From FAG

(fully)

to SAG
(semi)

to BAG !
(barely)
The Theoretical Rationale behind CURRENT TRENDS IN OPERATING PRACTICE OF SEMIAUTOGENOUS GRINDING OPERATIONS Dr. Jaime E. Seplveda MolyMoly -Cop Grinding Systems

Basic Concepts SEMIAUTOGENOUS GRINDING

Feed the mill with large rocks (up to 1012), so avoiding the traditional crushing, classification and multiple storage stages of intermediate size particles. Use these rocks as a zero-cost grinding media: Autogenous Grinding. Add large diameter steel balls (up to 6): Semiautogenous Grinding. Considering that rocks are lighter than balls, it was assumed (wrongly?) that such rocks should fall from the highest possible position and therefore, SAG mills adopted their typical pancake shape: D>L.

The concept of AUTOGENOUS GRINDING was born from the idea of avoiding the use and consumption of steel grinding balls, by replacing them with the same rocks contained in the fresh feed ore.

Alternative Circuit Configurations SINGLESTAGE GRINDING (FAG or SAG)

Product

Feed

Water

Alternative Circuit Configurations DOUBLESTAGE GRINDING (DSAG)

Product

Feed

Water

The mid size rocks, denominated Critical Sizes or Pebbles do not act as grinding media and they do not allow themselves to be ground. They use up space in the charge affecting the productivity of the mill. As a corrective measure, it has been arranged for such Pebbles to leave the charge through the mill grate, classifying and crushing them by conventional methods.

Semiautogenous Grinding WHICH WOULD BE THE ACTUAL ROLE OF THE ROCKS?

ROCKS Do they Grind? Yes, less than Balls Very little ! Do they Are they grind ground by themselves? media? No Yes

Large (> 4)

Medium (2 to 4)

Little ! require large balls

Very little !

Small (< 2)

No

Yes

No

Alternative Circuit Configurations DOUBLESTAGE GRINDING WITH PEBBLE CRUSHING (SABC(SABC-1)

Pebbles Product

Feed

Water

Alternative Circuit Configurations DOUBLESTAGE GRINDING WITH PEBBLE CRUSHING (SABC(SABC-2)

Pebbles Product

Feed

Water

Since Fully Autogenous Grinding (FAG) was first proposed, early last century, there has been a continuous evolution in operational practices with regard to:
The addition of increasing amounts of steel balls as ancillary grinding media, The sustained increment in diameter of such balls, The removal and crushing of the critical sizes (pebbles) that otherwise would accumulate in the load and The pre-crushing (elimination) of either the larger rocks or the intermediate particle size fractions contained in the fresh feed ore.

With time, the fully AUTOGENOUS option has been gradually diverting from its original conception to become nowadays just a simple case of a poorly operated CONVENTIONAL BALL MILL

Consequently, little is left today of the original intention of using the larger rocks as autogenous grinding media for the smaller particles. This presentation is aimed at illustrating the theoretical rationale behind the observed current trends in SAG operating practices, with the aid of Moly-Cop Tools 2.0.

Software for the Analysis of

Mineral Grinding Processes

2.0

My Grandpa made it!

Moly-Cop Tools Molyis available free of charge to all interested parties www.molycoptools@molycop.cl

The model included in Moly-Cop Tools was first published at the SAG 2001 Conference by J. E. Seplveda, A Phenomenological Model of SemiAutogenous Grinding Processes in a MolyCop Tools Environment, Vol. 4, pp. 301-315, Vancouver, Canada. After that, the model has been providing quite satisfactory descriptions of actual SAG processes, in all cases where the proper plant and/or pilot scale data has been made available.

Theoretical Background SPECIFIC SELECTION FUNCTION, ton/kWh

1.000

Balls on Particles Rocks on Particles Self-Breakage Overall

SiE

0.100

0.010 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Particle Size, microns

Complex Circuit Simulation ... SABC-1

Mesh # Opening By-Pass D50/Ds m Mesh # Opening By-Pass D50/Ds m 1 304800 0.000 1.00 100.00 Upper Split 1 304800 Lower 0.000 1.00 100.00 1000 131488 2.90 1 ton/hr, Fresh Feed F80 % Moisture

Simulation N Remarks Base Case Example

ton/hr

Ore Density, ton/m

2.80

0.00

0 0.00 2.90

ton/hr % of Feed % Moisture

1
61.50 % - 1/2"

369 36.91 2.90 61.50

ton/hr % of Feed % Moisture % - 1/2"

0.017 0.9 4

1000 40.00 76.72 167.0

ton/hr (all mills) % Solids % - 100# P80

F80 % - 1.5" 131488 58.97 Water, m /hr

3

344

Diameter, ft Lenght, ft Speed, % Critical Charge Level, % Balls Filling, % % Solids (slurry) App. Density, ton/m3 Gross kW kWh/ton

35.30 15.00 78.00 26.00 10.00 76.00 3.331 10093 10.09

Grate 5 76200 0.070 0.70 3.00 % Solids % - 100# T80 3 m /hr 72.79 21.26 6112 731

Screen 10 13335 0.017 0.90 4.00

Mesh # Opening By-Pass D50/D m

# of Cyclones Diameter Height Inlet Vortex Apex

% - 200# in Mill Discharge 29.66 psi

4.00 26.00 78.00 10.00 10.00 5.00

10.19

243 0.315 0.331 76.10

d50c Bpf Bpw % Solids

Circ. Load, % 2.367 2.367 0.000

(Guess) (Actual) (Delta)

Mesh 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12" 8" 6" 4.15" 2.95" 2.1" 1.48" 1.05" 0.742" 0.525" 0.371" 3 4 6 8 10 14 20 28 35 48 65 100 150 200

Size Distributions Opening Fresh Crushed Crushed Feed Pebbles 1 Pebbles 2 304800 100.00 100.00 100.00 203200 97.60 100.00 100.00 152400 83.93 100.00 100.00 101600 73.57 100.00 100.00 76200 67.87 100.00 100.00 50800 62.82 100.00 100.00 38100 58.97 100.00 100.00 26670 53.78 98.07 98.07 18850 49.78 90.24 90.24 13335 42.74 61.50 61.50 9423 38.32 48.04 48.04 6680 34.00 31.84 31.84 4699 29.28 23.55 23.55 3327 25.65 18.08 18.08 2362 22.57 14.32 14.32 1651 20.19 11.53 11.53 1168 18.16 9.20 9.20 833 16.79 7.80 7.80 589 15.65 6.65 6.65 417 14.66 5.74 5.74 295 13.79 5.06 5.06 208 12.84 4.43 4.43 147 12.01 3.96 3.96 104 11.12 3.50 3.50 74 10.28 3.10 3.10

89 m /hr, Water
3

Water, 3 m /hr

475 2.00 19.00 24.00 76.00 38.00 38.00 72.00 5.395 4631 9.26 # of Mills Diameter, ft Lenght, ft Speed, % Critical Charge Level, % Balls Filling, % % Solids (slurry) App. Density, ton/m3 Gross kW kWh/ton

In conjunction with other unit operationm /hr 1723 models, such as Conventional Ball Milling, Hydroclassification, Screening and Crushing, the referred SAG model can be applied, PROCESS RESTRICTIONS with Moly-Cop Tools, to represent fairly Current Min/Max SAG Power, kW 10093 11500 complex circuit arrangements. Pebbles, ton/hr 369 400
3

% Solids

60.01

BM Power, kW Product Size, P80 Pump Capacity, P*Q 3 Total Water, m /hr

4631 167.0 17554 1470

3730 185.0 30000 2000

Remarks OK OK KO OK OK OK

Complex Circuit Simulation ... SABC-2

Mesh # Opening By-Pass D50/Ds m Mesh # Opening By-Pass D50/Ds m 1 304800 0.000 1.00 100.00 Upper Split 1 304800 Lower 0.000 1.00 100.00 1189 131488 2.90 1 ton/hr, Fresh Feed F80 % Moisture
Simulation N 371 31.19 2.90 ton/hr % of Feed % Moisture Remarks Base Case Example 0

ton/hr

Ore Density, ton/m 61.50 % - 1/2"

2.80

0.00

0 0.00 2.90

ton/hr % of Feed % Moisture

1
61.50 % - 1/2"

Split 0.00

0 0.00

ton/hr % of Feed

1189 40.00 62.52 270.0

ton/hr (all mills) % Solids % - 100# P80

F80 % - 1.5" 131488 58.97 Water, m /hr

3

271
# of Cyclones Diameter Height Inlet Vortex Apex % - 200# in Mill Discharge 16.08 psi 4.00 26.00 78.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 13.51 (Guess) (Actual) (Delta) 357 0.260 0.273 82.66 d50c Bpf Bpw % Solids Circ. Load, % 2.688 2.688 0.000

Diameter, ft Lenght, ft Speed, % Critical Charge Level, % Balls Filling, % % Solids (slurry) App. Density, ton/m3 Gross kW kWh/ton

35.30 15.00 78.00 26.00 10.00 76.00 3.331 10093 8.49

Grate 5 76200 0.070 0.70 3.00

% Solids % - 100# T80 3 m /hr 73.45 25.85 5052 588

Screen 10 13335 0.017 0.90 4.00

Mesh # Opening By-Pass D50/D m

Mesh 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12" 8" 6" 4.15" 2.95" 2.1" 1.48" 1.05" 0.742" 0.525" 0.371" 3 4 6 8 10 14 20 28 35 48 65 100 150 200

Size Distributions Opening Fresh Crushed Crushed Feed Pebbles 1 Pebbles 2 304800 100.00 100.00 100.00 203200 97.60 100.00 100.00 152400 83.93 100.00 100.00 101600 73.57 100.00 100.00 76200 67.87 100.00 100.00 50800 62.82 100.00 100.00 38100 58.97 100.00 100.00 26670 53.78 98.07 98.07 18850 49.78 90.24 90.24 13335 42.74 61.50 61.50 9423 38.32 48.04 48.04 6680 34.00 31.84 31.84 4699 29.28 23.55 23.55 3327 25.65 18.08 18.08 2362 22.57 14.32 14.32 1651 20.19 11.53 11.53 1168 18.16 9.20 9.20 833 16.79 7.80 7.80 589 15.65 6.65 6.65 417 14.66 5.74 5.74 295 13.79 5.06 5.06 208 12.84 4.43 4.43 147 12.01 3.96 3.96 104 11.12 3.50 3.50 74 10.28 3.10 3.10

353 m /hr, Water

3

Water, 3 m /hr

391 2.00 19.00 24.00 76.00 38.00 38.00 72.00 5.395 4631 7.79 # of Mills Diameter, ft Lenght, ft Speed, % Critical Charge Level, % Balls Filling, % % Solids (slurry) App. Density, ton/m3 Gross kW kWh/ton

m /hr 2009 In conjunction with other unit operation models, such as Conventional Ball Milling, Hydroclassification, Screening and Crushing, the referred SAG model can be applied, PROCESS RESTRICTIONS with Moly-Cop Tools, to represent fairly Current Min/Max SAG Power, kW 10093 11500 complex circuit arrangements. Pebbles, ton/hr 371 400
3

% Solids

64.12

BM Power, kW Product Size, P80 Pump Capacity, P*Q 3 Total Water, m /hr

4631 270.0 27155 1759

3730 185 30000 2000

Remarks OK OK KO KO OK OK

Current Operational Trends in SEMIAUTOGENOUS GRINDING

Effect of % BALLS IN THE CHARGE

1200 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 0 5 10 15 20

Mill Throughput, ton/hr

1000 800 600 400 200 0

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 15 Vel. = 78% Crit. % Solids = 76% F80 = 131448 microns Grate = 0.5 Screen = 0.5 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

Max. Power

% Balls

One of the first diversions from Fully Autogenous Grinding was the addition of large diameter balls with the purpose of increasing mill power draw and so providing extra grinding capacity, giving rise to the so-called Semi Autogenous option. Under any circumstances, Operators must be alert not to exceed the design Maximum Power of the mill motor and drive mechanism.

Mill Power Draw, kW

22% Total Filling 26% Total Filling 30% Total Filling

Effect of % BALLS IN THE CHARGE

1200 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 0 5 10 15 20

Mill Throughput, ton/hr

1000 800 600 400 200 0

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 15 Vel. = 78% Crit. % Solids = 76% F80 = 131448 microns Grate = 0.5 Screen = 0.5 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

Max. Power

% Balls

Even at the same mill power draw, balls would be more effective than rocks to convert the available power into actual grinding, thanks to their higher density and spherical shape.

Mill Power Draw, kW

22% Total Filling 26% Total Filling 30% Total Filling

Effect of % BALLS IN THE CHARGE

14.0 13.5 1200 1000 800 600 400 22% Total Filling 26% Total Filling 30% Total Filling 2.0 3.0 4.0
3

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 15 Vel. = 78% Crit. % Solids = 76% F80 = 131448 microns Grate = 0.5 Screen = 0.5 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

kWh/ton

13.0 12.5 12.0 11.5 11.0 5.0

200 0

Apparent Charge Density, ton/m

In some cases, it is possible to identify an Apparent Charge Density (determined by the balls/rocks ratio) that minimizes the overall Specific Energy requirement. If the feed contains large rocks that essentially must grind themselves we must assure that these large rocks get to absorb the necessary proportion of the total available energy, so the overall process can achieve optimal performance.

Mill Throughput, tph

Effect of % BALLS IN THE CHARGE

14.0 13.5 1200 1000 800 600 400 22% Total Filling 26% Total Filling 30% Total Filling 2.0 3.0 4.0
3

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 15 Vel. = 78% Crit. % Solids = 76% F80 = 131448 microns Grate = 0.5 Screen = 0.5 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

kWh/ton

13.0 12.5 12.0 11.5 11.0 5.0

200 0

Apparent Charge Density, ton/m

However, regardless of this ideal Apparent Charge Density that would optimize the energy efficiency (kWh/ton) of the process, the overall effectiveness (mill throughput) of the operation is always achieved at higher balls/rocks ratios, up to the limit imposed by the available motor and drive power.

Mill Throughput, tph

Effect of DISCHARGE GRATE OPENING

1250

Mill Throughput, ton/hr

1200 1150 1100 1050 1000 950 0.0

Screen Opening = 1/2 inch Screen Opening = 3/4 inch

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 15 Vel. = 78% Crit. % Solids = 76% F80 = 131448 microns % Filling = 28% % Balls = 16% Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

1.0

2.0

3.0

Grate Opening, inches

Another source of diversion of SAG milling technology has been the empirical confirmation that removing and crushing larger and larger pebbles (by opening the discharge grate slots) invariably translates into substantially improved mill grinding capacity. In plain words it is like the SAG mill is asking help from the Crushers.

Effect of FRESH FEED SIZE DISTRIBUTION

3200 3000 2800 2600 2400 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 20

SABC-1 SABC-1 plus +6 inch Crushing SABC-1 plus 6x2 inch Crushing

D = 36 L = 17 Vel. = 76% Crit. % Solids = 78% % Filling = 28% % Balls = 12% Grate = 2 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

ton/hr

Simulated Conditions

21%

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% - 2" in SAG Mill Feed

It has been repeatedly demonstrated in actual operational practice that getting rid of the rocks ahead of the SAG mill brings substantial throughput benefits, raising questions about the effective contribution of such rocks to the overall grinding process.
Taken from: J. E. Seplveda, A SIMULATION ANALYSIS OF THE NET EFFECT OF FEED PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ON SAG MILL PERFORMANCE, Jan D. Miller Symposium, SME-AIME Annual Meeting, 2005.

Effect of Feed Size THE PELAMBRES CASE

3000 2900 2800 SAG 1 SAG 2

ton/hr

Operating Conditions D = 36 L = 17 Vel. = 76% Crit. % Solids = 78% % Filling = 23% % Balls = 15% Grate = 2 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

2700 2600 2500 2400 2300 2200 40 45 50 55 60 65

21%

% - 1.25" in SAG Mill Feed

Actual data in support of the previous statement was provided by the PELAMBRES (Chile) operation, back in 2001, in the context of their mine-to-mill approach.

Taken from: R. Palomo, Moly-Cop 2001: IX Mineral Processing Symposium.

Effect of Feed Size

THE COPPERTON CASE

2000 1900 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 30 Lines 1 - 3 Line 4

ton/hr

35

40

45

50

55

60

% - Fines in SAG Mill Feed (*)

(*) D. King (2005), SME-AIME Annual Meeting

Effect of CIRCUIT CONFIGURATION

3200 3000 2800 2600 2400 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 20

DSAG SABC-1 SABC-1 plus +6 inch Crushing SABC-1 plus 6x2 inch Crushing SABC-2

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 17 Vel. = 76% Crit. % Solids = 78% % Filling = 28% % Balls = 12% Grate = 2 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = SABC-1

ton/hr

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% - 2" in SAG Mill Feed

The grinding capacity of any given circuit improves as its configuration evolves from DSAG to SABC-1 to SABC-2; that is, as the SAG mill contributes less and less to the overall grinding task! Also, as the larger feed rocks get to be pre-crushed, the Ideal Apparent Charge Density quickly approaches values close to the limiting maximum value corresponding to just balls plus slurry (~5 ton/m3); that is, Conventional Grinding.

Effect of Balls/Rocks Ratio IDEAL APPARENT CHARGE DENSITY

12000 10000

Total

kW (Net)

8000 6000 4000 2000

Balls Rocks Slurry

Simulated Conditions D = 36 L = 17 Vel. = 70% Crit. % Solids = 78% % Balls = 12% Grate = 0.5 Ball Size = 5 Circuit Type = DSAG

0 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Total Mill Filling, %

As Total Mill Filling is increased (by the addition of large or mid size rocks), at constant Ball Filling, the Total Mill Power Draw increases, but the Net Power absorbed by the Balls actually decreases. If one is to accept that rocks are less effective than balls as grinding media (not to say, totally ineffective), then Mill Throughput will be higher at lower Total Filling levels. This empirical finding has led operators to run at fairly low Total Filling (below 24%) and relatively high (up to 20%) Ball Filling levels.

Meanwhile ... Has the IDEAL MAKE-UP BALL SIZE also been evolving?
2400

F80, mm
27

Mill Throughput, ton/hr

2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 3.5

With the advent of the new century, SAG mill operators have been consistently realizing the clear advantages of using larger and larger balls, regardless of the ore feed particle size.

56

120 131 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5

Make-up Ball Size, inches

For every grinding task, there is an Ideal Make-up Ball Size that maximizes mill throughput. Quite often, this Ideal Make-up Ball Size turns out to be larger than the largest commercially available ball size and increases consistently for coarser and coarser feeds.

Meanwhile ... Has the IDEAL MAKE-UP BALL SIZE also been evolving?
5.6 5.4 5.2 5.0 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4.0 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08

It should be noted that this trend of increasing make-up ball sizes has not yet been offset by the concurrent trend of feeding the mills with finer and finer particles.

Ave. SAG Ball Size, inches

Based on Historical Sales Records of Moly-Cop Chile S. A.

So ... HOW ARE THEY RUNNING TODAY?

Facility Mill Diameter, ft 32 36 36 38 32 38 28 28 36 36 28 36 34 28 34 Mill Length, ft 15 15 15 22 15 20 14 14 19 15 14 17 17 14 17 Ball Filling, % 15.0 14.0 14.0 15.0 12.0 19.0 13.0 13.0 15.0 17.5 14.0 19.5 14.0 17.0 17.0 Total Filling, % 28.0 30.0 33.0 31.0 25.0 26.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 31.0 30.0 30.0 25.0 30.0 30.0 Ball Size, in 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 F80 Size, mm 120 76 170 100 152 80 80 80 80 128 64 90 117 60 60 Charge Density, ton/m 3 3.75 3.54 3.46 3.64 3.56 4.37 3.88 3.88 4.14 3.95 3.52 4.10 3.83 3.88 3.88 Circuit Type

Chuquicamata Andina Teniente SAG 1 Teniente SAG 2 Collahuasi MEL Laguna Seca MEL Los Colorados SAG 1 MEL Los Colorados SAG 2 MEL Los Colorados SAG 3 Candelaria Mantos de Oro Pelambres El Soldado Los Bronces SAG 1 Los Bronces SAG 2

SABC-1 SABC-2 SABC-2 SABC-2 SABC-1 SABC-1 SABC-1 SABC-1 SABC-1 SABC-2 Precrushing Precrushing SAC Precrushing Precrushing

Data obtained from direct interviews to the listed operations.

So ... HOW ARE THEY RUNNING TODAY?

200 180 F80 Size, mm 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 Charge Density, ton/m3
Not enough balls! Too many balls!

FAG

BAG

Chuquicamata Andina Teniente Collahuasi Escondida Candelaria MDO Pelambres Anglo

Data obtained from direct interviews to the listed operations.

CONCLUDING REMARK
It is very likely that many of the members of this audience would not share with me the rightfulness of all of my todays statements. For now, in my defense, I just wish to express that, in real life ...

nobody is free of making mistakes !!!