56 views

Uploaded by Dirceu Nascimento

Usim pac Starting Guide

save

You are on page 1of 32

Version 3.1.1.0

Caspeo

3 avenue Claude Guillemin - BP 6009

45060 ORLEANS CEDEX 2 – FRANCE

Tel: +33-238-643615

Fax: +33-238-259742

E-mail: info@caspeo.net

**BRGM is the author of USIM PAC
**

Copyright © BRGM 1986 – 2004, © Caspeo 2004 – 2006

2 Starting Guide

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 3

TABLE OF CONTENT

Pages

1 - INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................4

1.1 - The Simulation based Approach....................................................................4

1.2 - Unit operation models ....................................................................................6

2 - GENERAL FEATURES OF USIM PAC......................................................................8

3 - INSTALLATION OF USIM PAC .................................................................................8

4 - CASE 6: A DESIGN CASE STUDY ...........................................................................9

4.1 - The Objectives ...............................................................................................9

4.2 - The Methodology ...........................................................................................9

4.3 - Step one: enter data ....................................................................................10

4.4 - Step two: define plant performance .............................................................15

4.5 - Step three: design the units of equipment ...................................................20

4.6 - Step four: estimate capital cost....................................................................24

REFERENCES..............................................................................................................26

USIM PAC 3.1

4 Starting Guide

1 - INTRODUCTION

Since 1986, BRGM has been developing a powerful process simulation software package,

USIM PAC (Broussaud 1988; Durance et al. 1993; 1994; Guillaneau et al. 1997, Brochot et

al. 2002). It is a user-friendly steady-state simulator that allows mineral processing engineers

and scientists to model plant operations with available experimental data and determine

optimal plant configuration that meets production targets. The simulator can also assist plant

designers with sizing unit operations required to achieve given circuit objectives.

The software package contains functions that can manipulate experimental data, calculate

coherent material balances, sizes and settings of unit operations, physical properties of the

processed materials, simulate plant operation and display results in tables and graphs.

Widely used in industrial plant design and optimization, with more than one hundred fifty

licenses sold in thirty countries, this software has been continuously improved, through

successive versions, to make it more accurate, powerful and easier to use.

These last years have seen significant developments in mineral processing technologies,

particularly in hydrometallurgy, bio-hydrometallurgy (Cézac et al. 1999; Brochot et al. 2000)

and mineral liberation. In addition, it is now necessary to take into account the environmental

impact at each stage of a mining project, including water and power consumption, waste

treatment and disposal (Sandvik et al. 1999; Guillaneau et al. 1999).

This new version of the simulator, USIM PAC 3.1, incorporates these modern developments.

Indeed, its structure and tools allow the user to take into account, at the same time, a wide

range of technological, economic and environmental aspects (Brochot et al. 2002).

The main features of USIM PAC 3.1 will be presented through the description of the design

and optimization methodologies. The significance of these features will be illustrated by an

example of design of a gold ore treatment plant.

1.1 - The Simulation based Approach

**Process modeling and simulation are used at all stages in the life of a mineral processing
**

plant: from process development to site rehabilitation, including pre-feasibility and feasibility

studies, engineering design, plant commissioning, plant operation and upgrading right

through to decommissioning. From the beginning, the simulation-based approach describes

the behavior and performance of the future plant. This description will be more and more

precise owing to the capitalization of knowledge acquired through laboratory tests, pilot plant

campaigns and plant operation. There is a continuous exchange between reality and the

virtual plant constituted by its steady-state simulator.

A simulator combines the following elements (see Figure 1):

A flowsheet that describes the process in terms of successive unit operations and material

streams. This flowsheet encapsulates the experience of the engineers responsible for the

plant design or optimization. It can reflect various scenarios so they can be compared

against given criteria. It takes into account numerous plant features such as reagents

distribution, water recycling or waste treatment.

A phase model that describes the materials handled by the plant (raw material, products,

reagents, water, wastes) so that unit operations and plant performance, products and

reagents quality (grades and undesirable element level), waste characterization (e.g. long-

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 5

**term behavior) for environmental impact can be evaluated. The phase description is critical
**

for analyzing and optimizing the process. This statement reinforces the vital importance of

field data and sampling protocols.

A mathematical model for each unit operation. This model formalizes the current scientific

knowledge about the unit operation, and its level of complexity depends on the data available

and the targeted objectives (i.e. flowsheeting, unit operation sizing, or optimization). The

model parameters - dimensions, settings and calibration factors - are calculated or validated

from field data.

A set of algorithms for data reconciliation, model calibration, unit operation sizing, full

material balance calculation, power consumption and capital cost calculation. These

algorithms are interfaced with a set of data representation tools. As a result, the plant

simulator constitutes a highly efficient communication vector between the different actors

who play a part in the plant life.

PLANT FEED

MODELS

Feed rate

Feed size distribution

Feed mineral distribution

PLANT DESIGN

Flowsheet

Units of equipment

STEADY-STATE

SIMULATOR PLANT PERFORMANCE

Flowrates

Size distributions

Mineral distributions

Power draws

PLANT CAPITAL COST

Figure 1: Main functions of a steady-state simulator

**Steady-state simulation does not compete with dynamic simulation: it is not a lower or higher
**

level of simulation. Whereas dynamic simulation is an essential tool for the design of

process-control strategies and a key element of advanced process-control systems,

steady-state simulation is an essential tool for plant design and pre-control optimization: it is

adequate to optimize the circuit design and the dimensions of the units of equipment before

the implementation of a process-control system.

USIM PAC 3.1

6 Starting Guide

Figure 2: Main Window of the USIM PAC simulator

**The simulator offers an array of powerful tools in response to the increasing demand for a
**

multi-criteria, global approach by plant designers. It takes into account a wide spectrum of

design criteria, including:

- Economic criteria such as capital cost, reagent and power consumption, production

quality in terms of valuable mineral grade or undesirable elements level;

- Technical aspects with the evaluation of various configurations and processing

technologies, a complete and detailed description of all material streams and their

behavior during process;

- Environmental factors such as water consumption and recycling, pollutant production or

waste treatment.

USIM PAC is a very flexible simulator (see Fig. 2). It can be used by process engineers for

plant design or optimization, researchers for process model development, as well as

academics for teaching process-engineering students.

The previous version, USIM PAC 3.0, already represented a significant milestone towards

integrating different industries through a global approach. It was possible to simulate

treatment from the mine through the metallurgical plant. Studies on a global approach in

urban waste management (Sandvik et al. 1999) or metal life cycle (Reuter 1998) already

used steady state process simulation techniques.

Version 3.1 goes further in that way. The material description has been enriched with

additional criteria that give capabilities to simulate processes in various field.

1.2 - Unit operation models

**The main components of a simulator are:
**

1. The simulation software, per se, which enables communication between user and

simulator and co-ordination of calculations: as this is the only component visible to

the user, it is often called the "simulator".

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 7

**2. Mathematical models for unit operations, which constitute the core of the system,
**

albeit they are buried inside the simulator as modules.

INPUT

PLANT CAPITAL COST

Flowrates

Size distribution

Mineral distribution

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

MODELS

Output(s)

Flowrates

Size distributions

Mineral distributions

Power draws

Figure 3: Unit operation model

**Various mathematical models can be associated with each unit operation drawn on the
**

flowsheet. Mathematical models calculate the output streams data from the input stream data

and model parameters (see Figure 3). These parameters can be equipment sizes, operating

conditions, physical properties, model adjustment parameters or simply performance criteria.

Depending upon the simulation objective and the data available, different mathematical

models can be used for the same piece of equipment. In USIM PAC, mathematical models

are divided into four levels:

- Level 0 models enable the user to specify directly the performance of the units. For

example, the performance of a classification unit can be modeled by a partition curve for

which the user specifies the bypass, the imperfection and the cut-size (d50). Such

models are also called flowsheeting models as they do not take into account any sizing

parameters. During the simulation, the performance of the unit will be independent of its

dimensions and the flowrate of the ore feeding it.

- Level 1 models take dimensional parameters into account. They require little (sometimes

no) experimental data. A typical example is a ball mill model, which uses only the Bond

Work Index as its single experimental parameter. If no data is available, it is even

possible to estimate the Work Index. Obviously the precision of such models is limited,

but they are simple to use.

- Models of higher levels are typically more accurate but they require the estimation of

some of their parameters. This estimation can be carried out either on the basis of

experimental data obtained from the continuous operation of the unit (level 2 models) or

from such data supplemented by information obtained from specific tests, generally

carried out in the laboratory (level 3 models).

Over 120 mathematical models are available in USIM PAC 3.1 covering a wide range of unit

operations from crushing to refining, from ore dressing to waste management. These include

comminution (SAG, Pebble/Rod/Ball mils, Liberation mill, SAM, etc.), classification

(Hydrocyclones, Screens, Rake/Spiral classifiers, etc.), concentration (Conventional/Column

USIM PAC 3.1

8 Starting Guide

**flotation, Gravity/Magnetic separation, etc.), hydrometallurgy (Leaching, Bioleaching, CIP,
**

CIL, Precipitation, Cementation, Solvent extraction, Electrowinning, etc.), solid/liquid

separation (Filtration, Sedimentation, etc.), waste treatment (Collection, Sorting, Incineration,

composting, etc.).

**2 - GENERAL FEATURES OF USIM PAC
**

USIM PAC offers powerful and easy-to-use methods to help engineers reach their objectives.

It requires no special training in computing or modeling.

Basic functions of USIM PAC can be divided into plant modeling, data input, data processing

and different tools for data and results display. High level functions are also available for

configuration and incorporation of user defined functions.

**USIM PAC runs under Windows™ 2000/XP. The minimum hardware is:
**

Pentium-based PC with 256 Mb RAM, 50 Mb of free disk space.

We recommend:

Pentium-based PC with 512 Mb RAM, 128 Mb of free disk space.

**The advanced user of USIM PAC can create new icons to represent the devices on a
**

flowsheet, or new equipment simulation models. Models and icons are introduced in the form

of FORTRAN functions, which must respect a few simple, well-defined rules. These

subroutines must be compiled and linked with an object code module supplied with the

USIM PAC Development Kit. FORTRAN compiler and linker are provided with the program.

**This flexibility makes it possible to satisfy the need of some USIM PAC users to insert their
**

own models in the software, as well as to provide a legal guarantee on the delivered object

code.

The user may also insert into the program completely new functions taking some or all of

their data from the USIM PAC files.

**3 - INSTALLATION OF USIM PAC
**

The installation of USIM PAC from the CD Rom is done through a specific procedure,

designed to copy the disks to your hard disk and to create the required subdirectories.

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 9

4 - CASE 6: A DESIGN CASE STUDY

4.1 - The Objectives

**The example given here provides the opportunity to describe a general methodology, by
**

which a preliminary design and capital cost evaluation of a plant can be achieved in a few

hours with USIM PAC 3.1. It corresponds to a preliminary design of a comminution circuit in

the mineral processing industry. It is delivered with the software as the CASE6 tutorial.

**The objective is to make a preliminary design of a gold-
**

grinding/classification/leaching/adsorption plant capable of treating 100 t/h of a gold ore with

95 % recovery.

• Size distribution: 0×8 mm

• Gold content: 7 ppm.

• Specific gravity: 3.

Plant specifications are (see flowsheet fig. 7):

• Primary grinding with a rod mill in open circuit.

• Secondary grinding with a ball mill in closed circuit.

• Classification by hydrocyclone with a circulating load from 150 % to 250 %.

• Leaching tank series with d80 = 75 µm for the feed.

• CIP tank series with 50 ppm of gold in the recycled carbon.

• Dewatering of the barren pulp in a thickener with water recycling for percent solids

regulation.

Laboratory tests give:

• Work Index: 14 kWh/st.

• Maximum recovery of gold by cyanidation: 98 %.

• Leaching rate constant: 0.3 h-1 (assuming a first order kinetic).

• Adsorption rate constant: 700, time constant: 0.3 (assuming the kn equilibrium

model).

• Maximum percent solids after clarification: 70 %.

The following sections details the succession of steps used in preliminary plant design: plant

modeling with flowsheet drawing, phase model description and selection of mathematical

models for each unit operation, stream data input, direct simulation and unit sizing

algorithms, results display using graphs and sheets.

4.2 - The Methodology

**Figure 4 shows the five steps of the methodology followed. Steps one and two aim at
**

defining the way the plant designer wishes the plant to perform. Step three consists of finding

units of equipment able to achieve the plant performances defined during step two. Finally

steps four and five produce information and documents necessary to present the

prefeasibility study. The whole approach, including report generation and printing, requires

less than a day for a mineral processing engineer.

USIM PAC 3.1

10 Starting Guide

Objective

Pre-feasibility study

Conventional flowsheet

hypothesis

USIM PAC

simulation of the plant using Laboratory experimentation:

-measurement of Bond index

simple models without equipment

- mesurement of flotation kinetics

dimensioning

USIM PAC

dimensioning the equipment for

the plant

USIM PAC technical results

printout of a full report

with flowsheet, graphs and

tables

USIM PAC

simulation of the full operation of the plant.

Comparisons between several possible flowsheets

USIM PAC economical results

calculation of the approximate

capital cost of the main

equipment and the overall cost

of the plant

Figure 4: Methodology for a preliminary design

4.3 - Step one: enter data

**Draw plant flowsheet
**

The Flowsheet Drawing option of USIM PAC is used to draw or modify a flowsheet; it is

entirely graphic and icon driven (see Fig. 5).

The arrow is used to select functions in the Toolbox with the mouse (see Fig. 6) and to

position equipment icons, material streams or texts on the screen. The Unit button opens the

icon library organized in groups of icons, depending on their function.

The created flowsheets are not simply saved as drawings: they are also analyzed and error

messages are displayed if the flowsheet is not physically comprehensible. Flowsheets can

be displayed on the screen, modified using the Flowsheet Drawing option, or plotted on

paper using File\Print... option.

The user can position the equipment on the flowsheet in any order. If required, Automatic

Renumbering options can be used to renumber the equipment and/or the streams in a

logical order. Manual Renumbering is also available for streams and units in floating menus

that can be obtained by a click on the right mouse button over a stream or a unit number.

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 11

Figure 5: Screen drawing plant flowsheet

Figure 6: Tools box of the flowsheet drawing option

**Any flowsheet can be copied and pasted through the clipboard. A copy of the described
**

flowsheet is presented on Figure 7.

9

Feed

1 17 16 OF

8

Rod mill Rof mill

Cyclone feed

feed product

Recycled

4 7 water

2 3 5 6

14

1

3

2 4 5 6

Leached pulp

Feeder Rod mill Hydrocyclone 10

Rod mill Hydrocyclone Leaching

regulator

regulator Barren

pulp

Ball mill 20

product UF

9

12

7

Ball mill

feed CIP

Preliminary design 8

19 11

Grinding/Leaching/CIP 18

13

11 Thickener

10 15

Ball mill

Ball mill

regulator

Tailings

Unloaded Loaded

carbon carbon

Figure 7: Flowsheet of the gold ore grinding circuit

Describe phase model

USIM PAC 3.1

12 Starting Guide

**For this case study, the ore is described in terms of a size distribution for grinding and
**

classification and a global gold content for leaching. The predefined phase named “Gold ore”

fits this description. The other phases present in the process are the water used for wet

treatment and leaching and the carbon used for the CIP stage. These phases are described

by their gold content (see Figures 8, 9 and 10).

Figure 8: Description of the phase model

**The units used above can be configured and adapted to the units used in the plant.
**

For a given project, the user of the program must define a phase model - i.e. he must decide

how to represent the material in the streams: the number of particle-size classes and the

corresponding mesh sizes, the number and names of the minerals or mineral groups, with

their specific gravities. The user can define types of mineral particles, and/or the flowrates of

flotation reagents associated with the slurry stream. Specific gravity of gold (19) is not

considered in this case as the gold is finely disseminated in the ore. It will behave in the

process (grinding, classification etc.) as the ore. That is why its specific gravity has been set

up as the same value this of its support.

Figure 9: Description of the phase model - particle size

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 13

Figure 10: Description of the phase model – composition for the three phases

**In this case, connections between phases are defined. They represent the capability of gold
**

to transfer from one phase to another (Ore to Solution through leaching, Solution to carbon

through adsorption – see fig. 11 & 12).

Figure 11: Connections to represent possible gold transfers

USIM PAC 3.1

14 Starting Guide

Gold Ore

Carbon

Leaching water

Gold transfer

Figure 12: Phase model

**Solid/liquid pairs of phases can also be defined to describe the streams in terms of pulp
**

flowrate (see fig. 13).

Figure 13: Solid/liquid pair definition

**Describe plant feed
**

The feed streams are described using the Stream Description option of the Data menu of

the main Window.

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 15

The input interface for the stream data follows the phase model structure. It gives, stream by

stream, the list of phases and solid-liquid pairs (see Figure 14).

Available data for each phase are the mass flowrate, the volumetric flowrate and the density;

if they are known, the component grade and the size distribution for the ore phase.

Depending on the study, stream density may be required and descriptions such as

composition by size classes or floating ability by component can be necessary.

Available data for each solid-liquid pair are the pulp mass flowrate, the pulp volumetric

flowrate and density if they are known and the percent solids. For a given solid-liquid pair,

only two values among both phase flowrates, pulp flowrate and percent solids are necessary.

The other two are calculated. Size distribution can be input using individual % passing or

cumulative % passing or retained.

Figure 14: Stream data entry

4.4 - Step two: define plant performance

Define performance for each unit operation

USIM PAC 3.1

16 Starting Guide

This step obviously requires some expertise from the software user. The time has not yet

come when the software is able to define relevant performances for each unit operation from

such a general objective as "required circuit performance: d80 = 60 µm at the hydrocyclone

overflow". In the present application, the software user (plant designer) suggests the

following local objectives, using level 0 models (see Table 1).

Table 1 Level 0 models

**Units Models and main parameters Values
**

#1 – Feeder Mixer (0)

#2 – Rod mill regulator Density Regulator (0)

Percent solids at regulator output (%) 70

#3 – Rod mill Mill (0A)

d80 at the mill discharge (mm) 1

#4 – Hydrocyclone Density Regulator (0)

regulator

Percent solids at regulator output (%) 40

#5 – Hydrocyclone Hydrocyclone (0B)

Short circuit of fines (%) 25

d80 of output fine stream (mm) 0.075

Corrected partition curve imperfection 0.3

#6 – Leaching Leaching (0)

Leached percentage per component of ore and 95

solid phases (%) – Gold

#7 – CIP CIP – Carbon-In-Pulp (0)

Adsorbed percentage per component of the 95

liquid phase (%) – Gold

#8 – Thickener Solid/Liquid Separator (0)

Percent solids of the slurry stream (mass %) 70

#9 – Splitter Liquid Split (0)

Maximum flowrate of liquid to the specified 180

output (t/h)

#10 – Ball mill regulator Density Regulator (0)

Percent solids at regulator output (%) 55

#11 – Ball mill Mill (0A)

d80 at the mill discharge (mm) 0.25

**The Equipment Description option of the Data menu is used to enter model selection and
**

parameters for each unit operation (see Fig. 15).

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 17

Figure 15: CIP – Carbon-In-Pulp (0) mathematical model parameters

**Run a Level 0 simulation
**

The ideal description of all the streams is calculated by the direct simulation algorithm from

the feed description using the selected performance models. This preliminary material

balance predicts a first estimate of:

• The circulating load in the grinding circuit,

• The recycling level of water and the fresh water consumption,

• The d80 and the gold content for each stream, and

• The overall gold recovery.

The user can impose a maximum number of iterations and a convergence criterion or he

may use default values proposed by the software (see Fig. 16).

Figure 16: Direct simulation starting box

**The USIM PAC simulation algorithm is iterative. The output stream(s) from each unit of
**

equipment is(are) calculated by the unit operation model as a function of the feed streams.

The number of iterations completed is permanently displayed.

For each iteration, all the calculated flowrates are compared with the values from the

previous iteration. Convergence is achieved when the sum of all the least square differences

becomes less than the convergence criterion.

Verify the validity of simulation results

The Level 0 simulation calculates flowrates and particle-size distributions for all streams of

the circuit. The plant designer must check that the values are consistent with the way he

anticipates the plant will perform. In the present case, it is important to verify that the

circulating load is realistic.

The Simulation Results are displayed in different ways by the options of the Results menu:

The Simulation Results \ Global Sheet option displays the solids and water flowrates and

the overall mineral composition of the stream (see Fig. 17). This table is fully configurable

and various types of variables can be displayed. We can check on the following table that:

USIM PAC 3.1

18 Starting Guide

**• circulating load in the grinding circuit is 204%;
**

• d80 of the cyclone underflow is 75µm

• gold recovery is over 95% (635.6/665)

• addition of water is 35.7 m3/h (53.7+50.1-68.1). Recycling 210 t/h of water to the

hydrocyclones (with splitter 9) will optimize water addition.

Figure 17: Display of the global results

**There are seven distinct forms of graphical representations: size distribution, size partition,
**

density distribution, density separation and split curves, and stream and component bar

graphs. These graphs are entirely configurable. Some predefined graphs can be drawn

directly from the flowsheet popup menu. It is possible to draw the size distributions of all

solid components directly from a stream submenu. Furthermore, size partition and split

curves can be drawn directly from a unit operation submenu.

Figure 18 gives an example of a graph showing the size distribution curves for the

hydrocyclone feed, overflow and underflow streams.

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 19

Figure 18: Size distribution curves of the cyclone feed, overflow and underflow

**Figure 19 gives the gold partial flowrate in each phase and each stream as a bar graph. It
**

clearly indicates the amount of gold in the grinding circulating load or in the recycled water as

well as the phase transfer between ore and water and then between water and carbon.

Figure 19: Stream bar graph of the gold partial flowrates

**This ideal material balance will be used as the new objective, called “target”, during the
**

equipment sizing stage. Full stream description can be displayed using the stream data entry

interface, the stream overview sheet or more synthetically with graphics and global results.

USIM PAC 3.1

20 Starting Guide

4.5 - Step three: design the units of equipment

**Select Level 1 or Level 2 unit operation models
**

Target.UP3 file needs to be saved as Design1.UP3. Then, the Equipment Description

option is used to replace the Level-0 models with Level-1 or Level-2 predictive models, and

to specify some characteristics of the equipment (see Table 2).

Table 2 Level 1 and 2 models

**Units Models and main parameters Values
**

#3 – Rod mill Rod Mill (1)

Number of mills in parallel 1

???? Inside mill diameter (m) 2.7

Length/diameter ratio 2

Percent volumetric loading of rods 35

Fraction of critical speed 0.7

Rod specific gravity 7.8

Work index per component (kWh/st) 14

#5 – Hydrocyclone (2)

Hydrocyclone

Number of hydrocyclones in parallel 2

???? Cyclone diameter: D (m) 0.659

???? Distance between the underflow and overflow 2.646

nozzles / D

???? Diameter of the feed nozzle / D 0.316

???? Diameter of the overflow nozzle / D 0.325

???? Diameter of the underflow nozzle / D 0.204

#6 – Leaching Leaching (1A)

???? Tank volume (m3) 940

Number of tanks in series 6

Maximum recovery per component of ore and solid 98

phases (%) – Gold

Rate constant per component (1/h) – Gold 0.3

#7 – CIP CIP – Carbon-In-Pulp (1)

Number of tanks in series 6

Tank volume (m3) 500

Rate constant per component of the liquid (<0 if 700

desorbed) – Gold

Time constant per component of the liquids – Gold 0.3

???? Mean residence time of the carbon in one tank (h) 8.1

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 21

**#11 – Ball mill Ball Mill (1)
**

Number of mills in parallel 1

???? Inside mill diameter (m) 3.8

Length/diameter ratio 1.2

Percent volumetric loading of balls 40

Fraction of critical speed 0.7

Ball specific gravity 7.8

Work index per component (kWh/st) 14

**Parameters preceded by ???? are calculated by the unit sizing algorithm. The associated
**

value is the result.

The Rod Mill (1) and Ball Mill (1) models are based on the energy-based theories of grinding

and in particular on Bond’s law and the Allis Chalmers methods for dimensioning grinding

mills (Rowland and Kjos, 1978). The choice was made to use one rod mill and one ball mill

with predefined conditions such as mill shape, grinding media loading and speed. Only the

diameter will be calculated to fit the target size distribution.

The Hydrocyclone (2) model is based on the empirical equations established as a result of

experimental work (Plitt, 1976). This model accounts for the roping effect. The number of

cyclones is fixed to 2 regarding the volumetric feed rate of pulp (around 530m3/h). The

dimensions of the hydrocyclones are calculated. First, by scanning the diameter is

determined. Then, using the Polytope algorithm, all dimensions are adjusted to meet the

objective.

The leaching (1A) model uses a first order kinetic equation for the gold transfer in solution

using a maximum recovery and a constant rate (McLaughlin and Agar 1991). The leaching

tank icon represents a series of 6 tanks for which the volume is determined to achieve the

95 % gold recovery.

The CIP (1) model is derived from the kn model (Fleming, Nicol, and Nicol 1980). The CIP

icon represents a series of 6 tanks with a counter-current carbon flow. The tank volume is

fixed to an arbitrary volume and the residence time of carbon is adjusted to achieve the 95 %

gold recovery. It is then possible to calculate the volume of carbon in the tank and hence the

tank volume from the ideal carbon concentration in pulp.

Design each unit of equipment

The calculation of equipment size parameters is performed using an optimization algorithm,

which finds the set of parameters that gives output streams that most closely match the

target data set (see Figure 20). A set of various objective functions is used to compare

calculated and target output streams more precisely (Brochot et al. 2002).

After calculation of all unit sizing parameters, a direct simulation is performed to update the

material balance with the adjusted models. It is then possible to compare these results with

the target using the different graphic tools. A final direct simulation can be performed after

changes are made to the unit sizing parameters to reflect available equipment from vendors

and the results are compared to the original objectives.

USIM PAC 3.1

22 Starting Guide

Figure 20: Unit of equipment sizing

**Run a Level 1 simulation
**

It is now possible to run the Direct Simulation again and to predict the detailed operation of

the plant, using the Level 1 and Level 2 predictive models, which take into account the

selected size(s) of the units of equipment.

As the models are predictive, not only the flowrates and particle-size distributions are

calculated for each stream, but also the power draws of the mills and the pressure drop in

the hydrocyclones. These values are displayed the Operating parameter Display and the

Calculated Power Consumption options (see Fig. 21).

Figure 21: Display of the operating parameter file

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 23

**At the end of this step, it is recommended to verify the consistency of the results of the
**

simulation again using the Results and Graphs menu. Figure 22 shows a comparison

between the objective and the simulated values for the Gold partial flowrates. Figure 23

shows a comparison of the targeted partition curve and the simulated one.

Figure 22: Comparison of the gold partial flowrates

USIM PAC 3.1

24 Starting Guide

Figure 23: Comparison of objective and simulated partition curves.

4.6 - Step four: estimate capital cost

**Each situation simulated using the Direct Simulation option can be followed by a calculation
**

of the approximate capital cost of the plant: the user calls the Investment Capital Cost

Estimation option and starts by selecting the currency (see Fig. 24), for example 2006 €.

Figure 24: Currency Selection

**He may then be required to indicate values for various parameters not entered for the
**

simulation. This option provides a cost report (see Fig. 25) containing:

• A list of the costs of the main units of equipment, and the total purchase cost of the

equipment, excluding transport and installation.

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 25

**• A table in which various ratios are applied to this purchase cost to provide a budgetary
**

breakdown of the total plant investment.

Figure 25: Cost report

**The configuration possibilities are numerous, using the Cost menu, due to the variability of
**

the economic factors. The Marshall and Swift mining equipment index, published in the

"Chemical Engineering" review, can be updated (see Fig. 26).

Figure 26: Marshall and Swift index configuration

**The cost-calculation models of USIM PAC are based mainly on the work of Mular [1982]
**

updated using the experience of some software users.

USIM PAC 3.1

26 Starting Guide

REFERENCES

**Brochot, S., Wiegel, R.L., Ersayin, S., Touze, S., "Modeling and Simulation of Comminution Circuits
**

with USIM PAC", 2006, Advances in Comminution, Ed. S.K. Kawatra, SME, pp 495-511.

**Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Villeneuve, J., Mugabi, M., "Modelling of the bioleaching of sulphide ores:
**

application for the simulation of the bioleaching / gravity section of the Kasese Cobalt Company

Ltd process plant", 2003, Processing & Disposal of Mineral Industry Wastes '03 conference,

Falmouth, UK, June 18-20.

**Brochot, S., Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., Durance, M.-V., Bourgeois, F., "USIM PAC 3: Design
**

and Optimization of Mineral Processing Plants from Crushing to Refining ", 2002, Mineral

Processing Plant Design, Practice and Control, Ed. A.L. Mular, D.N. Halbe & D.J. Barratt, SME,

pp. 479-494.

**Villeneuve, J., Michel, P., Wavrer, Ph., Brochot, S., Lemière, B., "La recherche européenne fabrique
**

les outils d'une meilleure gestion globale des déchets", 2002, Environnement & Technique, juin

2002, n°217, pp 31-34.

**Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., "USIM PAC 3.0: New features for a
**

global approach in mineral processing design", 2002, Application of computers and operations

research in the mineral industry, Ed. Sukumar Bandopadhay, SME, pp. 465-478.

**Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Foucher, S., Guillaneau, J.-C., Morin, D., Villeneuve, J., "Process
**

simulation to enhance complex flowsheet development: examples in biotechnology", 2000, SME-

Control 2000 Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA - February 28-March 1.

**Brochot, S, Cézac, P., Durance, M.-V., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., Morin, D., Villeneuve, J.
**

“Simulation of Biotreatments in complex mineral processes” XXI IMPC Rome, July 2000,

proceedings pp. A3-108-119. [2000b]

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J. , Bodenan, F., Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Hergibo, P.-L., Piantone,
**

P., Sandvik, K., Vedrine, H., Wavrer, P. « Urban Waste Management: From characterization to

process evaluation », French-Egyptian Symposium on Water and Waste Management and

Treatment , Cairo, Egypt, January 17-18-19, 2000 [2000a]

**Cézac, P., Truong-Meyer, X. M., Joulia, X., Brochot, S., Morin, D., “A New Modelling Approach of
**

Bioleaching Process”, 1999, CDROM of the ECCE2, Second European Congress of Chemical

Engineering, 5-7 Oct. 1999, 8 pp, Montpellier, France. [1999f].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Morin, D., Durance, M.-V., Morizot, G., “Biotechnology and process simulation: ore
**

processing in ecology friendly conditions”, Proceedings of the third World Mining Environment

Congress, pp74-84, 1999, Moscow, Russian Federation. [1999e].

**Villeneuve, J., Conil, P., Fourniguet, G., Hergibo, P. L., “Simulation Methods to Analyse the Treatment
**

of a Polluted Soil – Size Classification and Hydrocarbons Recovery”, 1999, CDROM of the

ECCE2, Second European Congress of Chemical Engineering, 5-7 Oct. 1999, 8 pp, Montpellier,

France. [1999d].

**Sandvik, K. L., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M.-V., Védrine, H., “Development of a Mineral Processing
**

Program as a tool for optimal decision in Waste Treatment”, 1999, Proceedings of the

REWAS’99, Global Symposium on Recycling, Waste Treatment and Clean Technology, 5-9 Sept.

1999, Vol 1, pp 55-64, San Sebastian, Spain. [1999c].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Villeneuve, J., Fourniguet, G., Védrine, H., Sandvik, K.,
**

Reuter M., “From mineral processing to waste treatment: an open-mind process simulator”, CIM

1999, Québec, Canada [1999b]

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 27

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Morin, D., Durance, M.-V., Morizot, G., “Biotechnology and process simulation: two
**

tools to develop environmentally friendly processes of ores”, 1999, Proceedings of the GME’99,

Beijing, China. [1999a]

**Durance, M.-V., Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., "Optimisation des ateliers de classification", 1998,
**

Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les techniques, Vol. V/98, supplément à décembre 1998, pp. 85-

93. [1998.b].

**Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., "Méthode d’analyse des performances de la classification
**

granulométrique d’un sol pollué", 1998, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les techniques, Vol. V/98,

supplément à décembre 1998, pp. 65-69. [1998.a].

**Mouvet, Ch., Artignan, D., Brochot, S., Chiles, J.-P., Coste, B., Negrel, Ph., Pauwels, H., "Variabilité
**

des milieux : illustrations, implications... solution ?", 1997, Les Cahiers des Clubs CRIN,

Surveillance de l’Environnement, Paris, 1997. [1997.e].

**Fourniguet, G., Villeneuve, J., Rocchia, L., Védrine, H., Brochot, S., Guillaneau, J.-C., "Analyse par
**

bilans matière d’un procédé hydrométallurgique de recyclage de déchets d’aciéries électriques",

1997, 6e Congrès Français de Génie des Procédés, Paris, 24-26 septembre 1997 [1997.d].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M.-V., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., Durand, H., "From
**

Sampling to Simulation: the BRGM range of Software for Process Analysis", 1997, Minerals

Engineering Annual Meeting, Santiago, Chile - July 29-August 1, 1997. [1997.c].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M.-V., Brochot, S., Fourniguet G., Védrine, H., Wavrer, P.,
**

Le Guirriec, E., “Logiciels d’aide à l’analyse des procédés”, Memento des Mines et Carrières,

nouvelle série n°3, 1997, pp. 376-396. [1997.b]

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M.-V., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., Durand, H., "A range of
**

Software for Process Analysis", 1997, SME Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado - February 24-27,

1997, preprint # 97-202. [1997.a].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Desbiens, A., Hodouin, D., Arnaud, J.-M., Fauvel, M., Charret, B.,
**

Maldonado, A., Blot, G., Poiraud, E., Terray, M., Serbon, J.-C., Delubac, G., Broussaud, A.,

Guyot, O., Soderman, P., Storeng, U., Samsog, P.O., "Optimisation des installations de broyage",

1996, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les techniques, Vol. III-IV/96, supplément à novembre 1996,

pp. 176-212. [1996.i].

**Pouthier, G., Georgeaux, A., Gourdou, J., Dodds, J., Arigon, Ch., Wavrer, Ph., Clin, F., Védrine, H.,
**

"Contrôle de la production", 1996, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les techniques, Vol. III-IV/96,

supplément à novembre 1996, pp. 102-116. [1996.h].

**Bergounioux, M., Brochot, S., Le Guirriec, E., "Méthodes SQP-Lagrangiennes Appliquées à la
**

réconciliation de données ", mai 1996, Rapport de l’Université d’Orléans, Département de

mathématiques, URA 1803 - CNRS, Orléans. [1996.g].

**Cézac, P., Truong Meyer, X.M., Joulia, X., Villeneuve, J., Morin, D., "Approche thermodynamique pour
**

la caractérisation du milieu de la lixiviation biologique d'une pyrite cobaltifère", 1996, Colloque

SIMO 96, Récents progrès en génie des procédés, Vol 10, n° 49, pp 357-363, Toulouse,

Octobre. [1996.f].

**Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J. -C., Martin, M. A. S., Lopes, G. S., "SAG Mill Modelling in USIM PAC 2:
**

Example of the CVRD Igarapé Bahia Circuit", 1996, Proceedings of the International Autogenous

and Semi Autogenous Grinding Technology 1996 Conference (SAG'96), Vancouver, Canada,

October 6-9. [1996.e].

**Villeneuve, J., Durance, M. V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., "Conception et
**

adaptation de la production de granulats par simulation", 1996, Congrès de la Société de

l'Industrie Minérale, Montpellier, 1-4 octobre 1996 [1996.d]

USIM PAC 3.1

28 Starting Guide

**Villeneuve, J., Durance, M. V., Guillaneau, J. -C., Santana, A. N., Silva, R. V. G., Martin, M. A. S.,
**

"Advanced use of column flotation models for process optimisation", 1996, Proceedings of the

International Symposium on Column Flotation (COLUMN'96), Montréal, Canada, August 25-29.

[1996.c].

**Schena, G., Villeneuve, J., Noël, Y., "A Method for a financially efficient design of cell-based flotation
**

circuits.", International Journal of Mineral Processing, April 1996, Vol 46, Nos 1-2, pp 1-20.

[1996.b]

**Le Guirriec, E., Bergounioux, M., Brochot, S., "Modélisation et résolution de problèmes de bilan
**

matière statistiquement cohérent", 1996, Communication aux Quatrièmes Journées du groupe

MODE de la SMAI, Mars 1996, Limoges, France. [1996.a].

**Brochot, S., Durance, M.V., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., "Approche objet en
**

simulation - application à la simulation des procédés de traitements des matières minérales.",

1995, XVIIème Conférence Internationale des Industries de Procédés,.Interchimie 95, Paris.

[1995.h].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Fourniguet, G., "The Supervisor of
**

Simulation: a step further to meet the Process Engineer Needs.", 1995, Proceedings of the XIX

International Mineral Processing Congress, San Francisco, USA, October 22-27. [1995.g].

**Brochot, S., Durance, M.-V., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve J., "Modelling of the
**

Minerals Diversity: a Challenge for Ore Processing Simulation", 1995, Proceedings of the 1995

EUROSIM Conference, EUROSIM’95, pp. 861-866, Vienna, Austria. [1995.f].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Olofsson, O., Durance, M.-V., Villeneuve, J., “Modelling the Sala Agitated Mill
**

(SAM) using BRGM Pilot Plant Data.”, 1995, Proceedings of the APCOM XXV 1995 Conference,

July, Brisbane, Australia, pp. 325-331. [1995.e]

**Le Guirriec, E., Brochot, S., Bergounioux, M., "An Augmented Lagrangian Method for Problems
**

Arising in Mineral Processing.", 1995, Proceedings of the 17th IFIP TC7 Conference on System

modelling and Optimization, Vol. 1, pp. 65-68, July, Prague, Czech Republic. [1995.d].

**Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., Durance, M.-V., "Flotation modelling: a wide range of solutions for
**

solving industrial problems.", 1995, Minerals Engineering, Vol. 8, n°4/5, April/May 1995, pp. 409-

420, Elsevier Science Ltd. [1995.b]

**Morizot, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., "Role of Modelling and Simulation in the development of new
**

Processes.", 1995, International Minerals and Metals Technology 1995, pp. 144-149. [1995.a].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M. V., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., "Modélisation du
**

concassage.", 1994, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les techniques, Vol. 76, supplément à

décembre 1994, pp. 67-73. [1994.h].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M. V., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., "Optimisation des
**

installations de concassage : simulation des procédés.", 1994, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les

techniques, Vol. 76, supplément à décembre 1994, pp. 114-118. [1994.g].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Durance, M. V., Libaude, J., "Exemple d'optimisation par simulation : concassage
**

secondaire d'un minerai d'or.", 1994, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Les techniques, Vol. 76,

supplément à décembre 1994, pp. 127-130. [1994.f].

**Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., Durance, M.-V., 1994, "Modélisation des séparations solide/liquide
**

dans l'industrie minérale.", Recueil des conférences du congrès Interfiltra 1994, Novembre, Paris,

pp. 284-293. [1994.e]

**Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G, 1994, "USIM PAC 2 for
**

Windows: advanced simulation of mineral processes.", Proceedings of the 5th International

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 29

**Mineral Processing Symposium, September, Cappadocia, Turkey, A. A. Balkema, pp. 539-547.
**

[1994.d]

**Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., 1994, "USIM PAC 2 for
**

Windows, the new process engineers' partner to design and optimize industrial plants.",

Proceedings of the first regional APCOM, June, Bled, Slovenia, pp. 303-312. [1994.c]

**Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1994, "Modelling and Simulation of Comminution", communication
**

presented at the ICRA workshop, May, Stockholm, Sweden. [1994.b].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M.-V., Brochot, S., Fourniguet, G., 1994, "Simulation
**

Improvements in Mineral Processing", communication presented at the first International

Symposium on Complex Ores Utilization, May, Saint Petersburg, Russia. [1994.a].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Allix, J., Arnaud, J.-M., 1993, "Optimisation des installations de concassage :
**

simulation, commande et réglage automatique des équipements.", communication presented at

the SIM Annual Meeting, October, Grenoble. [1993.f].

**Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Libaude, J., 1993, "Optimisation d'une usine de traitement de
**

minerai par simulation du fonctionnement et des caractéristiques des flux : exemple de la mine

d'or de Shila (Pérou)", communication presented at the SIM Annual Meeting, October, Grenoble.

[1993.e].

**Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Libaude, J., Villeneuve, J., 1993, "Simulation-Based optimization of
**

plants: a practical tool for the mineral industry.", Communication presented at the CIM

Metallurgical Society Annual Meeting, August, Québec, Canada. [1993.d].

**Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Fourniguet, G., Brochot, S., 1993, "Computer
**

Simulation of Mineral and Hydrometallurgical Processes: USIM PAC 2.0, a Single Software from

Design to Optimization.", Proceedings of the International Symposium on Modelling, Simulation

and Control of Hydrometallurgical Processes, August 24-September 2, Québec, Canada, pp.

109-121. [1993.c].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Durance, M.-V., Guyot, O., 1993, "Computer-aided Design and
**

Optimization of Mineral Processing Plant: USIM PAC 2.0 for Windows", Paper to be published in

Mining Magazine. [1993.b].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Durance, M.-V., Libaude, J., Ollivier, P., 1993, "Computer-aided Optimization of
**

Mineral Processing Plants, a Case Study: Increasing the Capacity of the Shila Gold Mine, Peru",

Paper presented at the SME Annual Meeting, February 15-18, Reno, Nevada, U.S.A.. Preprint #

93-222. [1993.a].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., Guyot, O., Pastol, J.-F., Villeneuve, J., 1992, "Méthodes et
**

algorithmes pour accroître l'utilité et le réalisme des simulateurs d'installations de traitement de

matières minérales.", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, Vol. 74, n° 5-92, pp. 146-

152. [1992.e].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Blot, P., 1992, "Advances in the Design and Optimization of Mineral
**

Processing Plants", Proceedings of the APCOM 92, 23rd International Symposium on the

Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industry, April 7-11, Tucson,

Arizona, U.S.A., Chapter 54, pp. 549-566. [1992.d].

**Durance, M.-V., Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J, Fourniguet, G., Brochot, S., 1992, "Advances in
**

Research on Steady-state Simulator for Mineral Processing Plants" Paper presented at the Miro

Annual Meeting, April, Coventry, United Kingdom. [1992.c].

**Libaude, J., Morizot, G., Baudet, G., Morin, D., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1992, "New Technological
**

Developments in Mineral Processing", 3rd Asia-Pacific Mining 92 Conference, March 18-21,

Philippines. [1992.b].

USIM PAC 3.1

30 Starting Guide

**Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., Pilotte, R., Broussaud, A., 1992, "Objective Driven Simulation: a new
**

Approach to Improving the Efficiency and Usefulness of Steady-state Simulators of Mineral

Processing Plants", Paper presented at the SME Annual Meeting, February 24-27, Phoenix,

Arizona, U.S.A.. Preprint # 92-168. [1992.a].

**Broussaud, A., Herbst, J., 1991, "Succès industriels de la modélisation en minéralurgie", Revue de
**

l'Industrie Minérale, Mines et Carrières, Vol. 73, décembre, pp. 30-36. [1991.h].

**Plitt, L.R., Guillaneau, J.-C., Broussaud, A., 1991, "Modélisation mathématique des hydrocyclones
**

avec décharge en boudin", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, Mines et Carrières, Vol. 73, décembre,

pp. 45-47. [1991.g].

**Blot, P., Oblad, E., Herbst, J., Villeneuve, J., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1991, "Integrating and Using an
**

Advanced SAG/AG Mill Model in the USIM PAC Mineral Processing Simulator", Proceedings of

the Conference on the Computer Applications in the Mineral Industry "Software of the 90's for the

Mineral Industry", Vancouver, BC, Canada, September 15-18, pp. 439-449. [1991.f].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., Guyot, O., Pastol, J.-F., Villeneuve, J., 1991, "Methods and
**

Algorithms to Improve the Usefulness and Realism of Mineral Processing Plant Simulators",

Proceedings of the XVII International Mineral Processing Congress, Dresden, Germany,

September 23-28, pp. 229-246. [1991.e].

**Broussaud, A., Herbst, J.A., 1991, "Optimization de plantas de proceso de minerales", Canteras y
**

explotaciones, Agosto, pp. 52-62. [1991.d].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Broussaud, A., Villeneuve, J., 1991, "Industrial Computer Methods for the Design
**

and off-line Optimization of Mineral Processing Plants", Proceedings of the XIIIrd Symposium on

Mineral Processing, Yugoslavia, May, pp. 91-96. [1991.c].

**Broussaud, A., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., Conil, P., Guyot, O., 1991, "Conception et gestion
**

des circuits de broyage assistées par ordinateur", l'Industrie Céramique, n° 860, 5/91, pp. 311-

313. [1991.b].

**Védrine, H., Broussaud, A., Conil, P., De Matos, C.F., 1991, "Modelling the Flotation Kinetics of a
**

Polymetallic Sulphide Ore", Paper presented at the SME Annual Meeting, February 25-28,

Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.. [1991.a].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Villeneuve, J., Broussaud, A., 1990, "Un nouvel outil pour concevoir et/ou optimiser
**

une criblerie", Journées "Carrières, vers une gestion optimale", Haute et Basse Normandie,

décembre. [1990.g].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., Fourniguet, G., 1990, "Practical Computer Methods for the Design
**

and Adaptation of Mineral Processing Plants", Paper presented at the VIth Simposium Sobre

Molienda, Chile, November. [1990.f].

**Broussaud, A., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., Conil, P., Guyot, O., 1990, "Conception et gestion
**

assistée par ordinateur des circuits de broyage", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques,

Vol. 72, n° 4-90, pp. 144-150. [1990.e].

**Broussaud, A., Fourniguet, G., Franck, J., Conil, P., 1990, "Quantitative Analysis of the Accuracy of
**

Steady State Simulation of Mineral Processing Plants", Proceedings of the CONTROL'90,

Mineral and Metallurgical Processing, SME, Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A., February 26-March 1,

pp. 13-21. [1990.d].

**Védrine, H., Broussaud, A., Conil, P., De Matos, C.F., 1990, "Modélisation de la cinétique de flottation
**

d'un minerai sulfuré polymétallique", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, mars-avril,

pp. 79-87. [1990.c].

**Plitt, L.R., Conil, P., Broussaud, A., 1990, "Technical note, an Improved Method of Calculating the
**

Water-split in Hydrocyclones", Minerals Engineering, Vol. 3, n° 5, pp. 533-535. [1990.b].

USIM PAC 3.1

Starting Guide 31

**Broussaud, A., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., Conil, P., Guyot, O., 1990, "Conception assistée par
**

ordinateur d'un circuit de broyage", Ciments, Bétons, Plâtres, Chaux, n° 784, 3/90, octobre, pp.

205-208. [1990.a].

**Ollivier, P., Blot, P., 1989, "Computer Aided Design of a Gold Ore Grinding Circuit", Proceedings of
**

the Randol Wokshop, Phase IV, Sacramento, California, U.S.A., November 10-11, pp. 39-42.

[1989.i].

**Conil, P., De Matos, C.F., Broussaud, A., Ferrao, C., 1989, "Modelling of the Autogenous Grinding of
**

the Moinho (Portugal) Complex Sulphide Ore", Proceedings of the International Conference on

Autogenous/Semi-Autogenous Grinding, Vancouver, BC, Canada, September 25-27, pp. 741-

758. [1989.h].

**Broussaud, A., Conil, P., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1989, "USIM PAC : premier logiciel intégré
**

d'aide à la conception et à l'optimisation des usines de traitement des minerais", Revue de

l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, juillet, pp. 1-12. [1989.g].

**Broussaud, A., Conil, P., Védrine, H., Ferrao, C.N, Coelho, J., Matos, C.F., 1989, "Modelling of an
**

Autogenous Grinding and Flotation Process. Application to the Industrial Processing of the

Moinho Complex Sulphide Ore", CANMET/EEC Meeting on Complex Sulphide Ore, Ottawa,

June. [1989.f].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., Pastol, J.-F, Jourdan, M., Ghibu, C., Perisse, R., 1989,
**

"Development and Application of a Modular Intelligent Control System for Mineral Processing

Plants", EEC Seminar on Mineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy, Warren Spring

Laboratories, Stevenage, U.K., February 27th and 28th. [1989.e].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., Fourniguet, G., Conil, P., Blot, P., 1989, "A revolutionary tool for
**

Mineral Processing Plant Design and Optimization", Paper presented at the SME Annual

Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A.. [1989.d].

**Lanthier, R., Hodouin, D., Guillaneau, J.-C., Broussaud, A., 1989, "Real-Time mass Balance
**

Calculation for a Pilot Grinding Circuit", Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Canadian

Mineral Processor, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. [1989.c].

**Guillaneau, J.-C., Broussaud, A., Lanthier, R., Hodouin, D., 1989, "Mise en oeuvre d'une stratégie de
**

valorisation en ligne des mesures pour la conduite d'un circuit pilote de broyage", Revue de

l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, novembre-décembre, pp. 8-16. [1989.b].

**Morizot, G., Legret, D., Croisé, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1989, "Pilotage de la flottation d'un minerai
**

sulfuré polymétallique : le cas Chessy", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, Vol. 71, n°

3-89, pp. 153-160. [1989.a].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., Conil, P., Fourniguet, G., Ragot, J., Bloch, G., Hanton, E., 1988,
**

"Poste de contrôle intelligent dédié aux procédés de traitement des minerais", Communication

présentée au colloque Ressources du sous-sol organisé par le Ministère de la Recherche, 26-27

septembre. [1988.g].

**Broussaud, A., 1988, "Advanced Computer Methods for Mineral Processing: Their Functions and
**

Potential Impact on Engineering Practices", Proceedings of the XVI International Mineral

Processing Congress, Stockholm, Sweden, June 5-10, Elsevier, Developments in Mineral

Processing, Vol. 10.A, pp. 17-44. [1988.f].

**Bourassa, M., Barbery, G., Broussaud, A., Conil, P., 1988, "Flotation Kinetic Scale up: Comparison of
**

Laboratory Batch Test to Pilot Plant Processing", Proceedings of the XVI International Mineral

Processing Congress, Stockholm, Sweden, June 5-10, Elsevier. Developments in Mineral

Processing, Vol. 10.A, pp. 579-588. [1988.e].

**Broussaud, A., Conil, P., Fourniguet, G., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1988, "USIM: an easy to use Simulator for
**

Mineral Processing Plants", Proceedings of the First Canadian Conference on the Computer

USIM PAC 3.1

32 Starting Guide

**Applications in the Mineral Industry, March, Québec, Canada, A.A. Balkema, Rotherdam, pp.
**

137-145. [1988.d].

**Broussaud, A., Clin, F., Croisé, G., Fourniguet, G., 1988, "Méthodologie d'échantillonnage et bilans
**

matière cohérents dans un pilotage de minerai sulfuré", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les

Techniques, mars-avril, pp. 165-170. [1988.c].

**Conil, P., Broussaud, A., Niang, S., Delubac, G., 1988, "Utilisation d'un simulateur pour l'aide à
**

l'évaluation d'hypothèses d'évolution d'un atelier de concentration à l'usine de phosphates de

Taïba (Sénégal)", Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, janvier-février, pp. 21-29.

[1988.b].

**Broussaud, A., Guillaneau, J.-C., 1988, "Modèles d'opérations unitaires en minéralurgie", Informatique
**

dans l'Industrie Minérale, Revue de l'Industrie Minérale, les Techniques, numéro spécial,

novembre, Vol. 70, pp. 146-172. [1988.a].

USIM PAC 3.1

- John DUploaded byRita Isabel Azevedo
- MPT_pptUploaded byBalachandran P Kamath
- Hobart 4246Uploaded byEnmanuel Tavera
- GABUNGAN.pdfUploaded byakbar
- ddddUploaded byVishwajeet Gadhvi
- PWS2014 Rawlins DesanderStudyRUploaded byJhon Henry Segundo Llaguento
- fichier01Uploaded byfetni
- Mineral Processing IntroductionUploaded bysrinath1234
- 1Uploaded byMIYBAR5059
- Equipos.docxUploaded byDaniel Vargas Caicedo
- 284-JECS16-ballmillingUploaded bysumohi
- modsimUploaded byJonathan Esqueche Aragon
- Prospekt Qmc en Rz OnlineUploaded byjayant2511
- Roller Press 1Uploaded bybipinagarwal
- 2014 Scale-up of Batch Grinding Data for SimulationUploaded byCan Ozer
- SL00-383 SBJUploaded byajeshkrishnan
- IncidentManagerpoweredbyWebEOCBoardDescriptions.pptUploaded bymalsi
- articol 4.pdfUploaded byFlorr
- W1 - Introduction to System Modelling and SimulationUploaded byNur Shiyaam
- Use of Simulated Process ModelUploaded byjokish
- Manual of Transportation Engineering StudiesUploaded byStivenStifler
- PedScTUploaded byGuido Aguirre
- NoLoughOnMeUploaded bysfofoby
- 19095Uploaded byPAVANFEB02
- JournalUploaded bymynameteacherija
- Grinding equipment for aquatic feed pelletsUploaded byInternational Aquafeed magazine
- ASEE-2012 Integrat Business Process Simulation SoftwareUploaded bymasterwolfx
- Administración de La Calidad - 1ed - Donna CS SummersUploaded byFelipe Fuentealba
- Acta PaperUploaded byDyingUmbrella
- Grinding Media Composition and QualityUploaded byanrulo