl 0.14269 0.01932 7.39 0.018 -5
10
Sep.tails.bl 0.04256 0.09489 0.45 0.698
-10
Sep.fines.bl 0.01721 0.01485 1.16 0.366 1
-20 -10 0 10 20 0 25 50 75 100
S = 10.4688 R-Sq = 96.9% R-Sq(adj) = 92.3%
10
3
5
Frequency
2
Residual
Regression 3 6864.1 2288.0 20.88 0.046
Residual Error 2 219.2 109.6 1 -5
Total 5 7083.3
-10
0
-10 -5 0 5 1 2 3 4 5 6
Source DF Seq SS Residual Observation Order
Sep.feed.bl 1 6667.4
Sep.tails.bl 1 49.5
Sep.fines.bl 1 147.2
E80
Regression Analysis: El.charge.avg versus Grind.aid

Fitted Line Plot
El.charge.avg = 2.55 - 0.0110 Grind.aid El.charge.avg = 2.551 - 0.01101 Grind.aid
2.6 S 0.389626
R-Sq 58.6%
Constant 2.5515 0.2970 8.59 0.001 2.4
Grind.aid -0.011012 0.004629 -2.38 0.076
2.2
El.charge.avg
S = 0.389626 R-Sq = 58.6% R-Sq(adj) = 48.2%
2.0
Source DF SS MS F P
Regression 1 0.8589 0.8589 5.66 0.076 1.6
Total 5 1.4661 1.4
1.2
0 20 40 60 80 100
Grind.aid
Residual Plots for El.charge.avg

99
0.2
90
0.0
Residual
Percent
50 -0.2
-0.4
10
-0.6
1
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50

3
0.2
0.0
Frequency
Residual
-0.2
1 -0.4
-0.6
0
-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 1 2 3 4 5 6
E81

Data Analysis of Electrostatic Charge in Finish Ball Mills

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Data Analysis of Electrostatic Charge in Finish Ball Mills

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research & Development Information

PCA R&D Serial No. 2855

Data Analysis of Electrostatic

by Medgar L. Marceau and Ann M. Caffero

© Portland Cement Association 2005

Task Committee 1 initiated a project to investigate electrostatic charge in grinding finish

Parameters Related to Level of Grinding Aid

Rej.rate = 151 + 2.74 Grind.aid - 0.0987 Grind.aid^2 + 0.000647 Grind.aid^3

Wat.flo1 = 2.96 - 0.0122 Grind.aid

Sep.speed = 150 + 0.00143 Grind.aid^2

Sound.c1 = 32.20 + 0.2899 Grind.aid + 0.002343 Grind.aid^2 - 0.000033 Grind.aid^3.

Grind.aid = 88.0 + 3.33 Sound.c1 - 3.69 Sound.c2

Grind.aid = 69.6 + 3.38 (Sound.c1 - Sound.c2)

Parameters Related to Electrostatic Charge

Elec.charge = 2.52 + 0.0339 Grind.aid - 0.00146 Grind.aid^2 + 0.000011 Grind.aid^3

Elec.charge = 2.57 - 0.0127 Grind.aid

Wat.flo1 = 0.9770 + 0.7080 Elec.charge

Parameters Related to Fineness

Sep.feed.bl = 1847 + 6.39 Grind.aid

Air sweep DC fan

Air sweep DC fan

Grinding parameters Unit Abbreviated name

ELECTRO-TECH SYSTEMS, INC., AUDIT REPORT (PHASE 1)

ADDITIONAL MILL DATA (PHASE 1)

ELECTRO-TECH SYSTEMS, INC., TEST REPORT (PHASE 2)

ADDITIONAL MILL DATA (PHASE 2)

CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES, INC.,

Various Matrix Plots ..................................................................................................................... E4

42 44 46 0 50 1001 2 3 96 100 104 100 150 200 42 44 46

265 Sep.fan.pow 205

Best Subsets Regression: Grind.aid versus Mill.pow, Elev.pow, ...

The regression equation is

S = 2.05442 R-Sq = 67.1% R-Sq(adj) = 66.6%

Unusual Observations 25.0

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

The regression equation is

Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 37.5 S 2.04825

Analysis of Variance 30.0

Unusual Observations Residual Plots for Elev.pow

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

The regression equation is

The regression equation is

Predictor Coef SE Coef T P

S = 14.0138 R-Sq = 83.2% R-Sq(adj) = 81.7%

Obs Mill.pow Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.

Predictor Coef SE Coef T P 90 1

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

Obs Elev.pow Grind.aid Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid

R denotes an observation with a large standardized residual.

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

Unusual Observations Residual Plots for Grind.aid

Avg 3185 30 72 271 50 50

S = 31.4888 R-Sq = 53.5% R-Sq(adj) = 52.9%

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

The regression equation is

Residual Plots for AS.fan.pow

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

The regression equation is

Analysis of Variance 275

Residual Plots for Sep.fan.pow

Histogram of the Residuals Residuals Versus the Order of the Data

The regression equation is

S = 7.98956 R-Sq = 5.7% R-Sq(adj) = 4.4%