You are on page 1of 5

MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY - ILIGAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Department of Metallurgical Engineering


METE 128: MINERAL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
Bond Work Index

Alvizo, Angelica B.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

I. Introduction

Comminution, especially grinding stage, is Work indices of common ores and its
the greatest energy consumer in mineral relation to hardness of solid are shown below.
processing accounting to about 50% of the
concentrator’s energy cost. Hence, comminution Table I.A. Average Bond Work Index of
theory is concerned with the relationship different materials (by Fred C. Bond)
between energy input and the particle size made Mineral/Ore Average Bond Work Index
from a given feed size. (Wills, 2006) (Wi, kWh/t)
Most of the energy input to a crushing or Andesite 20.1
grinding machine is absorbed by the machine Barite 6.3
Basalt 18.9
itself, and only a small fraction of the total
Bauxite 9.7
energy is available for breaking the material Cement clinker 15.0
(Wills, 2006), thus the more the need to develop Coke 16.7
methods to minimize energy consumption. Silica Sand 15.5
Bond (1952) developed an equation that
measures the ore grindability, the ease with Table I.B. Typical Values of Wi in relation with
which materials can be comminuted. It is based hardness
solely on the theory that the work input is Property Soft Medium Hard Very
proportional to the new crack tip length Hard
produced in particle breakage, and equals the Wi 7-9 9-14 14-20 >20
work represented by the product minus that
represented by the feed (Wills, 2006). It could Bond Work Index Test was performed in
express the resistance of the material to breakage this activity to be able to familiarize and
consequently predicting energy requirement and demonstrate the procedure. Furthermore, to
grinding efficiencies. determine its significant principles and be able
Bond Work Index (Wi), the most widely used to solve its calculations.
parameter, is defined as the energy required in
kilowatt-hours per ton of ore required to break II. Methodology
from infinite size to a product size of 80%
Sample Preparation
passing 100 μm. This is considered as a major
Dry sand passed through a sieve of 6 mesh
breakthrough in comminution processes
(3360 microns) and underwent Jones Riffles’
reducing energy usage hence decreasing total
sampling method obtaining about three
operational costs.
kilograms of sample.
Representative sample underwent particle of the sample was calculated using the equation
size analysis using a rotary shaker to determine below.
size distribution. Rosin-Rammler sieve analysis
was used to generate an equation that would ………….Eqn. 2
evaluate the 80% of the feed that passes. ( )
√ √
The bulk density was determined by adding where
the sample slowly in increments in a 1000-mL Pi = test screen size in microns (or
graduated cylinder to 700-mL mark, considering MOG)
this the volume, and taking its equivalent mass. Gpr = avg mass of undersize per mill
Intended Product Passing or Ideal Potential revolution (g/rev)
Product (IPP) was calculated using the 700-mL P80 = 80% passing size of the circuit
equivalent mass which was later used in product in microns
grinding stage. F80 = 80% passing size of the original
IPP(grams) = …………Eqn. 1 feed in microns.

Grinding
The grinding charge of an 8”x10” ball mill Figure II.A. Process Flowchart for Bond Work
consists of steel balls with varying diameters and Index Test
catching pan was cleaned. Estimated total
surface area of the 191 steel balls weighing 20 •Sample Preparation
125 grams is 842 in2. To ensure uniform feed for
grinding, a representative sample was charged to
•Particle Size Analysis
the mill to be thrown away thereafter.
Initial period of grinding was charged with
the weighed 700-mL sample at 100 revolutions. •Determination of F80
The mill charged collected in the catching pan
was then screened at the mesh of grind (MOG) -
180 microns. •Grinding and seiving at MOG
After each grinding stage, the undersize (-
180 μm) and oversize (+180 μm) products were
weighed to determine the number of revolutions •Particle Size Analysis
required for the next period. Afterwards, the
oversize product was fed back to the ball mill for
another set of run with the additional specific •Determination of F80
fractional amount (undersize+loss) of each
sample sizes based on the result gathered in the •Data gathering, Analysis, and
particle size analysis in order to maintain the Calculations
material charge. This process was repeated
thrice, achieving three periods of grinding stage.
Another screen analysis was carried out, this
time to determine the 80% of the product that III. Results and Discussion
passes by using the undersize product of the It is assumed that the bond ball mill grinds a
third period. Subsequently, the bond work index constant 700-mL of the sample material. The
possible reason for using a constant volume of
material than the mass itself is that a constant
volume allows a better comparison of different Figure 3.A. Rosin-Rammler Plot for Feed Size
materials’ resistance to ball milling. The Distribution
0
standard volume of 700 mL only occupies 35%
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8
of voids within the ball charge in the bond mill
-0.5
hence making the test faster. This percentage is
lower than expected in industrial mills.

log(log 100/R)
-1
Material charge: 931.5 g
Bulk Density: 1.3307 g/mL -1.5 y = 3.1452x - 8.64753
IPP Material Charge: 266.14 g
Size distribution through particle size -2
analysis is shown below to obtain 80% passing
of the feed, F80, using Rosin-Rammler equation: -2.5
log(Nominal Aperture Size)
( ( )) …….Eqn. 3

Table 3.1. Particle Size Analysis of the Feed From the data gathered in Table 3.1, Rosin-
Nominal Mass %mass Cum. Cum. Rammler Plot, Figure 3.A, generated a linear
Aperture Retained retained %mass %mass equation similar to Equation 3 that could
Size retained passing
calculate the 80% passing of feed, F80.
300 μm 2 300.00 77.1 77.1 22.9
212 μm 192.91 6.5 83.6 16.4
180 μm 333.30 11.2 94.8 5.2 ( ( )) ( )
150 μm 60.33 2.0 96.8 3.2
106 μm 59.51 2.0 98.8 1.2 F80 = 507.1 μm
-106 μm 34.78 1.2 100.0 --
Total 2980.83 This calculation indicates that the nominal
Loss = 19.17 g
Table 3.2. Feed Sieve Analysis for Rosin- aperture size in which 80% of the feed passes is
Rammler greater than the coarsest sieve used during the
Nominal log(nominal Cum. log(log sieve analysis which is 507.1 μm.
Aperture aperture %mass (100/R))
Size size) retained, R During grinding, more data were gathered
300 μm 2.48 77.1 -0.947 and analysed shown in Table 3.3. Formulas
212 μm 2.33 83.6 -1.109 required in construction the table are also given.
180 μm 2.26 94.8 -1.635
150 μm 2.18 96.8 -1.850
106 μm 2.03 98.8 -2.280

Grinding Mass (g) Mass (g) Loss Refill Total Mass (g) Mass (g) Mills Mass (g) Recycle Mill
Stage +180μm -180μm From mass (g) refill -180μm -180μm revolution -180μm Load revolution
produced produced milling Required used in refill milling required per rev next run

i 931.5 - 48.438 100

1 803.1 105.8 22.6 128.4 931.5 48.438 79.9 100 0.8 259.5 324.7

2 633.4 278.9 19.2 298.1 128.4 6.675 291.5 325 0.9 250.6 279.4

3 548.6 377.6 5.3 382.9 298.1 15.501 367.4 279 1.3 246.2 189.4

Table 3.3. Data obtained from Grinding for Bond Work Index Calculation
means that 80% of the product passes through
Mass (g) -180μm in refill = Total refill used (% passing 134.6 micron sieve. Gathering all the data
180μm) requirements, Bond Work Index can be
Refill mass required = Mass -180μm produced + loss
calculated using Equation 2.
Mass -180μm milling = Refill mass req – Mass -180μm in
refill
Mass -180μm/rev = Mass -180μm milling/mills revolution
Recycle load = IPP - Refill mass (% passing 180μm)
( )
Mill revolution next run = Recycle load/ Mass -180μm/rev √ √

From Table 3.3, average mass of undersize


per mill per mill revolution (g/rev), Gpr, for work This experimental result implies that the
index calculation can be determined which is energy requirement for this sample material to
equivalent to 1. Mass -180 μm produced in the achieve 180 micron sieve (80 mesh of grind) is
third period, 377.6 g, was subjected to Rosin- approximately 32.56 kW-h per ton of ore.
Rammler sieve analysis to be able to calculate Categorizing this bond work index to the
the 80% passing of the product, P80. typical values shown in Table I.B, it can be
established that the sample material is very hard.
Table 3.4. Product Sieve Analysis for Rosin- However, it is apparent in Table I.A that the
Rammler average bond work index for silica sand is only
Nominal Log Mass Cum. log(log around 15.5. This gives a relative error of 1.1
Aperture (nominal retained %mass (100/R))
Size aperture retained, from the true value vs. experimental value.
size) R Human error, improper laboratory
180 μm 2.26 - - - instruments, and the number of periods are some
150 μm 2.18 45.4 12.1 -0.03752
factors that can be blamed for this inaccuracy;
106 μm 2.03 109.9 41.4 -0.41680
-106 μm - 219.9 100.0 however the major contributor that widened the
375.2 discrepancy is the type of material used for this
Loss – 2.4 g activity. Fine materials, such as sand, are not
suitable for Bond Work Index Test. The material
Figure 3.B. Rosin-Rammler Plot for Product for bond grindability test should be coarse
Size Distribution enough to allow stage crushing in the
preparation of the specified -6 mesh (3360
-0.03 2.01 2.06 2.11 2.16 microns) feed to the test mill. (Levin, 1989)
-0.08
-0.13 IV. Conclusions
log(log 100/R)

-0.18
Determination of Bond Work Index of a
-0.23 material before subjecting to comminution
-0.28 processes helps in predicting energy requirement
-0.33 y = 2.51531x - 5.51108 thus lowering energy costs in industrial mills. It
-0.38 could truly represent the material’s resistance to
breaking implying an increase in value also
-0.43
log(Nominal Aperture Size) means a higher residence time or higher number
of revolutions needed in order to crush the ore
Using the linear equation generated in
leading to high energy consumption. The
Figure 3.B, the value P80 is 134.6 μm which
experimental result of sand’s bond work index
after three period of grinding showed a large
error from the true value. It is best recommended
to use a different material that is coarse enough
to allow stage crushing in the preparation of the
specified -6 mesh (3360 microns) feed to the test
mill.
Nevertheless, the bond work index test was
an accomplishment in terms of educating the
students its significance, calculations, and
procedures which is the main objective of the
activity.

V. References

F.C. Bond. (1961). "Crushing and Grinding


Calculations", British Chemical Engineering,
pp.378-385.

Levin, J. (1989). Observations on the Bond


standard grindability test, and a proposal for a
standard grindability test for fine materials. J. S.
At,. Inst. Min. Metal/., vol. 89, no. 1. pp. 13-21.

Wills, B. A. (2006). Will’s Mineral Processing


Technology. Metallurgical accounting, control
and simulation: Sample Division Methods. (7th
ed.). Elsevier Science & Technology Books

You might also like