215
Methods for Determinationof Breakage DistributionParameters
L. G. AUSTIN and P_ T_ LUCKIE
Departmmrof hfmeriat Sc5cnces. P~Irania Sra:e ihicer~ir);
(Received March 18. 1971; in x-wised form Ma>- 15, 1971)
Summary
iThe distriburion of primary breakage producrs in
laboratory mills can be estimated b-v batch grinding
for short times_ 77wee methodr are giren for mani-
pulatkzg the data, the second and third melhods
correcting for secondary breakage. _Wezhod III is
the most accurate, but since it uses the speczjk rates
of breakage of xhe uarious sizes in lhe correction
procedure it is necessary IO hm;e experinrenral or
theoretical esCmn&s of these caIues_ A general
cornpurer program is given for the compwtalions.
Ih?RODUCTION
The treatment of grinding as a rate process with
the unit operation of grinding being equivalent to
reactor design, is receiving considerable attention
at presentr_ As part of the size-mass balance de-
scription of grinding it is necessary to determine
experimentally the size-mass distribution of frag-
ments produced by the primary breakage of a
narrowsizefractionofmaterial_Intbissense.primary
breakage is defined as producing smaller fragments
which are remixed into the charge in the mii and
have to wait their turn to be reselected for further
breakage. The specific rates of breakage &) of a
given size fraction depend on this selection-for-
breakage and are incorporated into the equations of
grinding’ ; the objective of this note is to discuss
methods of dete rmining the primary breakage dis-
tribution without the interference of the secondary
breakage of :be fragments by reselection for break-
age-
THEORY
The simplest waya to determine the breakage
distribution is to batch grind a sample of the size of
tirzircrx$r Park. Pa. I Li_S_A_)
interest for a short period of time, sample the re-
sulting material, and perform a size analysis of tie
material broken smaller than the starting size ne
most convenient way of displaying the results is the
cumulative breakage distribution B, defined as
follows The size range is split into a number of size
intervals, often a geometric progression of sir\;es
and numbered 1 for the top size interval, 2 for the
second, and so on down to n, n being the size range
zero to the bottom size of tbe n- 1 interval_ Bij is
then the weight fraction of material broken from
size i which falls less than the upper size of size
interval i In non-cumulative form. b:_;= BLi- Bi+ Ij
= the weight fraction broken from sizei which falls
into size interval i Experimentally,~ is the top size
intervak and tbe set of values Bi 1 is plotted rzrsz~
particle size (upper size of intemal‘i), passing throuch
1 at i=2 (see Fig 1. for example)_ This method-is
called the one-size fraction method.
An experimental variation (the tracer method)
involves following in similar fashion the traced
breakage products of a traced fractionzV where the
tracing enables the material to be distinguished
from other material_ This has the advantage that
breakage of the size of interest can be followed in a
mixture of other sizes, and it is not necessary to
produce a starting batch of material all of this size
This technique can also sometimes be applied to
continuous grindin$ with the traced fraction added
to ?L- feed, since the traced material coming out of
the miff after 30 set, for example, has in effca been
batch ground for 30 set (this assumes that different
sizes move &rough the miil at the srme rate with no
preferential classification at tbe 61 tit).
If the time of grind is very short so that only a few
per cent of the starting fraction is broken, then it
can be assumed that the reselection for breakaae of
the products is negligible, and a simple cala&ion
(Method I, see Appendix) can be applied HoweI-er,
there are problems with Method LA correction has
to be made for sieving error- More importan; the
Pom-der T&l_ 5 (1971/G’?)

I””
P mation, and the method works best for the one-size
zo ,B 16 14 I2 10 B 6
SIZE WC& IHTERVALSI
Fi_e 1. Values of S and B used to simulate%ei_eht-size-time
distributions.
assumption of negligible rebreakage is only good for
short times which give only small build-up of
products; for short times, however, it is sometimes
not possible to get accurate size analyses of the
broken fractions because they are small percentages
of the total sample. Because of sieving error 6, the
starting size is usually l-6 in size 1 and 6 in size 2;
if S is large, the 2 material will undergo appreciable
breakage and to avoid this it is necessary to perform
accurate preparation of the initial size, to keep S low,
which can be tedious experimentally- These prob
Iems can sometimes be overcome by performing
several tests (e.g. for grinds of 15 set, 30 set, 1 min
etc) and extrapolating the results to near zero time,
but again this is ex_perimentalIy tedious and requires
precise size analysis_ In the continuous tracer
method, the minimum time at which traced material
leaves the mill may not be short enough to avoid
secondary brpakage.
Method II (see Appendix) partially eliminates
these problems, by performing an approximate
correction for secondary breakage_ -4s presented
here it is a modified form of that first used by Herbst
and Fuerstenaus_ Experimentally it is similar to
those discussed above, but the calculation method
is different_ It assumes that the expression S,B,, is a
function of i only and not J PhysicaIIy, thrs means
I_ G. AUSTIN, P. T. LUCKIE
that the specific rate of production of material of less
than size i from larger size i is not dependent on i-
Cne form of the equation of batch grinding is
dPi(t)/dr = i B,&[P,(r)-P,, r (r)] (1)
‘X i
where Pi(r) is the fraction or percentage less than the
upper size of size interval i at time t. When S$&=
function i only,
l-Pi(r)= [l-q(O)] exp(-SS,Qr) (2)
The Appendix shows how this gives
log [(l --pi(O))l(l -HO)1
Bi_l -z (3)
~~gCU-WW-~2(~)l
The major disadvantage of Method II is that the
assumption of SjBi+j= function i only is an approxi-
4 2
fraction method [which has P2(0)= s(O), etc,=O]
for short grind times. However, it is certainly an
improvement over Method I since it can be used at
longer grind times, and where the values of P,(O),
P,(O), etc. are not zero.
Method III, as formtdated in the Appendix, is the
most versatile method of calculating B values as it
can be used with quite large amounts of material in
the lower size fractions, both in the starting feed and
the distribution at time t, and it works when S,-B,,-
values are not approximately constant. However, it
requires an estimate of the values of S, and it is
complex enough to require computer calculation
rather than hand calculation (see Appendix). If two
or three S vaiues for different sixes are known experi-
mentally, interpolation from S (log scale) reT= x
(log scale) can be used to get the required values of S.
It is the preferred method if reasonable estimates of
S can be made.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In order to test the three methods of calculating
B, sets of simulated size distributions were generated
using postulated values of S and B, and a feed
consisting of 97% in the top size interval [wZ(0)=
0.033. The values of S and B used are shown in Fig 1,
and the size distributions generated are shown in
Figs 2 and 3. (The value of S for an interval is
plotted ~ersuli the upper size of the interval.) The
simulated size distributions were generated by
solving eqn_ (1) on a digital computers, assuming
Powder Technol, 5 (1971/Z)
DETERMINATION OF BREAKAGE DISTRIBLZION PARAMEl-ERS 217

that the B values are normalized. that %GB,_ 1 = B,_, =

B 5.3, etc. B4_, = B5_:! = Be_,, etc and so on-The three
methods of calculating B were then applied to
selectedsizedisttibutionsSincethesizedistributions
are simulated by exact computation there is no
GRINDING TIME. 30MlN experimental error in the curves and a comparison
of the calculated B values with the known B KAXS
demonstrates non-random error caused bv the
assumptions made in the method of calculation.
It will be noted that values of S and B have been
used. which have the same slope (on log-log scales)
for the smaher-size intervaIs. If this slope is z
s&S, = (0.841)=+ i’
B,, = b(0.831~‘-1’ _ i > 7

fcr the set 2 data of Fig I_ Assuming that B ~-alues

are normalized, Bij= B,_i_ E_1. and hence

SiB,j = (S,)(O_841)‘“- “(b)(O_S41)=+~‘. I >j+7

= (b)(S,)(O_S31)=+”
a .
P = function i only, not j _
a
*
,.,,,‘,,....

20 a* 16 14 l2 10
.r....
6 6 4
-.
2
Thus the data. set 2 in particular, has been chosen
SIZE I,,.%& 1NTERVAL.S~ so that the criterion necessary for Method II to apply
Fig L Wcighht-sizcdislributiox for YI 1. A calcuiarcd using BII is satisfied over part of the size range If the x-alues of
containing error_ B had been chosen such that they passed through
b = 1, then the Method II criterion would be exactly
Oi- satisfied for the set 2 data. and it would always give
I exactly the correct ralues of B from any of the size
distributions In pncti e, however, this would be an
0 1 unrealistic set of B nlues since experimental values
for balI and rod mihing have the general shapeshown
although the slope z and the value of b XT+- from
material to materiaL There are also data for other
o- milling systems in whi& the slope of the S plot I is
not close to the slope of the B plot, fl_
Considering Table I it can be seen that the three
D
methods are all reasonably satisfactory for only a
P
0
0
o-
small percentage of breakage from size intenal 1.
0
P
0
2 YIN
0 although even here Method I has significant error_
v
0 P The error would be less for S curves in vhicb S
5- 0 decreases rapidly with smaller partide size. because
0
0
P
the reIative amount of breakage from the lower size
p 0.5 YIN
intervals would then be less At approximateIy 2Opd
09 P broken from size intend 1, Method II has developed
2 P
P
significant error, which is increased for the data at
P
P
approximately40°/0 broken from size 1. Forexample,
P considering the fine material, final size interval 20.
Method II gives 29% from the 1.6 min distribution
*
P

1[ and 3.5 o/0from the 4-O min distribution, compared to

i ?o 18 16 14 12 IO 6 6 4 2
SIZE U/4& INTERVALS1 a true value of 2S”/$ When these wrong G&ES are
Fig 3. Wci&+six dktribntiom for sex 2 used to caIcuIate size distributions for 30 mitt
218 I_ G. AUSTIN. P. T. LUCKIE

TABLE I

B values for set 1 (maximum in S)

Stie True r=O.I min t=1.6 min t =4_0 min

inrenxl B
BI BII BIZI BZ BZI 8111 BZ BII BZIZ

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 0.680 0.72 0.7 068 0.75 0.71 0.680 A.80 0.73 LO
4 0.463 0.49 0.475 O-463 0.54 0.50 0.465 0.62 OS4 0.474
5 0.313 0.33 0.323 0.313 0.39 0.36 0.315 0.49 0.41 0328
6 0.212 0.23 0220 0212 029 026 0214 0.38 032 0226
7 0 146 0.16 0.152 0.146 021 0.19 0.148 0_30 025 0.156
s 0.100 011 0.105 0.1 0.16 0.14 0.101 024 0.19 cl106
9 0.088 0094 0.09 1 0.088 0.13 0.12 0.088 0.20 0.16 0.0885
10 0.079 0084 0.08 1 O-079 0.11 0.10 0.079 0.17 0.13 0.0767
11 0071 0.075 0.073 0.07 I 0.098 0.087 0.070 O-14 0.11 o-069
12 0.0635 0067 00648 0.0635 00S6 0.076 0.0632 0.12 0.097
13 0.0567 0.060 0_0578 O-0567 0.076 0.067 0.0564 0.11 0.084 0.0548
14 0.050 0_053 0.05 1 0.05 0.066 0.059 0.0498 0.094 0.073 0.0489
15 0.0445 0.047 0.0445 0.059 0.052 0.0444 0.083 0.061 0.0440
16 0.W o-w3 o.wO7 0.040 0.053 0.047 0.040 0.073 0.057 0.0398
i7 0.0357 0.038 0.0364 0.0357 0.047 0.041 0.065 0.050 0.0357
18 0.0318 0.034 0.0324 0.0318 0.042 0.037 0.03 18 0.058 0.044 0.0318
19 0.0283 0 030 0.0288 0.0283 0.037 0.033 O-0283 O-051 O-039 0.0284
20 0.0250 0.026 0.0255 0 0250 0.033 0.029 0.0250 0.045 0.035 0.0250

T_4BLE II
B values for set 2 (power function for S)

SIX T#-Ue t=O_Z min t = O-4 min t = 2.0 min

inrenxd B
Bi BZZ BZIZ BI BIZ BIZI BI BII BZIZ-

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I
3 0.680 0.7 1 0.686 0.680 0.74 0.690 b.680 0.84 0.719 0.680
4 0.463 0.49 O-469 0.463 0.52 0.477 0.463 0.67 0.51 0.49
5 0.313 0.33 0319 0.313 0.36 0.329 0.314 0.52 037 0.34
6 0.212 0.23 0217 0_212 0.25 0.227 Qz13 0.40 0.27 0.23
7 0.146 0.16 0.150 0.146 0.18 0.159 0.147 030 010 0.16
8 0.100 0.11 0.103 0.100 O.I3 0.111 O_lOO 023 0.15 0.11
9 0.088 0.094 0.089 0.088 0.11 0.095 &OS8 0.19 0.12 O-091
10 0.079 0.084 0.080 0.079 O-093 O-082 0.079 a15 0.095 0.080
11 0.07 1 0.075 0.07 1 0.071 0.083 0.072 O-07 1 0.13 o.oso O-07 1
12 0.0635 0.067 0.0635 0.0635 0.073 O-0641 0.0635 Qll 0.067 QO64
13 0.0567 0.060 0.0567 0 0567 0.065 0~0570 0.0567 0.099 0.060
14 0.05aJ 0.053 0.0500 9-0500 O-057 QO502 0_0500 a087 0_052 0.051
15 O-0445 O~Gl7 ODl4.5 O-0445 0.051 0.0446 0_0445 O-077 O-Q46 OXM6
16 O-0400 0.032 0.0400 O.O?.MJ O-046 0.0400 0.01oo 0.068 O-041 CO41
17 0.0357 0.037 0.0357 0.0357 0.041 0.0357 0.0357 0.061 0.036 0.037
18 Q0318 0.034 a0318 0.0318 0.036 0.0318 0.0318 O-054 0.032 O-033
19 0.0283 O-030 0.0283 a0283 O-032 0.0283 011283 0.048 0.0285 O-029
20 0.0250 0.026 0.0250 0.0250 0.029 O-0250 a0250 o.cJ43 QO253 O-026

p2 8.32% 25% =4%

DEERMINATION OF BREAKAGE DISTRIBUTION PARAMETERS 219

grinding the error in the final interval is very
pronounced (see Fig 2). Method III is quite satis-
factory for aII three times It is our experience that
accurate size distributions can be obtained at about
3040% broken out without elaborate experimental
procedures, but that below 20% it ‘becomes necessary
to run several careful tests to get a good average or
get data which can be extrapolated to zero time_
Considering Table II, Method II is satisfactory
even at approximately 65 o/0broken out. Method III
is also satisfactory_ It is concluded that when the
parameters are of the form of set 2 Method II can be
applied, requiring no preliminary knowledge of S
values.
Our current practice is to use Method II to get a
first estimate of B values, use these to estimate S
values by back-calcuIation’, and use these estimates
of S to calculate B by Method III. If the two sets of B
values are in agreement, satisfactory S and B values
have been obtained_ If not, the Method III B values
are used to recalculate S values
Table III shows Methods II and III applied to
calculate B from a starting distribution which is not
all of size 1, ground for a relatively short period of
time (4 min). Even in this case, the BIII values
accurately regenerated the size distributions and are
satisfactory (the BII values are again radically in
error). This result means that it is no longer necesmry
to prepare a batch of material closely sieved to size 1
to run a test; any reasonable starting material can
be used providing the size analysis is accurately
determined This _yeatly reduces sample preparation
time_ However, rt must be remembered that the
simulated data used normalized B values. whereas
we have many experimental examples where this is
not a valid assumption The advantage of the one-
size fraction method app!ied for a small deFee of
breakage is that the BII or BIII values are predomi-
nantly produced by breaka_? from size interval I_
If a wide starting size distnbution is used, the B
values calculated are weighted means of the sire
intervalsinvolved and it is not possible to distinguish
Bi., from Biw2 from Biw3_etc’_
CONCLUSIONS
Three methods are presented for determining
breakage distribution parameters, based on different
approximations of varying complexity_ Method III
is generally more satisfactory than Method IL and
Method I is only applicable under special conditions
However, Method III requires an estimate of the
values of specific rates of breakage_

REFERESCES
TABLE III
I L G. Austin, K. J. Rdd and P. T. Luclic, Woriirhop on Grinding
B values for Set 1 calculated from non-single size feed
Circuirs. PemqIr4mia Stare Unirersir_r, &fay JO-IA 1970:
I_ G. Austin. Theory and Pracrice of Grkdinu. Chynber of
Size t=4min TIlLI?
ia?rzal dfine& Johannesburg. Smah Afnka. _4& 17-Y; i970. -
B
2 R P_ Gardner and L_ G. AnSin. in H. Rumpfand D_ B.zkrcns
P(O) P I41 BII BIII
(eds), In ElarGpean symp_ i%?rH&em Vcrlq chunic
1 1 I 1 I 1
u’cinhdm. 196L p_ 217.
3 D. E K&all, ZL J. Reid and C J. RcsxuicL Pmrdcr Technol
2 0.415 0.047 1 1 1
1 (5) (1968) 291.
3 0308 0534 0.78 (1680 Q680
4 J. A Hcrbst and D. W_ Fucmcna~~. Trans. AI.%f& MI (196s)
4 0.239 0.449 0.64 O-47 0.463
538.
O_lS7 0382 054 0313
z 5 P. T. Luckx and I, G. Austin, A review in~rodoction IO rhc
z a148 0327 a47 021’
7 0.117 solorion of rho grinding upations by digital wmpuution,
0279 0.40 u15 (L146
0.093 0.237 0.M 0.106
Afirsrpksci &g_, (in press).
8 0.100
6 R R Klimpcl and L_ G.Fcaszin. I&. Eaq_ Ckznz Frmdpmenmk,
9 GO77 Ozcu 02.9 GO90 GOSS
9 (2) (197C) 230.
10 O-065 Gl?S 025 GO78 GO79
7 L_ G. Austin and V_ tC_ B-ktia, Expcrimmral muhods for
11 GO.55(5) GISO 021 GO69 GO71
grinding srudia in taborator~; mills, Powder TechrwL, 5
12 0.018 0.129 0.18 0.061 O-0635
(1971/72) 261.
13 GO41 (5) 0.111 0.15 GOSS GO567
14 O-036 Go96 Q13 0049 a050
15 O-032 Cl084 0.11 a044 Qcu45 APPENDIX: CALCUIATION OF B V_4LUES FROW
16 0*028 GO73 0.094 0.040 OD4Oo WEIGH-l--SIZE DISl-RIBUI’lONS AT SHORT TIMES OF
17 0.025 O-065 o*Os 1 0.036 a0357 E4TCH GRINDING
18 a022 O-057 a071 a032 GO318
19 GO197 o_osO GO63 (1029 ao2s3
20 0.0175 acus GO55 GO25 QO250
First approximation I Method I
The experimental technique is to start with a

Powder TechnoL. 5 (1971/R)

 220 L. G. AUSTIN, P. T. LUCKIE

charge which is almost entirely in the top size than s& i (size i being the top sim of interval i)_ This
interval. A sample of this is resieved, and it is gives an analytical solution to the equation of batch
generally found that a certain fractional amount, 6 grinding since S$&= constant for given value of i
say, will pass through into the second size interval
Thus the starting charge is actually I-Pi(t)=[l-I$(O)]exp[-SjBijt],jc i @3)

wl(0)= l--8 Applying this for short grinding times of a feed

i,‘l (0) = 8 primarily in the top size fraction,
6 is called the sieving error.
If the grinding time is very small, the breakage l-p,(t)=[l-Pi(O)] exp(-Bi_rSrt)
products will undergo negligible rebreakage. Then, Assuming that the initial distribution at time zero is
sieving of a sample which has been ground will give 1-iiinsize 1,thenPz(0)=6
w,(t), wz(t), _._, etc. and
weight arriving size 2 l-P2(t)=(l-6)exp(-S,t)
b
‘** = weight out of size 1 -S,t=ln[(l-p=(t))l(l-a)]
Let the fractional weight broken out of size 1 be Aw,
-BB,_,S,t -ln[(l-Pi(t))/(l-E(O))]
Aw = wr (0) - \Vr (t) (Al)
hzcu -SKoMl -pi@))1
The weight arriving in size 2 (A4)
% = log[(1-P~(0))/(l-P~(t))]
= W&)-6 Equation (A4) is the working equation.
Then, For small degrees of grinding, the values of P,(t)
will be small for the one-size fraction method [except
b 2,1 = [wz(rj-6]/Aw
for Pr (t) = 1, of course] and
Further, since ~(3,0), w(4,0), etc are negligible
Bi.1 2: [p;(t)-p;(O)]/[p,(t)_bl
b,., = w,(r)/Aw, etc. N Pi(t)/Aw D i > 3
In terms of B, Thus the two methods give identical results at
B 3. 1 = cumulative fraction below sufficiently low times of grinding_
I
Third approximation I Method III
= ii_ wi (t)/ AW
This method requires as input an estimate of the
rate constants of breakage, although the estimate
= Ps (t)/Atv
need not be very accurate_ The estimate is obtained
Similarly, from experimental data on rates of breakage’ ; for
B, 1 = P; (t)/Aw, i>3 example, the S curves in Fig 1 can be constructed
from appropriate rate measurements, so that the
= pi (t)/ CFZ(tj- pZ toI1 6-1 values of S fcr the various size intervals can be
Note: B,_, = 1. B,?, = 1. Equation (42) is the estimated by interpolation.
working equation. In principle, the size distribution produced at
some time of grinding from a specified feed is a
Second approximation: Method II
unique resuh of the S and B parameters, and know-
In some cases it is diflicult to get accurate data at
ing S, B can be back-calculated However, the algebra
very short times of grinding. Then it is necesmry to
correct for rebreakage of the primary breakage of the back-computation is non-tractabIe, except for
the two top size intervals 1 and 2 For these two
products The starting point is the approximation
intervals, the fractional amounts broken to less than
that S(y) B(x, yj=function of nyonly, which for size
intervals in geometric progression can be put as size i in time t of grinding are:
I SjBi,i=function i only. Physically, this means that “fraction less than size i from size 1” _
the rate of breakage to less than size i depends only
on the fractional amount of material greater than =Bisl[w,(0)-Wl(t)] 7 i > 1
size & not on the mean size of the material greater = Bi,l Aw (A3

Powder TechnoL 5 (197 ly;rz)

DETERMINATION OF BREAKAGE DISlRIBUTION PARAMEI-ERS 221

Traction less than size i from size 2” Now the fractional amount below the upper size
of siz 3 produced during grinding is clearly the sum
cBi.2 r
0
S,wx(t)dt of contributions from sixe 1 and 2, and hence

&(r)-P’(O)= 13,_,Aw+Ar
=Bi.lAz > is-2 646) or
Now wz(t) is known from the Reid solution B xl= P~(~)-~~P)-~I/Aw WC9
In the same way,

(emsa’- emsz’)wl (0) + esS2’ w2 (0) (A7)

Thus
l-e-s1z _ l-e-S2’ Now if&Z&normalized, BLi=Bi_j_,; ifit is not, this
AZ=& can be used as an approximation for the one size
s2 >
Sl
fraction method at short grind times because the
value of&(t) is dominated by B,_, and the error in
+w2(0)(
Q-==‘)] setting Be_2 = E& is negligible Then

and substituting for S, b,. 1w1 (O)/(S, -S,) from eqn.

(A7) where B,_ 1 is known from eqn. (AlO).
-s2rw2(0) emsIr 1 -e--s=r \ In general
w2(0-e 1 -
Ax=& e-S’t_e-SZ’
s, - s, 1

tw,(O) (y==)]
Since l-exp(-S,r)=Aw/w,(O),and l-exp(-SS,t)
= l-(~-Aw/w,(~)~=‘~‘, where the solution marches down from i=4_
To summarize, the required data are I values of S,
A = H’.(~)--W2WU-~Y [l_(l_-y__d] wl(0)=l-P=(O). A\~=~c,(O)--w,(t)=P,(r)-P,(O),
2
A+(l-@---I and values of s(t), P,(r), ___ P,(r); P,(O), P,(O), ---
+[l-(l--)=jw2(0) (AS) P,(O). A2 is calculated using eqns (AS), (A!3); hence,
B 3_l is calculated from eqn- (AlO); hence, the
where for printing convenience values of BiLI are calculated from eqn (All),
starting with z=4 and working down.
A = Aw/w r (0) (A%
and COMPUTATION

r = S,t/In [l/(1 - Aw/w, (0))] Wa)

A2 has the physical significance of the amount
broken from the second in:ervaI, and is calculated
from eons- (AS), 6% @a)-
Similar use of the Reid solution for the third,
fourth, etc intervals becomes intractable, and
therefore the amount broken out of the jth interval
is approximated by a simple linear mean rate:
“fractional amount broken to less than s&z i from
breakage ofj material” N BiiSjt[wj(0)+wi(t)]/3,
i>j>3
Thk is an excchent approximation for short grind
times where w#) varies almost linearly with time
Solving most of the equations developed to
simulate a comminution process or estimating the
parameters of the simulating equations requires, or
is made more convenient by, the pro& T gofa
computing device The more common method used
today is to write a program of solution and solve it
on a digital computer_ Research into this unit
operation at The Pennsylvania State University has,
of course, generated its own set of computer pro-
grams These programs are written in FORTRAN
lV language without resorting to esoteric system
capabilities such as mixed mode, variable dimension
statements, etc. and hence should execute without
alteration on most existing computer systems These

Pm&T T&z_ 5 (1971/72)

222 L. G. AUSTIN. P-T. LUCKIE

pro_- have been written and documented as SUBROUTINE BFUXC (PO, PT, ST, N,
subroutines, a technique employed by IBM for their I,==, B)
scientific progr amming packages Users of these DIMENSION PO(l), PT(i), ST(l), B(1)
programs need to provide a main program which B(l)= 1.0
inputs the required data, calls the subroutine and B(2)= 1.0
outputs the requested data. Dl = PT(2)- PO(2)
IF(KEY.EQ.l) GO TO 10
Subroutine BFUNC ALPHA=Dl/(l.O- PO(2))
Purpose : BETA=ALOG(l.O-ALPHA)
To develop cumulative interval breakage function IF(KEY_EQ_2) GO TO 10
values which give the proportion of material GAMh&+=l_O--MP (-ST(2))
broken out of size 1 which falls below size I, where R = ST(2)/BETA
1 is numerically less than or equal to I, 1 repre- D2=((PT(2)--T(3)-(LO-GAMMA)*(PO
senting the largest size interval_ (2)-PO(3)))/(ALPHA-GAMMA)*
Usage : (GAMMA+R*ALPHA)+GAMMA*
CALL BFUNC (PO, PT, ST, N, KEY, B) (POW- PO(3))YDl
Description of parameters: DlDl=Dl+Dl
PO--An input vector of size N containing the 10 DO 40 1=3,N
cumulative feed decimal fraction less than IF(KEV_EQ_2) GO TO 30
size I. B(I)=(PT(I)- PO(I))/Dl
PT-An input vector of size N containing the IF(KEY_EQ.1) GO TO 40
cumulative product decimal fraction less 11=1-l
than size I, after batch grinding for T units B(I)=B(I)-B(Il)*D2
of time. IF(Il.EQ.2) GO TO 40
ST-An input vector of size N containing the B(I)=B(I)*DlDl
product of the intervd selection function DO 20 J=3,11
value and the grinding time; i.e., S(I)*T. K=I-J+l
N-The number of size intervals_ 20 B(I)=B(I)-B(K)*ST(J)*(PO(J)- PO(J+ I)+
KEY-Input code indicating the tyPe of B values PT(J)- PT(J + 1))
to be calculated B(I)=B(I)/DlDl
1-B (I) values GOT040
2-B (II) valaes 30 B(I)=ALOG((l.O- PT(I))/(l.O- PO(I)))/
3-B (III) values. BETA
B-An output vector of size N containing the 40 CONTINUE
cumulative interval breakage vahres. RETURN
Remarks : END
Values for the input vector, ST, are only required
for KEY = 3.
Subroutines and function subprograms ra:qJired I
None.
Method :
Solutions of the comminution equations.

Powder TechnoL, 5 (1971/72)