Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Minerals Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mineng

Characterisation of superficial breakage using multi-size pilot mills

M. Yahyaei ⇑, N.S. Weerasekara, M.S. Powell
The University of Queensland, Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre (JKMRC), 40 Isles Road, Indooroopilly, Brisbane, Queensland 4068, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Low energy surface breakage has a high frequency of occurrence and thus plays a significant role in grind-
Received 16 January 2015 ing processes. Yet this superficial breakage is poorly understood, measured and modelled – forming the
Revised 14 July 2015 focus of this work.
Accepted 17 July 2015
Pilot mills of 0.8–1.8 m diameter, designed to provide a predominantly surface breakage environment
Available online 29 July 2015
with efficient removal of the resultant progeny, are utilised to characterise superficial breakage. A new
rate, that of superficial breakage (1/(kW h/m2)), is introduced which measures fractional superficial
Keywords:
breakage rate per energy provided to the surface of the material. This methodology is proposed as being
Comminution
Ore characterisation
suitable for understanding and characterising the surface breakage behaviour of ores.
Superficial breakage Tests were conducted on two ores with different hardness. Superficial breakage rates varied from 2 to
Ore surface breakage test 16 (1/(kW h/m2)) for the different ores and mill sizes, indicating a good sensitivity to ore type and the
need to understand the applied stress – related to mill size. The results show that a single ‘surface break-
age rate for use in mill modelling is incorrect as the rate of superficial breakage is dependent on the size
of the mill and therefore the inter-particle stressing conditions.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Nomenclature

Ess surface specific comminution energy (kW h/m2) R(t) superficial breakage rate (1/(kW h/m2))
m(t) mill holdup at time t (kg) t grinding time (min)

1. Introduction 1.1. Ore breakage characterisation

Treating low grade and more competent ore together with a
continual increase in energy and operating costs is a principal chal-
lenge of the mining industry. Since comminution is the most
energy intensive component of mining (Ballantyne and Powell,
2014), optimisation is crucial to keep the operation economically
viable. This requires fundamental understanding of the underpin-
ning mechanisms of size reduction in order to successfully develop
and implement mechanistic models such as the Unified
Comminution Model (UCM) (Powell, 2006), and the Virtual
Comminution Machine (VCM) (Cleary et al., 2008). It is, therefore,
vital to experimentally test breakage mechanisms that occur in full
scale comminution processes. This will facilitate the modelling of
any comminution device using computational modelling in combi-
nation with results of sophisticated ore characterisation tests
(Barrios et al., 2011b; Powell, 2006).
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: m.yahyaei@uq.edu.au (M. Yahyaei).
Although there are inconsistencies in definitions in the litera-
ture for breakage mechanisms, it is generally agreed that particles
can be broken through single impact, multiple impact, superficial
breakage which includes surface chipping and abrasion, and
through an accumulation of each or all of these (Carvalho, 2013;
Powell and Weerasekara, 2009; Tavares and de Carvalho, 2009).
Ore characterisation testing relevant to each of these mechanisms
should, therefore, be implemented in order to predict the progeny
of rocks when they break under each mechanism. There are a num-
ber of different approaches in characterising breakage behaviour of
ores.
The proposed standard breakage characterisation tests and tests
which have been used in research studies can be grouped into sin-
gle particle breakage, breakage in grinding mills and bed breakage.
A selection of these tests are presented in Table 1.
Fig. 1 presents common breakage tests which are in use for
characterising ore response at each stage of size reduction together
with an approximate range of size of particles used in each

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mineng.2015.07.011
0892-6875/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
72 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78
characterisation test (Verret et al., 2011). K80 is the 80% passing
size in mm.
It is evident from Fig. 1 that there are at least 9 characterisation
tests which are commonly used in the design and modelling of
Autogenous grinding (AG) and Semi-autogenous grinding (SAG)
mills. In addition to the standard tests presented in Fig. 1 many
characterisation tests have been implemented in research studies
and should be added if found appropriate. The significant number
of characterisation experiments is probably due to the complexity
of the comminution process in AG and SAG mills (Verret et al.,
2011). Single tests are not capable of providing an adequate under-
standing of comminution mechanisms and are unable to deliver
the full and appropriate data required for design and modelling.
Detailed understanding of the individual breakage mechanisms
that occur in each comminution device can possibly reduce the
number of characterisation tests that are required to describe the
milling process. This can then provide accurate data required by
mechanistic breakage models such as the UCM (Powell, 2006),
the VCM (Cleary et al., 2008), and other mechanistic grinding mod-
els (Carvalho, 2013).
1.2. Characterising superficial breakage behaviour
The DWT and JKRBTÒ developed at the Julius Kruttschnitt
Mineral Research Centre (JKMRC) are well established for charac-
terising the behaviour of ores in impact breakage (Morrison
et al., 2007; Shi and Kojovic, 2007). However, there is no such
robust methodology for characterising superficial breakage or
abrasion behaviour of material provided in the literature.
In the mineral processing context, characterisation methods
introduced in the literature as an ‘abrasion’ test (Devasahayam,
2013; Khanal and Morrison, 2008; Loveday and Naidoo, 1997;
Napier-Munn et al., 1996) are often grinding tests with combined
abrasion, superficial breakage and body breakage. Although the
proposed ‘abrasion’ tests are designed to promote superficial
breakage and abrasion, because they operate in batch mode, and
thus re-breakage of progeny cannot be prevented. Consequently,
small progeny particles will experience body breakage while being
Fig. 1. Common breakage characterisation tests and approximate range of particle
size testing (modified from Verret et al., 2011).
nipped between large particles – as in any ball mill. Also, high mill
speed (i.e. above 60% of critical speed) and in some tests feed with
a wide range of size distribution (Loveday and Naidoo, 1997;
Napier-Munn et al., 1996) will promote the probability of body
breakage. Fig. 2 illustrates charge motion simulated using
Discrete Element Method (DEM) in a 1.8 m mill with 60 mm lifters
having a 60° face angle, operating at 75% critical speed and holding
a charge with a wide size range (i.e. 250 + 6 mm). The schematic
shows active comminution mechanisms in such a condition. In the
high energy impact zone, there is a high probability of particle
fragmentation (i.e. Body breakage) due to direct impact of particles
or small particles being captured between two coarse particles. In
the low energy impact zone, the dominant mechanism of breakage
will be surface breakage for coarse particles while there will still be
a chance for small particles to undergo fragmentation by becoming
caught between coarse particles.
A slow mill speed can be used to eliminate the high energy
impact zone and a narrow feed size distribution can prevent body
breakage of small particles nipped between coarse particles. Fig. 3
illustrates the charge for the same mill as Fig. 2 operating at 40% of
critical speed and a charge with narrow size range (i.e.
73 + 31.5 mm). The schematic shows the active comminution
mechanisms, and that the dominant one will be surface breakage.
The authors are trying to understand and model superficial
breakage through a new approach conducting a surface (superfi-
cial) breakage grinding test in pilot mills, along with the study of
single particle incremental superficial breakage in the JKRBTÒ.
These studies are supported by DEM simulations. This should lead
to an ore characterisation experiment which can provide data
required for the design and modelling of AG and SAG mills plus
any other devices that apply superficial breakage. This paper
introduces the superficial breakage grinding test and methods
implemented to analyse superficial breakage behaviour of
rocks. Integration of single particle incremental breakage charac-
terisation and modelling superficial breakage forms an ongoing
research programme and its outcome will be published in future
papers.
Table 1
Ore breakage characterisation tests based on test methods.
Single particle Crusher work index (CWI) (Bond, 1947)
breakage JK drop weight test (DWT) (Napier-Munn et al., 1996)
SMC TestÒ (Morrell, 2004)
JK rotary breakage test (JKRBTÒ) (Shi et al., 2009)
Short Impact Load Cell (SILC) (King and Bourgeois, 1993;
Tavares and King, 2004)
Grinding in lab/ Advanced media competency test (AMCT) (Siddall and
pilot mills White, 1989)
Autogenous work index (AWI) (MacPherson and Turner,
1978; McKen and Chiasson, 2006)
SAGDesign (Starkey et al., 2006)
SAG power index (SPIÒ) (Starkey and Dobby, 1996)
AG Pilot Plant (MacPherson and Turner, 1978)
JK Ore Abrasion (Napier-Munn et al., 1996)
Pilot abrasion test (Loveday and Naidoo, 1997)
Rod mill work index (RWI) (Bond, 1960)
Ball mill work index (BWI) (Bond, 1960)
Sign. Plot (Burford and Niva, 2008)
Bed breakage Lab-scale HPGR (McKen et al., 2001)
Static pressure test (SPT) (Bulled and Husain, 2008)
Pilot-scale HPGR (Klymowsky et al., 2002)
HPGR compressed bed breakage test (Dundar et al.,
2013)
Crushing compression test (Evertsson and Bearman,
1997)
Impact on mono-dispersed unconfined beds (Barrios
et al., 2011a,b)
 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78 73

Fig. 2. Active comminution breakage mechanisms in a grinding test with a standard (high) mill speed and wide feed size range.

Fig. 3. Active comminution breakage mechanisms in a grinding test with low mill speed and narrow feed size range.

2. Superficial breakage experiment
A series of superficial breakage characterisation tests were con-
ducted to characterise the response of two different gold/copper
bearing ores named C-Ore and T-Ore using three mill sizes (1.8,
1.2 and 0.8 m diameters). Conducting tests in different mill diam-
eters helps to develop an understanding of the effect of stressing
condition on the surface breakage of the rock. These mills have
special features particularly designed for the study of surface
breakage during grinding and they eliminate the shortcomings of
existing ‘abrasion’ tests. The test procedure as introduced by
Powell (Powell et al., 2010) and described briefly in (Yahyaei
et al., 2013, 2014), is presented below.
2.1. Sample preparation
75 mm. These were then sized into three discrete size fractions of
73 + 63, 53 + 45, and 37.5 + 31.5 mm for the superficial break-
age test. Five size fractions of 26.5 + 22.4, 19 + 16, 11.2 + 9.5,
9.5 + 8 and 8 + 6.7 mm were prepared to conduct single particle
impact breakage with the JKRBT in order to characterise the
response of the rock to impact breakage, and to provide a measure
of ore hardness (Shi et al., 2009). A total of 1000 particles from each
size fraction were selected to undergo the incremental breakage
experiments under 5 different energy levels of 0.05, 0.07, 0.2, 1,
and 2.5 kW h/t (i.e. a number of 200 particles for each energy level)
(for more details on the incremental breakage test procedure the
Table 2
Characteristics of tested ores.

Ore name SG (t/m3) Bulk density (t/m3) Hardness index range (A  b)

The samples were obtained from a stockpile of primary crushed
C-Ore 2.70–2.85 1.36–1.40 30–52
material and all +73 mm materials were crushed to below 73 mm T-Ore 2.35–2.51 1.19–1.30 74–140
using a laboratory Jaw crusher by adjusting its close side setting at
74 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78

Fig. 4. Surface breakage mill with its product ports in the mill shell (0.8 m mill,
front cover removed) (Yahyaei et al., 2013).
Fig. 5. Water spray implemented to remove product generated (1.8 m mill, viewed
through loading hatch).

reader is referred to Shi et al., 2009). The ore types and their char-
acteristics are presented in Table 2. The ore hardness index (A  b) Table 3
is calculated for each size range individually and presented as a Mills characteristics and operating conditions.
range in Table 2. Mill diameter Number of product Speed Charge mass at 30%
(m) ports (rpm) filling (kg)
2.2. Test device and procedure 1.8 96 12.9 207
1.2 60 15.8 91
The grinding mills are designed to provide a superficial break- 0.8 40 19.4 34
age environment supressing impact body breakage, with the rapid
removal of abraded product, so as to minimise re-breakage. A 40%
critical speed is set so that rocks slide over each other preventing Table 4
Size distribution of the smoothed particles fed to the second stage of grinding.
higher energy impacts and creating an energy environment where
superficial breakage becomes the dominant mechanism (Yahyaei Size (mm) % Retained
et al., 2013, 2014). The fine products generated during this process C-Ore-1.8 m C-Ore-1.2 m T-Ore-1.8 m
are rapidly removed with a water spray washing them out through
63 18.1 24.0 19.8
20 mm ports located around the periphery of the mill (Fig. 4) in 53 13.7 8.7 15.5
order to reduce the probability of re-breakage of fine products. 45 26.3 23.9 18.5
All mills have an identical length of 0.3 m. Water spray was 37.5 7.2 8.9 11.9
20 L/min in all experiments (Fig. 5). Mill properties are listed in 31.5 21.4 22.6 16.1
26.5 9.9 8.4 13.6
Table 3. 22.4 2.1 2.2 3.2
Superficial breakage testing was carried out using 1.8 m, 1.2 m 19 1.3 1.3 1.4
and 0.8 m diameter mills. Testing in the 1.8 and 1.2 m mills was
carried out in two stages. In the first stage fresh angular particles
in three size fractions (i.e. 73 + 63, 53 + 45, and
37.5 + 31.5 mm) with equal proportion were ground for 10 min. system. A transducer amplifies, filters and sends the load cell sig-
The remaining material in the mill was unloaded, dried and nals to the recording software via a Universal Serial Bus (USB) port.
pffiffiffi The no-load torque for turning the empty mill was measured prior
weighed. It was then sized with a 4 2 series of sieves ranging from
to each test and subtracted from the gross torque to provide the
73 mm down to 38 lm. Thereafter, smoothed material coarser
net torque, which is then converted to power draw. An example
than 19 mm (i.e. 73 + 19 mm) from the first grinding stage was
of the mechanical power of the 1.8 m mill is presented in Fig. 6.
fed to the mill for a second stage of grinding for another 10 min.
Due to mechanical and electrical noise, and the unbalanced nature
Size distribution of feed in the second stage of grinding is pre-
of the charge motion, there is a fluctuation in measured power.
sented in Table 4. However, tests with the 0.8 m mill were con-
Hence, the average of measured power was used (Fig. 6).
ducted in continuous mode (i.e. without stopping the mill after
10 min and sizing the mill content) for 30 min. In both grinding
stages mill products discharged through the ports (Fig. 4) were col- 2.4. Superficial breakage rate
lected at 30 s intervals from the collection chamber below the mill.
The samples collected at each 30 s interval were dried, weighed, Surface breakage is a process which produces significant
pffiffiffi
and sized in a 4 2 series from 19 mm to 38 lm. All samples from amounts of new surface. Therefore, a new approach was used to
the first 10 min were sized due to the rapid evolution of product calculate specific grinding energy and superficial breakage rates
mass and size distribution in that period. Thereafter the product based on the surface area specific energy. In this research, surface
mass and size distribution was stable, so every second sample area specific energy (or surface specific energy) is defined as
was processed. energy induced to units of surface area of material inside the mill,
yielding units of kW h/m2. The surface area of material in each size
2.3. Measurements fraction is calculated using the relationship between particle size
and its surface area. The relationship used in this work is based
The mechanical mill power input is measured via a load cell on assuming an ellipsoidal shape for particles with an aspect ratio
mounted on a torque arm that anchors the entire mill and drive which varies with particle size, the surface area of material in each
 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78
Fig. 6. Mechanical power for a test using 1.8 m mill.
Fig. 7. Relationship between particle size and its surface area.
size fraction is then calculated using the dimensions of an ellipsoid
by the method of Michaux (2005). It is assumed that all materials
in the same size fraction have the same dimensions. This is a fair
pffiffiffi
assumption because materials are sieved with 4 2 series of sieves
and the size of the top sieve is 1.19 times of bottom sieve. The rela-
tionship between particle size and its corresponding surface area
which is used in this study is presented in Fig. 7. It is acknowledged
that the calculation of surface area can be improved on, this is part
of ongoing investigations. However, a simple and consistent mea-
sure provides a robust and practically usable approach that is
well-suited to an applied characterisation method and appropriate
at this stage of the development of a breakage testing
methodology.
Using this approach, incremental superficial breakage rate for
surface breakage testing is defined using Eq. (1).
 
mðtDtÞmðtÞ
mðtÞ
RðtÞ ¼
Ess;t
where
t: grinding time (min)
Dt: grind time interval (min)
R(t): superficial breakage rate (1/(kW h/m2))
m(t): mill holdup (kg)
Ess,t: surface specific energy at time t (kW h/m2)
Surface specific energy (Ess,t) for each time interval (Dt) is calcu-
lated by dividing the measured input energy by the calculated sur-
face area of materials inside the mill at that time interval.
The proposed superficial breakage rate (R(t)) calculates incre-
mental surface breakage for a given time interval. This technique
is used to isolate active surface breakage mechanisms present
within a given time interval, thus preventing them from being
75
influenced by mechanisms from previous intervals. As superficial
breakage rate is normalised with the net grinding power and mass
of mill content, it becomes an appropriate criterion for comparing
grinding tests which were conducted using different sizes of mills
and different feed mass, in this work three sizes of mills using dif-
ferent feed mass.
3. Results and discussion
The superficial breakage rate was used to provide a fair compar-
ison between the surface breakage tests in the three mills.
3.1. Effect of ore type and mill size
For all mills, after 6 min all superficial breakage rates converge
from an initially high rate towards a steady state rate regardless of
mill size or ore type. Incremental breakage tests using the JKRBTÒ
showed that the A  b value of T-Ore (i.e. 74–140) on average is
62% higher than C-Ore (i.e. 30–52) indicating that the T-Ore is
markedly softer. The superficial breakage rate of the T-Ore started
from 16 and 5 (1/(kW h/m2)) respectively while it was, as
expected, much lower at 4–2 (1/(kW h/m2)) for C-Ore in the
0.8 m and 1.8 m mills (Fig. 8).
As illustrated in Fig. 8, the superficial breakage rate gently
decreases as the surface breakage test progresses and it is similar
for all mill sizes after 6 min. This initial high superficial breakage
rate is attributed to chipping. Therefore, as the particles become
smoothed, the superficial breakage rate converges towards a
steady state rate regardless of mill size or ore hardness value
(A  b) (Fig. 9).
ð1Þ
Fig. 8. Comparing superficial breakage rate of C-Ore and T-Ore in three mill sizes.
76 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78
Fig. 9. Effect of mill size on superficial breakage rate of C-Ore and T-Ore.
As illustrated in Fig. 9, the superficial breakage rate of angular
particles gently decreases as the surface breakage test progresses
and a steady state superficial breakage rate is achieved after about
6 min for the C-Ore. However, for the T-Ore it required more than
10 min to achieve a steady state breakage rate. When the surface
breakage test continued with smoothed particles, a steady state
condition was observed at the beginning of the grinding test.
This indicates that when the sharp edges of particles were
smoothed, sliding abrasion is the dominant mechanism of superfi-
cial breakage.
For the harder ore (C-Ore), the grinding rate in the 0.8 m mill
starts at a higher value compared with the 1.2 m and 1.8 m mills
which are 2.8 and 2.1 (1/(kW h/m2)) respectively. This indicates
that the small mill starts with a higher chipping rate and, as the
mill size increases, the chipping rate drops significantly – an unex-
pected finding. Investigating the charge motion of particles in DEM
simulation revealed that the high chipping rate of the small mill
could be attributed to the charge motion regime. Coordination
number of particles, which is defined as the number of particles
in contact with a particle per second, in 1.8 m mill in average is
2.2 per particle while it is 1.2 in the 0.8 m mill. This means that
particles in the small mill are more subject to low energy impacts
which result in higher chipping rate. All mills converge to identical
grinding rates after 6 min indicating that the surface breakage
behaviour of these competent rocks in all sizes of mills was almost
the same. This indicates the smoothed particles have reached to a
steady surface breakage condition. Similarly, for the softer ore
(T-Ore) grinding rate in the 0.8 m mill starts at a higher value of
16 (1/(kW h/m2)) compared to 7 (1/(kW h/m2)) in the 1.8 m mill.
But, unlike the harder ore, it does not reach a specific steady state
grinding rate regardless of mill size, rather it reaches a mill size
dependent steady state grinding rate with superficial breakage
rates of 1.6 and 3.1 respectively for the 0.8 m and 1.8 m mill. It also
shows that, even though lower superficial breakage rates were ini-
tially observed in the 1.8 m mill, once it reaches steady state it has
double the superficial breakage rates compared to the 0.8 m mill at
steady state. One possible reason for this behaviour of a soft ore
could be because in a 1.8 m mill, the chipping mechanism will
remain active over the whole grinding time while in a 0.8 m mill
it will smooth the particles significantly quicker and particles will
reach steady surface breakage mode.
3.2. Appearance function of superficial breakage
Fig. 10 compares size distribution of the progeny for C-Ore
tested in 1.8, 1.2, and 0.8 m mills collected at 1 and 19 min inter-
vals. Fig. 10(a) presents the size distribution as cumulative percent
passing while Fig. 10(b) presents the product size distribution as
pffiffiffi
percent retained on each sieve using 4 2 sieve series. Since the mill
product port is 20 mm, there is no +20 mm material in the product.
Fig. 10 shows that the 1.8 m mill produces more fine (0.1 mm)
material in comparison to a 0.8 m mill, regardless of grinding time.
Fig. 10(b) indicates that as the grinding time passes the produc-
tion of mid-sized material (1–7 mm) decreases while coarse parti-
cles (7–19 mm) do not change significantly and vary randomly.
Considering the findings from Figs. 8 and 9, this could be attributed
to the fact that a coarse fraction of material is produced from body
breakage caused by incremental breakage mechanism hence they
appear randomly in the progeny, while mid-sized material is pro-
duced from chipping off the angular pieces of the rocks which
decreases as the grinding progresses. An increase in the production
of fine material is due to sliding abrasion which becomes the dom-
inant mechanism towards the end of grinding. A similar trend is
observed for the size distribution of the product of the T-Ore
although the T-Ore produced a finer product as was expected.
3.3. Generating new surface
Fig. 11, illustrates the new surface production rate for three mill
sizes for C-Ore and T-Ore, as a function of surface specific input
energy (Ess). The surface production rate is defined as a fraction
of fresh generated surface area per mass of mill charge.
Fig. 11 clearly shows that over time the surface production rate
gradually decreases to a steady state value. This is due to the fact
that with time the particles become smoothed and more compe-
tent for abrasion hence the surface breakage rate stabilises at a
low value. Therefore, it produces less mass of product which even-
tually leads to a gradual decrease in surface area generation at a
steady state rate.
It is evident from Fig. 11 that the 1.8 m mill produces signifi-
cantly more surface per unit mass of charge which could be
explained by the finer size distribution of progeny in this mill. As
was expected, with softer ore (T-Ore) the amount of surface pro-
duction is higher, and the mill size has a significant influence in
increasing the rate.
3.4. Mill size and collision energy distribution
To understand the stressing mechanisms of surface breakage
tests and explain the experimental results, DEM simulations were
implemented to characterise the collision environment in each
surface breakage test. Numerical modelling was conducted using
EDEMÓ software with non-spherical (clumped) particles for angu-
lar rocks (i.e. first stage of grinding experiment) and with spheres
representing smoothed particles for the second stage of the grind-
ing experiment (Weerasekara et al., 2014).
 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78 77

Fig. 10. Effect of mill size and grinding time on product size distribution of C-Ore, (a)% passing and (b)% retained.

Fig. 11. Comparing surface area production rates of (a) C-Ore and (b) T-Ore in three mill sizes.

Fig. 12. Effect of mill size on impact to abrasion ratio of (a) 63–73 mm and (b) 31.5–36.5 mm angular particles.

Fig. 12 compares the ratio of impact to shear (normal to tangen- 4. Conclusions

tial) in the three mill sizes in whole collision energy levels for par-
ticles in the size ranges of 63–73 mm and 31.5–36.5 mm.
Fig. 12 indicates that the ratio of impact to shear for both size
fractions is higher in the 0.8 m mill in all collision energy levels.
This clearly explains the experimentally observed higher chipping
rate in the 0.8 m mill as well as coarser progeny size distribution.
Therefore, the lower superficial breakage rate and finer progeny
in the 1.8 m mill could be attributed to the surface breakage mech-
anism in the bigger mill. One possible explanation for higher
impact to abrasion ratio in the 0.8 m mill could be the charge
motion regime which provides more low energy impacts rather
than shearing in comparison to the 1.8 m mill. This is confirmed
through observation of charge motion in DEM simulations.
A new approach was applied to characterise superficial break-
age of ore through utilising three sizes of specialist surface break-
age mills. The proposed superficial breakage rate, which is based
on mass generated per energy given to the available surface area,
enables a comparison of the performance of mills with different
sizes and energy input. Change in the slope of superficial breakage
rate, along with evolution of size distribution of progeny, indicates
two distinct mechanisms of surface breakage. The first mechanism
is chipping; this is the dominant mechanism of mass removal for
fresh angular particles. The second mechanism is low energy incre-
mental surface breakage; this is the dominant mechanism of
breakage for smoothed particles. The study of the impact of mill
78 M. Yahyaei et al. / Minerals Engineering 81 (2015) 71–78
size on the surface breakage response of rock indicates that a 0.8 m
mill has a higher superficial breakage rate when chipping is the
dominant mechanism. DEM modelling analysis confirms that this
could be attributed to a higher ratio of impact to shear in the small
mill. Shearing is the dominant mechanism of surface breakage in
the 1.8 m mill hence this mill produces a finer product and conse-
quently it has higher mass specific surface generation compared to
the 0.8 m mill.
The results show that a single surface breakage rate for use in
mill modelling is incorrect as the rate of surface breakage is depen-
dent on the size of the mill and therefore the inter-particle stress-
ing conditions. It is proposed that the research outcomes can be
formulated into a predictive model of incremental surface break-
age in grinding through integrating the DEM modelling of stressing
condition with characterisation of ore surface breakage behaviour.
This is under investigation by the authors.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge Ryan Bracey, Rory
McKinnon and Lance Ostenfeld for their extensive efforts perform-
ing pilot tests. The authors are also grateful to JKMRC’s pilot plant
technicians for their assistance during the tests.
References
Ballantyne, G.R., Powell, M.S., 2014. Benchmarking comminution energy
consumption for the processing of copper and gold ores. Miner. Eng. 65, 109–
114.
Barrios, G., Carvalho, R.M., Tavares, L.M., 2011a. Extending breakage
characterisation to fine sizes by impact on particle beds. Trans. Inst. Min.
Metall. Sect. C 120, 37–44.
Barrios, G.K.P., de Carvalho, R.M., Tavares, L.M., 2011b. Modeling breakage of
monodispersed particles in unconfined beds. Miner. Eng. 24 (3–4), 308–318.
Bond, F.C., 1947. Crushing tests by pressure and impact. Trans AIME, Am. Inst. Min.
Metall. Petrol. Eng. 169, 58–66.
Bond, F.C., 1960. Crushing and grinding calculations Part I and II. Brit. Chem. Eng. 6,
378–385.
Bulled, D., Husain, K., 2008. The development of a small-scale test to determine
work index for high pressure grinding rolls. In: 40th Annual Meeting of the
Canadian Mineral Processors, Orford, I., (Ed.), CIM, Ottawa, Canada, pp. 145-164.
Burford, B.D., Niva, E., 2008. Comparing energy efficiency in grinding mills. In:
Orford, I. (Ed.), Metallurgical Plant Design and Operating Strategies. AusIMM,
Perth, Australia, pp. 45–64.
Carvalho, R.M., 2013. Mechanistic modelling of semi-autogenous grinding. In:
Metallurgical and Materials Engineering. UFRJ/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro.
Cleary, P.W., Powell, M.S., Morrison, R.D., 2008. Applying computationally intensive
techniques to modelling of comminution devices, In: The XXIV IMPC, Beijing,
China, pp. 1955–1963.
Devasahayam, S., 2013. Abrasion characteristics of ores. Miner. Process. Extr. Metall.
Rev. 34 (2), 114–129.
Dundar, H., Benzer, H., Aydogan, N., 2013. Application of population balance model
to HPGR crushing. Miner. Eng. 50–51, 114–120.
Evertsson, C.M., Bearman, R.A., 1997. Investigation of interparticle breakage as
applied to cone crusher. Miner. Eng. 10 (2), 199–214.
Khanal, M., Morrison, R., 2008. Discrete element method study of abrasion. Miner.
Eng. 21 (11), 751–760.
King, R.P., Bourgeois, F., 1993. Measurement of fracture energy during single-
particle fracture. Miner. Eng. 6 (4), 353–367.
Klymowsky, R., Patzelt, N., Knecht, J., NBurchardt, E., 2002. Selection and sizing of
high pressure grinding rolls. In: Mular, A.L., Halbe, N., Barratt, D.J. (Eds.), Mineral
Processing Plant Design, Practice and Control. Society of Mining Engineering,
Vancouver, Canada, pp. 636–668.
Loveday, B.K., Naidoo, D., 1997. Rock abrasion in autogenous milling. Miner. Eng. 10
(6), 603–612.
MacPherson, A.R., Turner, R.R., 1978. Autogenous grinding from test work to
purchase of a commercial unit. In: Mular, A.L., Bhappu, R.B. (Eds.), Mineral
Processing Plant Design. Society of Mining Engineering, New York, NY, pp. 279–
305.
McKen, A., Chiasson, G., 2006. Small-scale continuous SAG testing using the
MacPherson autogenous grindability test. In: Allan, K., Major, K., Flintoff, B.C.,
Klein, B., Mular, A.L. (Eds.), International Autogenous and Semiautogenous
Grinding Technology. Vancouver, Canada, pp. 299–314.
McKen, A., Raabe, H., Mosher, J., 2001. Application of operating work indices to
evaluate individual sections in autogenous-semiautogenous/ball mill circuits.
In: Mular, A.L., Barratt, D.J., Knight, D.A. (Eds.), International Autogenous and
Semiautogenous Grinding Technology. Vancouver, Canada, pp. 151–164.
Michaux, S.P., 2005. Analysis of fines generation in blasting. In: JKMRC. The
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Morrell, S., 2004. Predicting the specific energy of autogenous and semi-autogenous
mills from small diameter drill core samples. Miner. Eng. 17 (3), 447–451.
Morrison, R.D., Shi, F., Whyte, R., 2007. Modelling of incremental rock breakage by
impact – for use in DEM models. Miner. Eng. 20 (3), 303–309.
Napier-Munn, T.J., Morrell, S., Morrison, R.D., Kojovic, T., 1996. Mineral
Comminution Circuits: Their Operation and Optimisation. Julius Kruttschnitt
Mineral Research Centre, Indooroopilly, Australia.
Powell, M.S., 2006. The Unified Comminution Model – a conceptually new model.
In: The XXIII IMPC. Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 1783–1788.
Powell, M.S., Morrison, R., Djordjevic, N., Hilden, M., Cleary, P.W., Owen, P.,
Govender, I., Weerasekara, N.S., Michaux, S.P., Kojovic, T., Pokrajcic, Z., Musa, F.,
Sinnott, M., Mainza, A., Bbosa, L., 2010. Eco-efficient liberation outcomes and
benefits. In: CSRP Final Report. CRC for Sustainable Resource Processing.
Powell, M.S., Weerasekara, N.S., 2009. The challenges in developing a mechanistic
breakage model such as the UCM. In: European Symposium on Comminution
and Classification. Finland, pp. 15–18.
Shi, F., Kojovic, T., 2007. Validation of a model for impact breakage incorporating
particle size effect. Int. J. Miner. Process. 82 (3), 156–163.
Shi, F., Kojovic, T., Larbi-Bram, S., Manlapig, E., 2009. Development of a rapid particle
breakage characterisation device – the JKRBT. Miner. Eng. 22 (7–8), 602–612.
Siddall, G.B., White, M., 1989. The growth of SAG milling in Australia. In: Mular, A.L.,
Agar, G.E. (Eds.), International Autogenous and Semiautogenous Grinding
Technology. Vancouver, Canada, pp. 169–186.
Starkey, J., Dobby, G., 1996. Application of the SAG power Index at five Canadian
SAG plants. In: Mular, A.L., Barratt, D.J. (Eds.), International Autogenous and
Semiautonomous Grinding Technology. Vancouver, Canada, pp. 345–360.
Starkey, J., Hindstrom, S., Nadasdy, G., 2006. SAGDesign testing: what it is and why
it works. In: Allan, M.J., Major, K., Flintoff, B.C., Klein, B., Mular, A.L. (Eds.),
International Autogenous and Semiautogenous Grinding Technology.
Vancouver, Canada, pp. 240–254.
Tavares, L.M., de Carvalho, R.M., 2009. Modeling breakage rates of coarse particles in
ball mills. Miner. Eng. 22 (7–8), 650–659.
Tavares, L.M., King, R.P., 2004. Measurement of the load–deformation response from
impact-breakage of particles. Int. J. Miner. Process. 74, S267–S277.
Verret, F., Chiasson, G., McKen, A., 2011. Sag mill testing – an overview of the test
procedures available to characterize ore grindability. In: International
Autogenous Grinding and Semi-autogenous Grinding and High Pressure
Grinding Roll Technology. Vancouver, pp. 1–14.
Weerasekara, N.S., Yahyaei, M., Powell, M.S., 2014. Interpreting low energy attrition
behaviour in a pilot mill using numerical modelling. In: XXVII International
Mineral Processing Congress (IMPC 2014). Santiago, Chile, pp. 117–124.
Yahyaei, M., Weerasekara, N.S., Powell, M.S., 2013. Characterisation of abrasion
breakage using multi siize pilot mills. In: 13th European Symposium on
Comminution and Classification. Braunschweig, Germany.
Yahyaei, M., Weerasekara, N.S., Powell, M.S., 2014. Impact of mill size on low-
energy surface damage. In: XXVII International Mineral Processing Congress
(IMPC 2014). Santiago, Chile, pp. 53–62.