Chapter 12

DETERMINATION OF THE BOND WORK INDEX USING AN ORDINARY

LABORATORY BATCH BALL MILL

R. F. Yap, J . L. S e p u l v e d a , and R. J a u r e g u i

Anaconda M i n e r a l s Company
Tucson, A r i z o n a 85726

INTRODUCTION

The T h i r d Theory of Comminution,

o f t e n t i m e s c a l l e d t h e Bond T h e o r y ,
was f i r s t p u b l i s h e d by F r e d C . Bond
i n 1952. S i n c e t h e n , i t h a s b e e n where
widely used i n t h e m i l l i n g i n d u s t r y
t o s i z e c r u s h i n g and g r i n d i n g equip- W = t h e energy i n p u t t o t h e m i l l ,
ment a s w e l l a s t o p r e d i c t and (kwh/ t )
e v a l u a t e t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e . Although
two o t h e r comminution t h e o r i e s w e r e Wi = Work I n d e x , (kwh/t)
advanced a l m o s t a c e n t u r y e a r l i e r .
one by R i t t i n g e r , 1 8 6 7 , and t h e P = s q u a r e s i e v e o p e n i n g which 80%
o t h e r by K i c k , 1 8 8 5 , t h e i r u s e was o f t h e p r o d u c t p a s s e s , (microns)
l i m i t e d because they d i d not agree
w i t h a c t u a l commercial comminution F = s q u a r e s i e v e o p e n i n g which 80%
s y s t e m s (Bond, 1 9 6 1 ) . o f t h e f e e d p a s s e s , (microns)

A c c o r d i n g t o Bond's T h i r d T h e o r y , Equation (1) i s t h e mathematical

t h e work i n p u t i s p r o p o r t i o n a l t o
t h e new c r a c k t i p l e n g t h produced i n
p a r t i c l e b r e a k a g e , and e q u a l s t h e
work r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e p r o d u c t
minus t h a t r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e f e e d .
F o r p a r t i c l e s of s i m i l a r s h a p e , t h e
crack t i p length is equivalent t o
t h e s q u a r e r o o t of o n e - h a l f t h e
s u r f a c e a r e a , and t h e new c r a c k
l e n t h i s p r o p o r t i o n a l t o (1/fi -
&-
1/ 1; where P and F a r e p a r t i c l e s
d i a m e t e r of p r o d u c t and f e e d , r e s p e c -
tively. For p r a c t i c a l c a l c u l a t i o n s ,
t h e p a r t i c l e diameter can be expressed
in t e r m s o f t h e 80% p a s s i n g s i z e s , P
and F , r e s p e c t i v e l y . Therefore, t h e
work i n p u t i s g i v e n b y ,
176
s t a t e m e n t of t h e T h i r d Theory, o r t h e
Bond e q u a t i o n . N u m e r i c a l l y , t h e work
i n d e x i s t h e e n e r g y r e q u i r e d i n kwhlt
t o r e d u c e a g i v e n m a t e r i a l from
t h e o r e t i c a l l y i n f i n i t e feed s i z e t o
80% p a s s i n g 100 m i c r o n s .
The work i n d e x of a p a r t i c u l a r
m a t e r i a l i s determined i n t h e labora-
t o r y by c o n d u c t i n g t h e s t a n d a r d Bond
g r i n d a b i l i t y t e s t . Bond developed
s e p a r a t e t e s t s f o r t h e r o d m i l l and
the b a l l m i l l . The s i m p l i f i e d t e s t
method d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s p a p e r , which
i s u s e d a t Anaconda R e s e a r c h C e n t e r
t o a p p r o x i m a t e t h e work i n d e x , i s a n
a l t e r n a t i v e procedure t o t h e b a l l m i l l
grindability test only. We would
like to emphasize at this point that
this simplified test method is not
intended as a total substitute to the
standard grindability test of Bond.
Rather, it is presented here as an
alternative to the standard test when
the necessary equipment or appropriate
samples are not available; or when a
close approximation of the index will
serve the purpose.
There are some difficulties and
inconveniences when following the
standard procedure to determine the
Bond grindability of a sample. One
is the necessity of a Bond mill which
may not be readily available in the
laboratory, particularly that located
at the plant. Another is the re-
quirement of about 10 kilograms of
feed sample that needs special prepa-
ration. Also, conducting the test is
particularly time intensive; one test
usually requiring the whole (8-hour)
day's effort of a skilled technician.
When the grindability data are to
be used for grinding circuit design
purposes, the necessity to have the
best possible estimate of the work
index, could easily overcome the
apparent difficulties above. However,
if the grindability data are to be
used for control purposes, minor loss
in accuracy could be sacrificed for
the significant amount of time gained
in the acquisition of the data.
A number of attempts have been
made in the past to determine Bond's
grindability or his work index by
means of abbreviated procedures.
They will be briefly reviewed below
following a description of the stan-
dard Bond grindability test.
STANDARD BOND GRINDABILITY TEST
The standard Bond grindability
test (Bond, 1961) is a locked-cycle
dry grinding and screening process
which is carried out until steady
state condition is obtained. The
following describes the procedure for
this test as it is practiced at the
Anaconda Research Laboratory.
Test Equipment
The test is conducted in a special
ball mill which will be referred to
in this paper as the Bond mill. The
mill measures 30.5 x 30.5 cm (12 x
12 inches) inside, and is cast in one
piece. It has no lifters and all the
inside corners are rounded. A 10-2
x 20.4 cm (4 x 8 inch) hand hole is
provided at the shell for charging
purposes. It is operated at 70 rpm
and is equipped with a revolution
counter. The mill can be disengaged
from the speed reducer and motor by
means of a clutch when necessary. The
ball charge consists of 285 pieces of
steel balls weighing about 20.125 kg
and distributed as follows:
Ball Diameter No. of Balls
38.10 mm (1-112") 43
Test Sample
The feed to the test is a material
stage-crushed to -6 mesh. About 8 to
10 kilograms of this sample are pre-
pared for the test. For convenience,
this is split into 500-600 grams lots
to facilitate addition, and minimize
particle segregation, of the make-up
fresh sample.
For practical purposes, the work
index of the ore sample is usually
determined at either 65 or 100 mesh.
Feeds that are relatively finer pre-
sent dry screening difficulty, while
coarser feeds contain excessive amounts
of finished product which prolongs
attainment of steady state conditions.
A sample that contains 15% finished
fraction or less is ideal.
Test Procedure
The ore is packed to 700 cc volume
using a vibrating table. The weight
of this volume of sample is the
initial ore charge to the mill, and
this weight is maintained throughout
the test. For the first grinding
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
cycle, the mill is run for a certain
number of mill revolutions to produce
about 300-400 grams of finished
product, i.e., passing the test
sieve, PI. For most ores, this is
between 100 and 150 revolutions of
the Bond mill. The oversize fraction
is returned to the mill for the
second cycle. This is built up to
the original weight of 700 cc ore
charge by replacing the finished
product removed with exactly the same
weight of fresh sample. The unit
weight of product produced in terms
of net grams per mill revolution is
calculated. This number, termed as
the ore grindability for the cycle,
is used to estimate the number of
revolutions required for the next
grinding cycle in order to produce a
circulating load of 250 percent. In
a batch test, this is equivalent to
producing a finished product weighing
lj3.5 of the original ore charge.
The locked-cycle test is continued
until steady state is reached. This
condition indicated by slight changes
in grindability of the ore with
grinding cycles, or small fluctuations
about a certain value. At this point
the weight of the finished product
should be close to that required for
250 percent circulating load. With
proper feed, this equilibrium condi-
tion may be realized in 6 to 8
grinding cycles. As mentioned earlier,
presence of excessive amounts of
finished product in the new feed
could unduly prolong achieving this
steady state condition.
After reaching equilibrium, the
grindabilities for the last three
cycles are averaged. The average
value is taken as the standard Bond
ore grindability to calculate the
work index as shown in Equation (2)
. .
Similarly, the finished product
produced during the last three grind-
ing cycles are combined together,
mixed, and sampled for screen analysis.
For this reason, it is advisable to
collect the finished products sepa-
rately starting the third cycle.
The work index is computed using
the following empirical equation re-
vised by Bond in 1960,
where
P1 = the sieve opening at which the
test is made, (microns)
= Bond's standard ball mill
Gbp grindability, net grams of ball
mill product passing sieve size
P I produced per mill revolution.
The rest of the terms are defined as
in Equation (1).
The work index obtained following
the standard Bond grindability test
described above predicts the energy
requirement for a 2.44 meter (8 ft)
inside liners diameter, prototype
ball mill under the following condi-
tions.
1. Wet closed circuit grinding.
2. Energy predicted is at the
pinionshaft which includes mill
bearings as well as gear and
pinion losses. Motor losses and
other losses due to other compo-
nents in the drive train are not
included.
There are six different efficiency
factors that are applied to this
reference energy requirement to trans-
late it to a particular commercial
grinding circuit installation (Rowland,
1975).
APPROXIMATE GRINDABILITY
TEST METHODS
Method of Berry and Bruce
Berry and Bruce, 1966, approximated
the Bond ball mill work index by com-
paring the respective size distribu-
tions of feed and product of an
 DETERMINATIONOF BOND WORK INDEX
unknown sample w i t h t h o s e of a
r e f e r e n c e sample; a f t e r t h e two
samples have been ground i n t h e same
laboratory m i l l under i d e n t i c a l
c o n d i t i o n s . The m i l l u s e d i s a n
o r d i n a r y l a b o r a t o r y 30.5 cm (12 i n )
Paul-Abbe m i l l and t h e f e e d i s -10
mesh m a t e r i a l . The p r o c e d u r e o f t h e
t e s t i s a s follows:
A 2000 gram sample o f a n unknown
o r e i s ground wet f o r a c e r t a i n
p e r i o d of t i m e t o o b t a i n a d e s i r e d
g r i n d . The same amount o f r e f e r e n c e
o r e , whose Bond work i n d e x i s known,
i s ground f o r t h e same p e r i o d o f
t i m e under i d e n t i c a l o p e r a t i n g c o n d i -
t i o n s . S c r e e n a n a l y s e s a r e performed
on t h e f e e d and p r o d u c t of b o t h
unknown and r e f e r e n c e o r e s t o d e t e r -
mine t h e r e s p e c t i v e P a n d F v a l u e s .
S i n c e t h e t e s t i s p e r f o r m e d on
i d e n t i c a l sample w e i g h t s and o p e r a t -
ing conditions, the energy spent i n
g r i n d i n g t h e unknown o r e i s a p p r o x i -
mately equal t o t h a t s p e n t i n g r i n d i n g
t h e r e f e r e n c e o r e . Using ~ o n d ' s
T h i r d Theory, t h e f o l l o w i n g r e l a t i o n -
s h i p c a n be w r i t t e n :
R e f e r e n c e Ore Unknown Ore
(3)
which a l l o w s e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e work
i n d e x of t h e unknown o r e b a s e d o n t h e
work i n d e x o f t h e r e f e r e n c e o r e .
The method i s q u i t e s i m p l e , f a s t
t o c a r r y o u t and u s e s a n o r d i n a r y
l a b o r a t o r y b a l l m i l l which i s r e a d i l y
available. A l l it requires is a
s t o c k o f o r e w i t h a measured work
i n d e x t h a t c a n b e used a s r e f e r e n c e
sample. The main l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e
method i s r e d u c e d a c c u r a c y . T h i s
a r i s e s probably because of t h e f a c t
t h a t grinding efficiency can vary
w i t h t h e p h y s i c a l and r h e o l o g i c a l
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e m i l l c o n s i s t .
F o r example, i t i s common knowledge
t h a t grinding a t d i f f e r e n t pulp
densities leads t o variation i n the
s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e p r o d u c t .
The same i s t r u e when t h e p r o p o r t i o n
of f i n e s present i n t h e feed is
d i f f e r e n t from one t e s t t o a n o t h e r .
Maintaining feed weight, m i l l operat-
i n g c o n d i t i o n s and e n e r g y i n p u t t o
t h e m i l l may n o t always g u a r a n t e e t h e
a p p l i c a b i l i t y of E q u a t i o n ( 3 ) . As
explained l a t e r i n the t e x t , i d e n t i -
c a l feed s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n s a r e a l s o
required.
Method o f Smith and Lee
Bond's o r i g i n a l e m p i r i c a l e q u a t i o n
t o c a l c u l a t e t h e work i n d e x f r o m re-
s u l t s of t h e s t a n d a r d b a l l m i l l
g r i n d a b i l i t y t e s t is a s follows
(Bond, 1952 and 1 9 6 0 ) :
Since PI i s normally s p e c i f i e d i n t h e
t e s t , t h e only term r e q u i r e d t o e s t i -
m a t e t h e work i n d e x i s t h e o r e
.
g r i n d a b i l i t y , Gbp
S m i t h and Lee, 1 9 6 8 , d e t e r m i n e d t h e
g r i n d a b i l i t y of e i g h t d i f f e r e n t
m a t e r i a l s a t d i f f e r e n t mesh s i z e s
following t h e standard locked-cycle
Bond g r i n d a b i l i t y t e s t . U s i n g t h e
same Bond m i l l and t h e same g r i n d i n g
c o n d i t i o n s , they determined t h e
corresponding batch g r i n d a b i l i t y
v a l u e s f o r d i f f e r e n t mesh s i z e s . A
d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e two
g r i n d a b i l i t i e s was f o u n d f o r t h e f i n e r
meshes of g r i n d , and f o r t h e b a t c h
tests c a r r i e d o u t f o r l e s s t h a n 300
m i l l r e v o l u t i o n s . Using t h i s k i n d o f
c o r r e l a t i o n , i t may b e p o s s i b l e t o
a p p r o x i m a t e t h e Bond g r i n d a b i l i t y b y
simply determining the batch grinda-
b i l i t y . The work i n d e x c a n t h e n b e
e s t i m a t e d u s i n g E q u a t i o n ( 4 ) . Ob-
viously, t h e correlation curve thus
e s t a b l i s h e d w i l l only be u s e f u l f o r a
p a r t i c u l a r type of material s i m i l a r t o
t h e one used t o e s t a b l i s h t h e curve.
I f t h e unknown sample h a s d i f f e r e n t
m i n e r a l o g i c a l composition o r d i f f e r e n t
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
g r a i n s i z e , i t may r e q u i r e a n o t h e r
reference curve. This l i m i t a t i o n , i n
a d d i t i o n t o r e q u i r i n g u s e o f t h e Bond
m i l l and a f e e d p r e p a r e d i n t h e same
way a s t h a t u s e d i n t h e s t a n d a r d Bond
t e s t , makes t h i s method n o t v e r y
practical.
Method of H o r s t and B a s s a r e a r
A n o t h e r s i m p l i f i e d method f o r t h e
c a l c u l a t i o n o f Bond Work I n d e x b a s e d
o n b a t c h t e s t i n g was p r o p o s e d by
H o r s t and B a s s a r e a r i n 1976. A l t h o u g h
t h i s method f o l l o w s t h e c o m p a r a t i v e
a p p r o a c h o f B e r r y and B r u c e ( 1 9 6 6 ) ,
i t d o e s n o t make d i r e c t u s e o f t h e
f e e d and p r o d u c t s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n s
o f t h e unknown o r e , a s a c t u a l l y
d e t e r m i n e d by s c r e e n a n a l y s i s .
Instead, i t c a l c u l a t e s product s i z e
d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r t h e unknown o r e
u s i n g t h e f e e d s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n of
t h e r e f e r e n c e o r e a s a b a s i s , and
assuming t h a t t h e g r i n d i n g p r o c e s s
follow f i r s t order k i n e t i c s . This
d a t a i s used w i t h Equation ( 3 ) t o
c a l c u l a t e t h e work i n d e x f o r t h e
unknown o r e . The t e s t u s e s a n
o r d i n a r y l a b o r a t o r y b a l l m i l l and -10
mesh o r e a s f e e d . The p r o c e d u r e u s e d
f o r t h e t e s t i s a s follows:
A 1000 gram s a m p l e o f t h e r e f e r e n c e
o r e i s ground f o r a c e r t a i n p e r i o d
o f t i m e t o a c h i e v e a d e s i r e d mesh o f
g r i n d . Three s p l i t samples of t h e
unknown o r e , e a c h w e i g h i n g 1000 grams,
a r e ground i n t h e same m i l l u n d e r
identical operating conditions for
d i f f e r e n t p e r i o d s of time. These
p e r i o d s a r e such t h a t they b r a c k e t
t h e g r i n d i n g t i m e u s e d on t h e r e f e r -
e n c e o r e . The r e s u l t s o f t h e t h r e e
g r i n d i n g t e s t s on t h e unknown o r e a r e
c o r r e l a t e d according t o a s i m p l i f i e d
form of t h e f i r s t o r d e r r a t e e q u a t i o n
which i s shown i n E q u a t i o n ( 5 ) . F o r
a n y p a r t i c u l a r s i z e , t h e r a t e of
disappearance of m a t e r i a l c o a r s e r
than t h a t s i z e i s given by:
where
= c u m u l a t i v e mass, f r a c t i o n re-
Ci
t a i n e d on t h e i t h s i e v e
C o i = v a l u e of Ci a t t = o
t = time
ki = comminution c o e f f i c i e n t f o r
f r a c t i o n c o a r s e r than t h e i
tihe
sieve
From t h e semi-log p l o t of cumula-
t i v e weight percent r e t a i n e d versus
t i m e , t h e r e s p e c t i v e ki v a l u e s f o r
t h e d i f f e r e n t s i z e f r a c t i o n s which
a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e s l o p e s of
corresponding l i n e s a r e obtained.
The h y p o t h e t i c a l p r o d u c t s i z e d i s t r i -
b u t i o n o f t h e unknown o r e i s c a l c u -
l a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o E q u a t i o n (5) u s i n g
t h e comminution c o e f f i c i e n t s , t h e
time used t o grind t h e reference o r e
t o t h e d e s i r e d g r i n d , and t h e f e e d
s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e reference
o r e . From t h e p r e d i c t e d p r o d u c t d i s -
t r i b u t i o n , t h e 80% p a s s i n g s i z e , P ,
f o r t h e unknown o r e i s d e t e r m i n e d .
The work i n d e x of t h e unknown o r e
i s e s t i m a t e d by comparison w i t h t h e
r e f e r e n c e o r e using Equation (3).
It s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t i n t h i s
method, t h e same F v a l u e d e t e r m i n e d
f o r t h e r e f e r e n c e o r e i s used f o r t h e
unknown o r e a s w e l l , T a b l e I (Horst
and B a s s a r e a r , 1976) i l l u s t r a t e s
r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d on d i f f e r e n t samples
of c o p p e r o r e s f o l l o w i n g t h i s method.
F o r comparison, r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d
u s i n g t h e method s u g g e s t e d by B e r r y
a n d Bruce ( 1 9 6 6 ) , and t h o s e o b t a i n e d
w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d Bond g r i n d a b i l i t y
t e s t a r e a l s o shown.
For a p a r t i c u l a r m a t e r i a l whose
g r i n d i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s follow
f i r s t o r d e r k i n e t i c s , t h i s method c a n
b e e x p e c t e d t o be more r e p r o d u c i b l e
t h a n t h e method of Berry and Bruce
( 1 9 6 6 ) . T h i s i s m a i n l y due t o u s i n g
t h e same f e e d s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r
b o t h r e f e r e n c e and unknown o r e s . The
r e l a t i v e d i s p l a c e m e n t s of t h e P
v a l u e s f o r t h e two o r e s w i l l t h u s
r e f l e c t t h e r e l a t i v e h a r d n e s s of t h e
o r e s , i . e . , t h e work i n d e x . O t h e r
 DETERMINATION OF BOND WORK INDEX
Table I - Comparative Results for Bond's Standard
Method, Berry and Bruce Method, and Horst and Bassarear Method*
Experimental Berry & Bruce
Bond Work Index Met hod
Material (kwh/t) (kwhlt)
Cu Ore 1 10.0
Cu Ore 2 14.7
Cu Ore 3 19.9
Pima Ore 1 13.9
Pima Ore 2 17.8
Pima Ore 3 19.7
Mean Relative Error
*After Horst and Bassarear, 1976
advantages of the method are the
utilization of an ordinary laboratory
ball mill, less amount of test
material than required by the standard
Bond grindability test, and a -10
mesh test feed material which is
usually available for use in flota-
tion testing. The important short-
coming of the method is the fact
that not all ore breakage kinetic
can be described adequately by
Equation (5).
Failure of the material to follow
Equation (5) introduces uncertainty
in the computation of the comminution
coefficients. In addition, the time
involved conducting the test and
calculating results is just as time-
consuming as conducting the standard
Bond test. Finally, this method
requires a skilled technician to be
able to conduct the necessary
analytical treatment of the experi-
mental data.
Method of Kapur
A general algorithm for the
simulation of the Bond grindability
test based on linear grinding kine-
tics was developed by Kapur in 1970.
The amount R, retained on the test
sieve after batch grinding an amount
of material M, of which the original
oversize fraction is r, may be
Estimated Work Index
Horst & Bassarear
Error Method Error
(%) (kwh/t) - %
8.25 1.72
represented by:
where, @ is a function dependent upon
grinding time, t, initial feed size
distribution, and the selection and
breakage parameters. Using this
equation to describe the first cycle
of Bond's standard test, he developed
an algorithm for "stage-wise" simula-
tion of the subsequent cycles to
arrive at the steady state condition
sought for in Bond's test. He
showed that, although, in general,
there is no explicit analytical
relationship between the kinetic
batch grinding parameters and the
Bond grindability, it is possible to
estimate both Bond grindability and
Bond work index from the first two
cycles of a Bond test.
The simplified scheme presented
determines the grinding parameters
based on this information. Assuming
that the function @ in Equation (6)
follows the exponential decay rela-
tionship, the batch grinding para-
meter, G, is estimated as follows for
the first and second cycles respec-
tively.
For the first cycle,
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
For the second cycle,
In these equations, M I and M2 are
the respective amounts of new feed,
t1 and t2 are the respective grind-
ing time, and 01 and G2 are the
respective batch grinding parameters.
Kapur suggests taking the G2 value
computed from Equation (8) as the
grinding parameter, G , to be used in
the empirical relationship below to
estimate Bond's grindability, Gbp :
where
The G' term in Equation (10) refers
to the grinding parameter of the
circulating load in the Bond test
while G refers to the grinding
parameter of the fresh feed. For
practical calculations, A is assumed
to be equal to unity.
Since there are no values for F
and P obtained through this method,
the work index is calculated by
means of the following empirical
equation,
The numerical coefficient and the
different exponents in Equation (11)
were determined by least-square
method so as to minimize the error
between predicted and experimental
values determined by ~ond's standard
procedure. Table I1 shows results
obtained with this method and those
obtained by the standard procedure.
This method has the disadvantage of
requiring the use of the Bond mill
which might not be readily available
in some laboratories, particularly
those at the plant. In addition, it
uses another empirical equation to
compute work index, which has to be
well established. Finally, the rather
complex computation involved will
necessitate the services of a skilled
technician.
Method of Karra
Modifications to Kapur's algorithm
(Kapur, 1970) have been proposed by
Karra in 1981. In cases where the
feed for the grindability test con-
tains too much material finer than the
mesh of grind, this material is removed
and substituted with an equal amount of
fresh feed. This combined feed is used
for the first cycle of the grinda-
bility test. ~ a ~ u r 'algorithm
s was
modified to include this special case.
In addition, Karra presents a new and
simpler algorithm which takes into
account the fact that the recycle
material could be comprised of the
harder constituents of the original
material and would, therefore, grind
at a slower rate. The new algorithm
also uses a statistically fitted equa-
tion for the evaluation of the work
index.
This method also requires conducting
the first two cycles of Bond's stan-
dard grindability test in order to
determine the values for the grinding
parameters needed for the simulation.
After evaluating grindability for the
first and second cycles experimentally,
the algorithm permits calculation of
Bond's grindability for the subsequent
grinding cycles until equilibrium is
achieved. The work index is computed
from the following empirical equation:
 i N
u H H h u
!
4 H H * H H H m~
Hal H H H H > H H * m ~
H H C (O ( O H H H H U 1
H H H U U a l a J a l a J C C I W
! 4 ! 4 ! 4 ! 4 ! 4 U W a J a l a J a J a J l
aJ al aJ
a J a J 0 0 0 0 0 !4 !4 C C C C C !4
u u u u u m m 0 0 0 0 0 m
. d + + d . d ! 4 ! 4 ! 4 ! 4 ! 4 W W U U U u u a
U U U U C ~ J ~ J ~ J m~m Jm ~ m J
m m a J
a m u a a a a a u a ~ a ~ a a~~ a a -~4
8 6 8 6 a J a a a a a ! 4 ! 4 6 6 f i f i 6 4 m
a~ a ~ al a ~ o o o o o o a m.d.d.d.d.d arc
X x x X U U U U U U & & J J J J J b L A
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS

T a b l e I11

Comparative R e s u l t s Between Bond's S t a n d a r d Method,

K a r r a ' s A l g o r i t h m and K a p u r ' s Algorithm*

Work I n d e x
Experimental K a r r a ' s Algorithm Modified ~ a p u r ' s~ l g o r i t h m
Mesh of Bond Work Error Error
Material Grind Index Calculated (%) Calculated (X)_
Copper Ore 200 9.68 9.63 0.5 9.15 5.5
Copper Ore 200 10.16 10.94 -7.7 11.04 -8.7
Quartzite 48 4.81 5.00 -4.0 5.20 -8.1
Moly Ore 65 13.23 13.67 -3.3 13.53 -2.3
Moly Ore 65 11.99 12.65 -5.5 12.87 -7.3
Moly Ore 65 13.53 13.72 -1.4 13.84 -2.3
Moly Ore 65 13.76 14.27 -3.7 14.25 -3.6
Limes t o n e 35 10.12 10.06 0.6 9.99 1.3
I r o n Ore 200 11.98 11.16 6.8 12.30 -2.7
Diorite 65 7.69 7.18 6.6 6.81 11.4
Andesite 100 16.04 16.58 -3.4 16.93 -5.6
Andesite 65 17.64 15.84 10.2 15.72 10.9
Lead Ore 200 11.20 11.31 -1.0 11.23 -0.3
I r o n Ore 200 17.33 17.23 0.6 16.76 3.3
I r o n Ore 200 19.20 19.43 -1.2 18.88 1.7

Mean R e l a t i v e E r r o r 4.77 6.06

* A f t e r K a r r a , 1981

where because dry screening i n these f i n e r

sieves i s not r e l i a b l e .

Grindability t e s t s carried out f o r
t h e p a s t 15 y e a r s a t t h e Anaconda
R e s e a r c h C e n t e r on v a r i o u s t y p e s o f
o r e s h a v e shown t h a t t h e v a l u e of F
i n E q u a t i o n (14) v a r i e s o n l y s l i g h t l y
from one o r e t y p e t o a n o t h e r . Simi-
l a r l y , t h e value of P v a r i e s s i g n i f i -
c a n t l y o n l y when P I i s changed;
otherwise, i t a l s o has a f a i r l y
c o n s t a n t v a l u e . Eond (1961) i n f a c t ,
s u g g e s t e d a v e r a g e v a l ~ ~ eofs P f o r
d i f f e r e n t values of P I f o r use i n
E q u a t i o n (2) when a v a l u e f o r P i s
n o t a v a l i a b l e . These v a l u e s a s g i v e n
by Bond a r e : 114 m i c r o n s a t LOO
mesh, 76 m i c r o n s a t 1 5 0 mesh, 5 0
m i c r o n s a t 200 mesh, and 26.7 m i c r o n s
a t 325 mesh. A c t u a l l y P I v a l u e s
f i n e r t h a n 1 5 0 mesh a r e s u s p e c t
The a p p a r e n t c o n s t a n c y of t h e s e
values with d i f f e r e n t materials
a p p e a r s t o b e a consequence of u s i n g
t h e 80% p a s s i n g s i z e a s d e f i n i t i o n f o r
F and P when t h e t o p s i z e of t h e s e
p r o d u c t s h a s been p r e s e t . In addition,
h a v i n g a s t a g e - c r u s h e d f e e d and a
stage-ground p r o d u c t h e l p p r e v e n t wide
v a r i a t i o n s of F and P . I n t h e u s u a l
l o g - l o g p l o t of c u m u l a t i v e weight
percent passing versus screen s i z e ,
t h e t o p end of t h e f e e d s i z e d i s t r i -
b u t i o n c u r v e i s f i x e d a t 6 mesh on t h e
100 p e r c e n t l i n e . I n t h e same manner,
t h e t o p end of t h e p r o d u c t s i z e d i s -
t r i b u t i o n c u r v e i s f i x e d on t h e 100
p e r c e n t l i n e a t t h e t e s t s i e v e opening,
P i . S i n c e t h e 80% l i n e i s r e l a t i v e l y
c l o s e t o t h e 100 p e r c e n t l i n e , t h e r e
i s l i t t l e v a r i a t i o n among r e s p e c t i v e
F and P v a l u e s , even though t h e f e e d
and p r o d u c t s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n s of
 DETERMINATIONOF BOND WORK INDEX

Table IV
Comparative Results for Bond's Standard Method, and
Anaconda's Quick Check Method
Estimated
Experimental Work Index
Mesh of Experimental Bond Work Quick Check
Grind, Grindability Index Method* Error
Material Tyler (glrev) (kwhlt) (kwhlt) (%I -
Source

Hematite I 200 1.210 11.18 11.55 -3.31 Kapur ,

1970
Hematite I1 200 1.692 8.95 8.77 2.01 Kapur ,
1970
Goethite 200 1.384 10.63 10.34 2.73 Kapur ,
1970
Copper Ore I 100 1.159 16.83 16.39 2.61 Kapur ,
1970
Copper Ore I11 48 1.618 18.24 17.52 3.95 Kapur ,
1970
Copper Ore IV 65 3.120 8.53 8.85 -3.75 Kapur ,
1970
Copper Ore V 65 0.887 24.24 24.82 -2.39 Kapur ,
1970
Rare Earths I 65 2.585 9.81 10.33 -5.30 Kapur,
1970
Shale 200 0.961 14.37 13.95 2.92 Kapur ,
1970
Copper Ore 200 1.606 10.16 9.15 9.94 Karra,
1981
Moly Ore 65 2.143 13.23 12.04 8.99 Karra,
1981
Limestone 35 4.170 10.12 9.46 6.52 Karra,
1981
Iron Ore 200 1.285 11.98 10.99 8.26 Karra,
1981
Andesite 65 1.422 17.64 16.86 4.42 Karra,
1981
Montana Cu Ore 1 Anaconda
Montana Cu Ore 2 Anaconda
Montana Cu Ore 3 Anaconda
Arizona Cu Ore 5 Anaconda
Arizona Cu Ore 5 Anaconda
Arizona Cu Ore 5 Anaconda
Arizona Cu Ore 5 Anaconda
Arizona Cu Ore 5 Anaconda
Nevada Mo Ore 1 Anaconda
Nevada Mo Ore 1 Anaconda
Nevada Mo Ore 1 Anaconda
Nevada Mo Ore 1 Anaconda
Nevada Mo Ore 1 Anaconda
Nevada Mo Ore 2 Anaconda
Chile Cu Ore 1 Anaconda
Chile Cu Ore 2 Anaconda
*Calculated by Equation (13)
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
d i f f e r e n t m a t e r i a l s can b e s i g n i f i -
c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from e a c h o t h e r .
The a v e r a g e v a l u e s f o r R found a t
Anaconda R e s e a r c h L a b o r a t o r y o n
v a r i o u s o r e t y p e s a r e summarized
below.
Mesh of G r i n d , P 1
-- --- - --
-
-
-
Mesh Microns R
T a b l e I V shows some c o m p a r a t i v e
r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by u s i n g E q u a t i o n
( 1 3 ) and B o n d ' s s t a n d a r d method.
Method of Yashima and Co-Workers
A completely d i f f e r e n t approach t o
t h e non-standard d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e
work i n d e x h a s b e e n r e p o r t e d by
Yashima e t a l , i n 1970. U s i n g dimen-
s i o n a l a n a l y s i s , they developed an
empirical relationship correlating
work i n d e x w i t h t h e m e c h a n i c a l p r o p e r -
t i e s of s e v e n d i f f e r e n t b r i t t l e
m a t e r i a l s . The e q u a t i o n d e r i v e d f o r
work i n d e x i s a s f o l l o w s :
where
Wi = work i n d e x , ( k w h / t )
p = d e n s i t y , (kg/crn3)
B = b r i t t l e n e s s index
r s h i p , determined a f t e r analyzing
S = tensile strength, (~g/cm')
Y1 = Young's m o d u l u s , ( ~ g / c m ~ )
v, = Poisson's r a t i o
Rc =
r a t i o of s p e c i f i c s u r f a c e a r e a
of f r a c t u r e p r o d u c t t o t h e
c y l i n d r i c a l specimen
r a t i o of s p e c i f i c s u r f a c e a r e a
Rt =
of f r a c t u r e p r o d u c t t o t h e
s p h e r i c a l specimen under slow
r a t e of compression
A c c o r d i n g t o Yashima, e t a l . , Equa-
t i o n (15) can b e applied t o b r i t t l e
m a t e r i a l s w i t h Mohs' h a r d n e s s between
2.0 and 6.5. T a b l e V compares r e s u l t s
o b t a i n e d by t h i s t e c h n i q u e and t h o s e
by t h e s t a n d a r d Bond method.
Although t h i s method shows t h a t a n
a p p r o a c h b a s e d on c o n s i d e r a t i o n of
t h e m e c h a n i c a l p r o p e r t i e s of t h e
material is possible, its applicabil-
i t y d o e s n o t seem v e r y p r a c t i c a l s i n c e
a n e x t e n s i v e amount of work i s r e q u i r e d
f o r t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e p r o p e r -
t i e s needed i n t h e c o r r e l a t i o n . This
i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e w i t h non-homo-
genous m a t e r i a l s u c h a s o r e s , where
t h e s e p r o p e r t i e s w i l l have t o b e
d e t e r m i n e d from sample t o sample.
THE ANACONDA SIMPLIFIED METHOD
B a s i s o f t h e Method
T h i s method, l i k e t h e methods d e s -
c r i b e d by B e r r y and Bruce (1966) and
by H o r s t and B a s s a r e a r (1976), makes
u s e of a b a t c h g r i n d i n g t e s t performed
i n a regular laboratory b a l l m i l l .
Unlike t h e o t h e r procedures, t h i s
method d o e s n o t r e q u i r e a r e f e r e n c e
o r e f o r comparison e v e r y t i m e t h e
t e s t i s performed. I n s t e a d , it uses a
m i l l t h a t h a s been c a l i b r a t e d using
s e v e r a l o r e s whose work i n d e x i s
known. The b a s i s f o r t h e method i s t h e
c a l c u l a t i o n o f a b a t c h o p e r a t i n g work
i n d e x which i s assumed t o be d i r e c t l y
r e l a t e d t o t h e work i n d e x determined by
t h e s t a n d a r d procedure. This r e l a t i o n -
s e v e r a l o r e s , r e m a i n s c o n s t a n t and i s
used f o r a l l t h e o r e s t o be analyzed
thereafter .
 Table V

Comparative R e s u l t s Between Bond's S t a n d a r d

Method and Yashima e t a l . Method*

Work Index (kwh/t)

Standard Bond Yashima e t a l . Error
Material Method Method (%>

S i l i c a Glass 14.8 13.8 6.76

B o r o s i l i c a Glass 15.2 15 .O 1.32
Quartz 13.3 13.8 -3.76
Feldspar 12.4 11.8 4.84
Limes t o n e 9.4 8.0 14.89
Marble 6.7 6.7 0.00
Gypsum 6.3 5.8 7.94

Mean R e l a t i v e E r r o r 7.27

*After Yashima e t a l . , 1970

Since t h e work index proposed by t h e Bond m i l l d u r i n g t h e f i n a l c y c l e s

Bond i s p u r e l y a comparative f i g u r e
obtained by g r i n d i n g o r e s under c a r e -
fully controlled conditions i n a
s t a n d a r d i z e d m i l l , t h e method proposed
h e r e f o l l o w s t h e same approach b u t
uses a wet b a t c h t e s t . Since r e s u l t s
obtained i n e i t h e r c a s e w i l l be
r e l a t e d t o t h e hardness o f t h e o r e , a
r e l a t i o n among t h e s e can a l s o be
expected. To r e f l e c t changes i n
hardness when p r o v i d i n g e q u a l amounts
of d i f f e r e n t o r e s with t h e same
amount of energy d u r i n g g r i n d i n g , i t
i s n e c e s s a r y t o have f e e d s i z e d i s t r i -
bution f o r the d i f f e r e n t ores very
c l o s e t o each o t h e r ( i d e a l l y t h e y
should be i d e n t i c a l ) .
However, s i n c e d i f f e r e n t m a t e r i a l s
have d i f f e r e n t breakage c h a r a c t e r -
i s t i c s , small variations i n t h e s i z e
d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e f e e d m a t e r i a l i s
obtained. S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e t e s t
feed f o r t h e Anaconda p r o c e d u r e i s
stage-crushed t o -10 mesh, and t h e n
t h e -100 mesh f r a c t i o n i s s c a l p e d by
s c r e e n i n g . The t o p s i z e of 1 0 mesh
was a r b i t r a r i l y chosen a s t h i s i s t h e
s i z e a t which a l l o r e samples f o r
f l o t a t i o n t e s t i n g a r e crushed t o a t
Anaconda. A sample f o r t h e t e s t i s ,
therefore, readily available.
Another advantage of u s i n g t h i s s i z e d
feed i s t h a t i t s s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n
resembles t h a t of t h e m i l l c o n s i s t of
of t h e s t a n d a r d t e s t . T h i s c o n t r i -
b u t e s t o making g r i n d i n g e f f i c i e n c y
s i m i l a r i n both cases.
I f t h e same f e e d s i z e d i s t r i b u -
t i o n i s used f o r d i f f e r e n t o r e s and
t h e same s p e c i f i c energy i s p r o v i d e d
i n each c a s e , r e l a t i v e h a r d n e s s of
t h e o r e s w i l l be r e f l e c t e d by t h e
d i s p l a c e m e n t of t h e product s i z e
d i s t r i b u t i o n s away from t h e f e e d s i z e
distribution. The l a r g e r t h e d i s -
placement t h e s o f t e r t h e o r e and
vice versa. Since the batch t e s t i s
performed under w e l l c o n t r o l l e d con-
d i t i o n s , v e r y good r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y i s
o b t a i n e d . T h e r e f o r e , t h e method
r e f l e c t s accurately material r e l a t i v e
hardness.
The Anaconda s i m p l i f i e d method
c a l c u l a t e s t h e work index d i r e c t l y .
Corresponding v a l u e s f o r Bond
g r i n d a b i l i t y i f d e s i r e d , may b e
d e t e r m i n e d u s i n g a n e m p i r i c a l equa-
t i o n such a s Equation ( 1 3 ) . S i n c e
t h e method i s based on a b a t c h t e s t ,
t h e p r o d u c t s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n ob-
t a i n e d i s d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of
Bond's l o c k e d - c y c l e g r i n d a b i l i t y
test.
Method D e s c r i p t i o n
The Anaconda p r o c e d u r e d e s c r i b e d
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
h e r e can b e used w i t h a l m o s t any
regular s i z e laboratory b a l l m i l l
equipped w i t h any t y p e of d r i v i n g
mechanism. The u s e of d i f f e r e n t
equipment w i l l s i m p l y r e s u l t i n a
d i f f e r e n t c a l i b r a t i o n c o n s t a n t . The
equipment d e s c r i b e d below i s b e i n g
used c u r r e n t l y i n o u r l a b o r a t o r y . If
c a l i b r a t i o n i s n o t p o s s i b l e o r prac-
t i c a l a t a given laboratory, using
t h e same t y p e of m i l l and o p e r a t i n g
i t under t h e same c o n d i t i o n s s h o u l d
a l l o w t h e u s e of t h e same c a l i b r a t i o n
constant given here.
I n t h e example g i v e n i n t h i s p a p e r ,
t h e 100 mesh s i e v e was used a s t h e
mesh of g r i n d . The method c a n b e
r e c a l i b r a t e d w i t h any o t h e r mesh of
grind, i f desired.
T e s t Equipment. The l a b o r a t o r y b a l l
m i l l used f o r t h e test a t Anaconda i s
a r e g u l a r G a l i g h e r m i l l , 21.0 cm
(8-114 i n . ) l o n g by 2 5 . 1 cm (9-718
i n . ) i n diameter. The m i l l i s
charged w i t h c a s t steel b a l l s varying
i n s i z e from 3 . 8 1 t o 2.22 cm (1-112
t o 718 i n . ) . The m i l l b a l l c h a r g e i s
shown i n T a b l e V I . The m i l l i s
d r i v e n by a r e g u l a r G a l i g h e r b a l l
m i l l d r i v i n g u n i t and i s o p e r a t e d a t
a speed of 92 RPM which r e p r e s e n t s 96
p e r c e n t of c r i t i c a l .
T e s t Sample. Feed m a t e r i a l f o r t h e
t e s t i s p r e p a r e d by f i r s t - s t a g e
c r u s h i n g t o -10 mesh and t h e n removing
t h e -100 mesh f r a c t i o n by s c r e e n i n g .
I f done p r o p e r l y , d r y s c r e e n i n g w i l l
s u f f i c e . C a r e must b e e x e r c i s e d i n
k e e p i n g t h e -100 mesh m a t e r i a l i n t h e
f e e d a s low a s p o s s i b l e ; one c o n t a i n -
ing l e s s than 3 percent is ideal.
T e s-
- t Procedure. One k i l o g r a m of t h e
s i z e d f e e d i s ground a t 5 0 p e r c e n t
s o l i d s (one l i t e r of w a t e r ) f o r a
p e r i o d of 1 0 m i n u t e s . S c r e e n a n a l y s e s
a r e performed on t h e s i z e d f e e d and
t h e ground p r o d u c t t o d e t e r m i n e t h e
r e s p e c t i v e F and P v a l u e s . If t h e
Bond work i n d e x i s assumed t o b e
proportional t o the batch operating
Bond work i n d e x ,
where a = proportionality
constant
-
E = n e t s p e c i f i c energy
provided d u r i n g t h e
b a t c h t e s t , (kwhlt)
-
If A = @.*
t h e work index can be
10
computed d i r e c t l y from
where, A i s t h e c a l i b r a t i o n m i l l
c o n s t a n t ( k w h l t ) , P and F a r e t h e 80%
p a s s i n g s i z e s of t h e product and f e e d
d i s t r i b u t i o n r e s p e c t i v e l y (microns),
and W, i s t h e work i n d e x ( k w h l t ) .
F o r tGe m i l l used a t Anaconda Re-
s e a r c h Labs, t h e v a l u e f o r A was
d e t e r m i n e d t o b e 0.5031 (kwhlt) u s i n g
t h e c a l i b r a t i o n procedure described
n e x t . Equation (17) becomes,
E q u a t i o n (18) h a s been used f o r a l l
t h e work i n d i c e s p r e d i c t e d through
t h e Anaconda method i n c l u d e d i n t h i s
p a p e r . E q u a t i o n (18) i s o n l y v a l i d
t o p r e d i c t work i n d i c e s determined
u s i n g t h e 100 mesh as t h e mesh of
grind .
-
Method Calibration. Calibration
~ r o c e d u r e si n v o l v e t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n
o f t h e c o n s t a n t A , Equation 1 7 , based
on t h e i n f o r m a t i o n provided by
s e v e r a l o r e s analyzed by t h e s t a n d a r d
and t h e Anaconda methods. T a b l e V I I
p r e s e n t s t h e d a t a g a t h e r e d from
n i n e t e e n d i f f e r e n t m a t e r i a l s which
w e r e ground a c c o r d i n g t o Anaconda's
b a t c h t e s t p r o c e d u r e s and Bond's
s t a n d a r d l o c k e d - c y c l e t e s t . The
c o n s t a n t A can b e determined by
 D€ERMINATION OF BOND WORK NUDM

Table VI

B a l l M i l l Grinding Media Charge

B a l l Diameter Weight
(cm) (inches) Number of B a l l s (grams)

TOTAL

Table VII

C a l i b r a t i o n Data f o r t h e Anaconda S i m p l i f i e d Method

Wit witt
Bond Simplified
F P 1 1 -1 Procedure Procedure R e l a t i v e
Sample (microns) (microns) (JF - fi) (kwh/t) (kwh/t) E r r o r (%)

Montana Cu Ore 1
Montana Cu Ore 2
Montana Cu Ore 3
Nevada Mo Ore 1
Nevada Mo Ore 2
Nevada Mo Ore 3
Nevada Mo Ore 4
Nevada Mo Ore 5
Nevada Mo Ore 6
Nevada Mo Ore 7
Arizona Cu Ore 1
Arizona Cu Ore 2
Arizona Cu Ore 6
Arizona Cu Ore 7
Arizona Cu Ore 8
C h i l e Cu Ore 1
Chile Cu Ore 2
Chile Cu Ore 3
O i l Shale 1

Mean Square of R e l a t i v e ~ r r o r s= ~ 4.09

~ ~

t Determined a t 100 mesh

tt Calculated by Equation (15)

tttCalculated as p F
~ r r o r ~
B O N D WORK I N D E X ( k w h / t )
 DETERMINATIONOF BOND WORK INDEX
minimizing the square of the error
between experimental observations
and those predicted by Equation (17).
The following expression for A is
obtained (Himmelblau, 1968),
Using the data of Table VII and
Equation (19), a value of A = 0.5031
(kwh/t) was determined.
Alternatively, A could be deter-
mined from a plot of Wi versus
(1/& - lIfi)-' using a log-log
chart as shown in Figure 1. Accord-
ing to Equation (17), this plot
should result in a straight line
with a slope of 1.0. If such a line
is fitted to the experimental data,
its intercept at any given value of
(l/fi - 1/fi)-' , should allow deter-
mination of A. In the example shown
in Figure lLthe intercept at
( 1 1 6 - l/JF)-I = 10, was found to
be W. = 5. Hence, from Equation (17),
A = 6.5 (kwhlt). Notice that this
value is close to that determined by
statistical regression.
The constant a in Equation (16)
accounts for the proportionality be-
tween the batch test and locked-cycle
test, other adjusting factors used to
correlate plant and laboratory mills
in Bond's derivation, and mill
efficiency.
The relative efficiency of the
Galigher mill used for the Anaconda
method with respect to the Bond mill
was determined by grinding samples of
the same ore sized to -10 mesh in
both mills so that the net specific
energy provided to the ore was the
same. Ore charge for the Bond mill
corresponded to that used for the
standard grindability test. Size
distributions of the products obtained
are shown in Figure 2 which also
includes the experimental conditions
used for each test. Notice that the
two products exhibit size distribu-
tions very close to each other,
indicating that the grinding effi-
ciency of either mill, under the
conditions tested, is about the same.
The specific energy provided by the
Galigher mill under the standardized
conditions for the Anaconda simpli-
fied procedure was determined to be
approximately 5 (kwh/t). Conse-
quently the value of a (Equation
[16]) for the example shown here is
very close to unity. This indicates
that for this kind of mill, operated
under the conditions proposed, the
operating work index obtained is
close to the Bond work index of the
ore.
As reported in Table VII, the
Anaconda simplified method allows for
predicting work index values which
are in the average within 2 5 percent
of the value determined by the
Standard Bond procedure.
Calculation of Work Index Using the
Anaconda Simplified Method
The following example illustrates
how to use the method after calibra-
tion. A sample of Mexican porphyry
copper ore was stage-crushed to -10
mesh and then the -100 mesh material
removed by dry screening. The -10
+lo0 mesh material thus obtained was
size-analyzed using a set of sieves.
One kilogram was charged to the mill
together with one liter of water and
a 10 minute grind was carried out
under the conditions specified before.
Product and feed size distributions
for the test are shown in Table VIII
and they have been plotted in Figure
3. From this plot, the values for
F and P were determined as 1320 and
177 microns respectively. From
Equation (18),
 C U M U L A T I V E W E I G H T FRACTION F I N E R
l-ho q
0 l-h v.
c( 09
R c
em mb r m(

1
-.
o o o o p o p ~ R r
.... . o o r
O O P N W C - . A 0 rt l-h n
I I N . A W W C - W N O
V I W W O N O N O
C - P W . J O . J W 0
 DfTERMlNATlON OF BOND WORK INDEX

PARTICLE S I Z E (MICRONS)

Figure 3 - Feed and product size distributions obtained after

analyzing a sample of Mexican porphyry copper ore according
to the Anaconda Simplified Method.

(21) the application of the Anaconda

For comparative purposes, about 10
kilos of -6 mesh material were pre-
pared by stage-crushing out of the
same original sample to determine the
work index according to Bond's
standard procedure. The work index
obtained through the standard proce-
dure was Wi = 10.62 (kwh/t) which
compares quite well with the value
calculated by the simplified method.
Selected Application Examples
Different illustrative examples on
SPutplified Method are presented in
this section. They have been chosen
because they point out some of the
advantages of using the method as
well as some of the precautions that
have to be taken when using it.
Case 1. Only 2 kilograms of Chilean
copper ore were available for work
index determination. The ore had
already been stage-crushed to -10
mesh to be used in bench scale flota-
tion tests. Even under these restric-
tions, it was still possible to
calculate a work index for the sample
using the simplified procedure. The
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
-100 mesh material was removed and
one kilogram of the -10 +lo0 mesh
fraction was ground according to
procedure specifications. A value
of Wi = 11.80 (kwhlt) was obtained.
Case 2. For the example shown here,
there was some material remaining of
a Chilean ore sample prepared for
standard Bond work index determina-
tion, i.e. had been stage-crushed
to -6 mesh. Work index was deter-
mined in two different ways using
the Anaconda simplified method. For
the first determination, the -10
+lo0 mesh material needed for the
test was prepared by screening the -6
mesh ore available on the 10 mesh
sieve and 100 mesh sieve respectively.
A work index, Wi = 11.48 (kwhlt),
was obtained in this case from the
batch test results. For the second
determination the -10 +lo0 mesh feed
material was prepared by pre-crushing
the -6 mesh material to -10 mesh
prior to removal of the -100 mesh
fraction. In this case, the work
index determined by the simplified
method was Wi = 13.45 (kwhlt) . This
second value resembles much better
that obtained through the standard
Bond procedure which was Wi = 13.66
(kwh/t) .
Results indicate that in order to
get reliable results, it is necessary
to insure participation of each one
of the material classes of different
strength (hardness) to the feed
material used for the analysis.
Otherwise, as it seems to be the case
in this example, the -10 mesh frac-
tion produced during the first stages
of crushing may preferentially be
representative of the softer consti-
tuents of the ore. This behavior is
expected to be most frequent for
samples of great heterogenuity.
Although for some other ores not a
major effect on the feed preparation
procedure has been observed, it is
recommended that when using the
Anaconda simplified method, the
material sample which is going to be
analyzed be stage-crushed to -10 mesh
in its entirety prior to performing
the analysis.
Case 3. It was desired to determine
the work index of the classifier
product obtained from a SAG-Ball mill
pilot grinding circuit. This material
was finer than 10 mesh, which makes
the standard Bond procedure not appli-
cable. After removal of the -100 mesh
fraction, the -10 +lo0 mesh product
obtained exhibited a size distribution
quite different from that required for
the feed for the Anaconda procedure.
It was then necessary to assemble
some -10 +lo0 mesh material with the
appropriate size distribution for the
test which should resemble that shorn
for the feed product in Figure 3.
This was accomplished by splitting the
sample into different size fractions,
mesh by mesh, and recombining them in
the appropriate proportion to obtain
the desired distribution.
A work index value of Wi = 12.9
(kwh/t) was obtained, which compared
to a work index of Wi = 11.0 (kwhlt)
for the feed ore to the circuit ob-
tained by the standard Bond method
indicated that the sands are harder.
It becomes appropriate at this
point to remind the reader that
although good determination of Bond
Work Index can be carried out in cases
like this, the information obtained
should be considered most useful in
reflecting the hardness of the ore at
a given point in the grinding circuit.
Trying to use the work index obtained
in conjunction with the size distribu-
tion of the material at that point to
predict energy consumption in succes-
sive size reduction operations, would
undoubtedly lead to gross errors. As
explained before, Bond's technique was
designed for a well defined applica-
tion. i.e. predicting specific energy
consumption on a 8-foot diameter ball
mill, based on laboratory tests per-
formed with material sized and
prepared in a well standardized manner.
The reliability of the techinque
decreases when any of these restric-
tions are not met.
Case 4. To correlate plant throughput
with ore hardness at one of our
 DETERMINATION OF BOND WORK INDEX
concentrators, it was necessary to
have available at the plant site a
simplified technique to determine ore
hardness. The work index of the feed
ore to the rod mills was chosen to be
an appropriate indicator of ore
hardness, therefore the Anaconda
simplified method seemed to be appro-
priate to accomplish this task.
To determine work index at plant
site, a new mill of the same type as
the one used in our laboratory was
purchased and provided with the same
ball charge (see Table VI). The mill
would also operate at the same tum-
bling speed. Under these conditions,
the same calibration constant, A =
0.5031(kwh/t), can be used. Several
ore samples were used to perform
parallel experiments in both mills.
It was demonstrated that the same
work index value could be obtained in
either mill, as expected.
One week operation composite sam-
ples are being analyzed on a regular
basis. Preliminary results indicate
that the technique reflects changes
in ore hardness accurately. Work
indices calculated in this way will
be correlated to plant throughput.
Applicability Range
As it was stated in Equation (16),
the simplified Anaconda method is
based on correlating operating batch
work indices with those determined by
the standard Bond procedure. In the
calibration example shown before, all
batch tests had a specific energy
input of approximately 5 (kwh/t). As
shown in Equation (16), it should be
possible to apply the method success-
fully for different values of the
specific energy provided during
grinding. However, this value should
be such that the degree size reduction
and grinding efficiency achieved are
comparable to those obtained with the
standard Bond procedure. Specific
energy input to the mill can be
varied either by grinding for different
periods of time or by varying the
amount of material charged. In each
case, assuming that the proportionality
constant a remains constant, a cor-
rected value for A could be back-
calculated, since A is directly
proportional to the specific energy.
Furthermore, the specific energy is
directly proportional to the grinding
time and inversely proportional to the
mass charged to the mill. Table IX
shows the results obtained when one
kilogram samples of Arizona Copper
Ore 2 were ground for different
periods of time. Similarly, results
obtained after grinding samples of
Arizona Copper Ore 3 of different
weights are presented in Table X. In
either case, all other experimental
conditions were standard. From Tables
IX and X it can be concluded that for
the calibration example shown in this
paper, acceptable results can be ob-
tained for specific energy values
ranging in between 2.5 and 6.5
(kwh/t). This means that, based on
the calibration constant available,
good predictions can be made if the
grinding time is varied from 5 to 13
minutes when the mill is charged with
one kilogram of ore, or if the mill
ore charge is varied from about 2000
grams to about 770 grams for a 10
minute grind.
Accuracy and Precision
As reported in Table VII, the
accuracy of the method is approxi-
mately +5%, i.e., predicted work index
values are in the average within 25
percent of the value determined by the
standard Bond procedure.
Since the Anaconda simplified
method is based on a single batch
grinding test performed under very
well controlled conditions, excellent
reproducibility is achieved for a
given ore sample, which makes the
method a very precise technique.
Table XI shows the results obtained
when replicate determinations were
performed on several different ores.
Although, in some cases, replicate
results do not show variability, it
could be said in general that the
coefficient of variation will be in
the average below 3%.
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS

Table IX

Work Index by Simplified Anaconda Method Based On

Batch Milling of Arizona Copper Ore 2t for Different
Grinding Times

Grinding Ore
Time Charge E Att
(min) (grams) (kwhlt) (kwhlt)

t Bond Work Index = 12.0 (standard procedure)

-
tt Calculated as A = 0.5031 2
5.00

Table X

Work Index by Simplified Anaconda Method Based On

Batch Milling of Arizona Copper Ore 5t for Different
Mill Ore Charges

Grinding Ore -
Time Charge E Att P Wittt
(min) (grams) (kwhlt) (kwhlt) (kwhlt)

t Bond Work index 12 (standard procedure)

=
-
tt Calculated as A = 0.5031
5.00
tttCalculated as Wi = A[A- -1.1-'
4F fi

For comparative purposes, an exam- precision of both methods is about

ple of the precision attained with the the same.
standard Bond method at Anaconda
Research is given in Table XII. OTHER THEORETICAL METHODS
Coefficients of variation close to 3%
were obtained indicating that the As mentioned before, it is also
 DETERMINATION OF BOND WORK INDEX

Table X I

Precision Determination
Anaconda S i m p l i f i e d Method

W Coefficient
-
Ore -
Test (kwk/t) of V a r i a t i o n

Mexico Cu Ore 1 1
L
Mexico Cu Ore 2 1
2
Mexico Cu Ore 3 1
2
Arizonacuore2 1
2
3
Arizona cu Ore 4 1

Table X I 1

P r e c i s i o n Determination
S t a n d a r d Bond Procedure

W Coefficient
-
Ore -
Test (kwi/t) of V a r i a t i o n

Arizona Cu Ore 2 1 12.00 0.0239

2 11.56
3 12.09
Arizona Cu Ore 3 1 12.08 0.0305

possible t o derive a l t e r n a t i v e k i n e t i c s , i n which p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s

methods f o r c a l c u l a t i n g Bond work
index based on t h e f i r s t o r d e r g r i n d -
i n g k i n e t i c s model, Two d i f f e r e n t
approaches were t r i e d a t Anaconda
Research Laboratory.
t h e only continuous v a r i a b l e consi-
d e r e d b e s i d e s t h e time v a r i a b l e t , i s
( H e r b s t and F u e r s t e n a u , 1 9 6 8 ) ,

Work Index from Batch T e s t i n g

Based on t h e Macroscopic P o p u l a t i o n
Balance Model (MPBM) approach t o f i r s t
order grinding k i n e t i c s (Herbst,
1978), and Bond's Third Theory of
Comminution (Bond, 1962) , an e x p l i c i t
r e l a t i o n s h i p between Bond work i n d e x
and b a t c h g r i n d i n g r e s u l t s can b e where
derived.
H : mass of m a t e r i a l c o n t a i n e d
The MPBM e q u a t i o n f o r b a t c h g r i n d i n g i n the m i l l .
c o n d i t i o n s and l i n e a r g r i n d i n g
198 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS

S (d,t) :selection function, independent of size d'.

denotes the fractional
rate of breakage for Substitution of Equation (24) into
particles of size d at Equation (23) results in:
time t.
b3(d,d1) : breakage function; bs(d,
d') d(d) represents the aHF3(d9t) = K(d)H Idmax f3(dT,t)d(d')
fraction of primary at d
breakage fragments of (25)
size d~produced from
parent of size dl.
f3(d,t) : mass density function;
f3(d,t)d(d) denotes the
material mass fraction
with size d at time t.

Assuming that the selection func-

tions are time independent [S(d,t) =
S (d)] , and applying Leibnitz's Rule,
Equation (22) becomes,
Assuming that the mass remains con-
stant, Equation (25) can be integrated
from time 0 to time t,

where

cumulative mass based size distribu-

tion (Herbst and Sepulveda, 1980)
and
cumulative breakage function
Consider the case where
Equation (28) reveals that under the
assumptions made, the disappearance
of material coarser than size d fol-
lows an exponential decay with respect
to time. Equation (28) has been
used successfully by several investi-
gators, and it seems to give valid
approximations to grinding kinetics
for most of common tumbling ball mill
batch applications.
By taking natural logarithm on both
sides of Equation (28), the following
expression is obtained:

which states that the fractional rate

of production of particles finer than
size d out of particles of size d' is
 DETERMINATIONOF BOND WORK INDEX

Equation (29) i n d i c a t e s t h a t i f t h i s
theory h o l d s t r u e , a p l o t of
[1-F3(d,t)] v e r s u s t i n semilog p a p e r
should r e s u l t i n a s t r a i g h t l i n e o f
s l o p e -K(d) and i n t e r c e p t [1-F3 (d ,O)]
Notice t h a t what i s p l o t t e d h e r e i s
t h e d i s a p p e a r a n c e of t h e m a t e r i a l
fraction coarser than s i z e d, a s
grinding progresses.
g r i n d i n g of m a t e r i a l of i n f i n i t e s i z e
t o a s i z e F (80% p a s s i n g s i z e on t h e
feed s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n t o a standard
Bond g r i n d a b i l i t y t e s t ) which w i l l
. r e q u i r e a g r i n d i n g time t F . From
Equation (28)
F3(F,tF) = 1 - exp I - K ' F ~ . ~= ~0.80
~ ]

I t h a s been observed on s e v e r a l
o c c a s i o n s t h a t Equation (29) f i t s
the experimental d a t a b e t t e r f o r
f i n e r s i z e s and s h o r t e r p e r i o d s of
g r i n d i n g time. The s l o p e of e a c h
one of t h e s e s t r a i g h t l i n e s , -K(d),
f o r each s i z e c o n s i d e r e d , i s what
has been c a l l e d i n t h e p a s t communi-
t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s (Horst and Bassa-
r e a r , 1976). These c o e f f i c i e n t s
have been used t o p r e d i c t g r i n d i n g Similarly, consider t h e grinding
kinetics for different applications, of m a t e r i a l of i n f i n i t e s i z e t o a
such a s t h e p r e d i c t i o n of Bond work s i z e P (80% p a s s i n g s i z e on t h e
index by t h e method of Horst and p r o d u c t s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n of a s t a n -
Bassarear (1976) e x p l a i n e d b e f o r e , d a r d Bond g r i n d a b i l i t y t e s t ) which
and t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of m i l l be- w i l l r e q u i r e a grinding time tp.
havior i n complex g r i n d i n g c o n t r o l From Equation ( 2 8 ) ,
s t r a t e g i e s (Herbst e t a l . , 1980).
However, t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h e s e
c o e f f i c i e n t s i s a p p r o p r i a t e o n l y when
grinding experimental conditions f o r
c o e f f i c i e n t determination a r e equal
t o t h o s e used i n l a t e r g r i n d i n g
experiments where t h e y a r e going t o
be a p p l i e d . The u s e of d i f f e r e n t
e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s may r e s u l t i n
changes i n t h e power b e i n g drawn by
t h e m i l l (which should be accounted
f o r ) and/or may change t h e e f f i c i e n c y
of g r i n d i n g f o r t h e d i f f e r e n t s i z e -
fractions i n the m i l l . The e n e r g y p e r u n i t mass, E , r e -
q u i r e d t o g r i n d a p a r t i c u l a t e assembly
The comminution c o e f f i c i e n t s K ( d ) , of " s i z e t ' F ( f e e d ) t o a p a r t i c u l a t e
can be r e l a t e d t h e o r e t i c a l l y t o assembly of " s i z e t t P ( p r o d u c t ) , i s
s t a n d a r d Bond work i n d i c e s by u s i n g g i v e n by
Equation (28) and Bond's Third Theory
of Comminution (Bond, 1962). The
demonstration i s based on showing
t h a t Bond's e q u a t i o n i s o b t a i n e d from
Equation (28) f o r t h e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e
i n which i t i s assumed t h a t where
-
E : s p e c i f i c energy (kwh/t)
L : power i n p u t t o t h e m i l l (kw)
H : mass of m a t e r i a l c o n t a i n e d i n
the m i l l ( t )
A s Bond proposed, c o n s i d e r t h e
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
t p t F: time (h)
S u b s t i t u t i n g E q u a t i o n (32) a n d ( 3 4 )
i n t o (351,
On t h e o t h e r h a n d , a c c o r d i n g t o
Bond's Third Theory, t h e s p e c i f i c
energy, E, required t o grind a partic-
u l a t e assembly of " s i z e " F ( f e e d ) t o
a p a r t i c u l a t e assembly o f " s i z e " P
(product) i s g i v e n by
w h e r e Wi = Bond Work I n d e x .
By c o m p a r i n g E q u a t i o n s (36) and
( 3 7 ) , i t is concluded t h a t
To c a l c u l a t e Wi from E q u a t i o n ( 3 9 )
b a s e d on b a t c h t e s t d a t a , L a n d H
a r e d i r e c t l y m e a s u r e d and K ' c a n b e
c a l c u l a t e d using t h e following
procedure.
S u b s t i t u t i n g Equation (30) i n t o
E q u a t i o n ( 2 9 ) and r e a r r a n g i n g , t h e
following relationship is obtained:
According t o Equation ( 4 0 ) , K ' can
b e c a l c u l a t e d from t h e s l o p e o f a
s e m i l o g p l o t of [ 1-F 3 ( d , t ) 1 /
[1-F3 ( d , O ) ] v e r s u s d o a 5 f o r a g i v e n
g r i n d i n g t i m e , t . T h i s method of c a l -
c u l a t i n g Bond Work I n d e x h a s n o t
proven t o be very s u c c e s s f u l i n our
l a b o r a t o r y . Although t h e d e r i v a t i o n
p r o v i d e s a l i n k between l i n e a r g r i n d -
i n g k i n e t i c s and Bond's T h i r d Theory,
p l o t t i n g experimental d a t a according
t o E q u a t i o n (40) d o e s n o t r e s u l t i n a
s t r a i g h t l i n e , which makes t h e e v a l u a -
t i o n of K' discussable. Since t h e
l i n e a r g r i n d i n g k i n e t i c s model f o r
b a t c h m i l l i n g h a s been proven v a l i d
on a number of o c c a s i o n s by d i f f e r e n t
i n v e s t i g a t o r s , one m i g h t s u s p e c t t h a t
t h e weakness of t h e method d e r i v e s
from t h e v a l i d i t y of E q u a t i o n (30) o r
t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h e T h i r d Law t o
t h i s case.
Locked C y c l e T e s t S i m u l a t i o n
A g r i n d i n g k i n e t i c s model t h a t
accurately represents batch
g r i n d i n g b e h a v i o r c o u l d b e used tc,
c a r r y o u t a s i m u l a t i o n of Bond's
l o c k e d - c y c l e g r i n d a b i l i t y t e s t based
on k i n e t i c p a r a m e t e r s d e t e r m i n e d from
a s i n g l e b a t c h e x p e r i m e n t . A model
s u c h a s t h e one shown i n E q u a t i o n (22)
i s appropriate since its integrated
form a l l o w s f o r p r e d i c t i o n s of com-
p l e t e product s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r
a g i v e n set of o p e r a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s
and s p e c i f i c e n e r g y i n p u t . The compu-
t a t i o n a l p r o c e d u r e s h o u l d f o l l o w Bond's
standard procedure a s c l o s e a s possi-
b l e . Major a d v a n t a g e of t h i s method
a s compared t o t h o s e p u b l i s h e d p r e v i -
o u s l y (Kapur, 1970, and K a r r a , 1981)
i s t h a t s i n c e complete product s i z e
distributions a r e predicted, it is
p o s s i b l e t o c a l c u l a t e a Work I n d e x
d i r e c t l y ( H e r b s t , 1 9 8 1 ) . For t h e
purpose of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n given here,
i t i s c o n v e n i e n t t o u s e E q u a t i o n (22)
a f t e r i t h a s been d i s c r e t i z e d w i t h
r e s p e c t t o p a r t i c l e s i z e . The p a r t i c -
u l a t e a s s e m b l y b e i n g ground i s d i v i d e d
i n t o n mass f r a c t i o n s mi, e a c h one
comprised i n t o a correspondent s i z e
i n t e r v a l (di,di+l), i = 1,2,. . .. ,n.
Under t h e s e conditions, E q u a t i o n (22)
r e d u c e s t o a set of n l i n e a r d i f f e r e n -
t i a l equations:
 DETERMINATION OF BOND WORK INDEX
Equation (41) represents a mass bal-
ance for the material in the ith size
interval at time t, for which Si is
the size discretized selection func-
tion for the ith size interval
denoting the fractional rate at which
material is broken out of the ith
size interval and bij is the size
discretized breakage function repre-
senting the fraction of the primary
breakage product of material in the
jth size interval which appears in
the ith size interval. When the
selection and breakage function
parameters are independent of both
the size distribution in the mill and
time, the kinetic model is linear
with constant coefficients. Equation
(41) can be transformed into an
energy normalized form as follows:
where Si in Equation (41) and siE in
Equation (42) are related by (Herbst
et al., 1977)
In Equation (43), L is the net power
draft of the mill and H is total
holdup of material being ground.
Equation (41) or (42) can be written
in matrix form and solved using
standard matrix techniques. The
solution has been successfully
implemented using a digital computer
program named ESTIMILL (Herbst et
al., 1977) which can be used to
estimate grinding kinetic parameters
(selection and breakage function
values) from experimental data and to
predict size distributions when the
parameters are known.
After performing a batch test in
the Bond mill for a given energy
input E, a set of selection and
breakage functions can be estimated
using the ESTIMILL program. Since
the efficiencies of both the Bond
mill and Galigher mill are almost the
same, as shown in Figure 3, batch data
from either mill could have been used.
To simulate the locked-cycle test,
another program was written which only
makes use of ESTIMILL predicting
capabilities for each one of the
grinding cycles and follows Bond's
standard test procedure to calculate
fresh feed additions and number of
revolutions for the next cycle.
Necessary data for the simulation are
the batch grinding kinetics parameters
determined previously, specific energy
provided by the Bond mill per revolu-
tion (calculated based on Bond's
recommended ore charge, Bond mill
power and Bond mill tumbling speed),
and feed size distribution of the -6
mesh material used in the test. For
each cycle, the program calculates
the product size distribution, the
recirculating load and its size dis-
tribution, the grindability for the
cycle, the fresh feed addition, the
mill feed size distribution and the
number of revolutions for the next
cycle. The calculation sequence is
terminated when the grindability
becomes constant. Preliminary results
obtained with this method were In
general not as good as those obtained
with the Anaconda simplified method.
This seems to be due to inaccurate
representation of the dry screening
operation following each cycle. This
method, like those proposed by Kapur
(1970) and Karra (1981), carries the
restrictions associated to the linear
grinding kinetics model (Equation [22])
namely no interaction among the parti-
cles being ground, and time - invari-
ance for both selection and breakage
parameters. Although it may be
assumed that these restrictions are
met when steady state conditions are
reached, slight variations are expected
 DESIGN, INSTALLATION OF COMMINUTION CIRCUITS
during the initial transient state.
Therefore, some of the error associ-
ated with the method may be due to
the fact that the grinding parameters
are usually determined based on infor-
mation obtained during the initial
grinding cycles. This method, as the
other theoretical methods described
before, is not practical due to the
complexity of the calculations,
equipment requirements, and high
level of preparation required from
the operator.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The description of the several
approximate methods for the calcula-
tion of Bond work index using a
laboratory mill operated on a batch
mode is presented. Empirical
methods which allow for a direct
calculation of the work index using
a straightforward procedure are more
practical and better suited for plant
application. In particular, the
Anaconda simplified method has proven
very useful, practical, and flexible
in a number of different applications,
providing a degree of accuracy and
precision comparable or better than
other more refined methods. Compara-
tive results obtained on over twenty
different ores between the standard
Bond grindability test and the
Anaconda simplified method show an
average accuracy of 25%. Work index
estimated by this method may be used
to supplement ore grade data in
controlling daily plant throughput
and metal production. Major advan-
tages of the method are the use of
an ordinary laboratory ball mill, only
2 kilograms of sample are required,
and can be performed in about two to
three hours.
Other methods based on the simula-
tion of the grindability test using
linear grinding kinetics models do
not exhibit increased accuracy and
their practicality is reduced given
the complexity of the calculation
procedure. Although these methods
do not seem to be effective in
reducing the efforts required for the
standard Bond procedure, they may
prove useful in complementing more
elaborate simulation schemes for
grinding operations.
REFERENCES
Berry, T.F., and Bruce, R.W., 1966,
"A Simple Method of Determining
the Grindability of Ores,"
Canadian Mining Journal, Vol. 87,
pp. 63-65.
Bond, F.C., 1952, "The Third Theory
of Comminution," Trans.AIME, Vol.
193, pp. 484-494.
Bond, F.C . , 1960, "New Equation for
Calculating the Work Index from
A-C Closed Circuit Ball Mill
Grindability Tests," Allis Chalmers
Publication.
Bond, F.C . , 1961, "crushing and
Grinding Calculations," Revised
January 1961, Allis Chalmers
Publication 07R9235B. (Original
in British Chemical Engineering,
June 1960, pp. 378-385 and
543-548).
Herbst, J.A., and Fuerstenau, D.W.,
1968, "The Zero Order Production
of Fine Sizes in Comminution and
Its Implications in Simulation,"
Trans. SME-AIME, Vol. 241, pp.
538-548.
Herbst, J.A., Rajamani, K., and
Kinneberg, D., 1977, "ESTIMILL: A
Program for Grinding Simulation
and Parameter Estimation with
Linear Models. Description and
User Manual ,I' Metallurgy Depart-
ment, University of Utah, S.L.C.
Utah.
Herbst, J.A., 1978, "An Approach to
the Modeling of Rate Processes in
Multiparticle Systems," Rate
Processes in Extractive Metallur-
gy, Sohn, H.Y., and Wadsworth,
M.E., eds., Plenum Press, New York.
 203
DETERMINATIONOF BOND WORK INDEX

Herbst, J.A., Rajamani, K., and Pate,
W. T. , 1980, "Identification of Ore
Hardness Disturbances in a Grinding
Circuit Using a Kalman Filter,"
Proceedings IFAC Symposium,
Montreal, Canada.
Yashima, S., et al., 1970, "On the
Relation of Work Index and
Mechanical Properties of Brittle
Materials," -ku Kogaku, Vol. 34,
No. 11, pp. 1199-1205.

Herbst, J.A., and Sepulveda, J.L.,

1980, "Particle Size Analysis,"
Mineral Processing Handbook, AIME,
to be published.

Herbst, J.A., 1981, Private

Communication.

Himelblau, D.M., 1968, Process

Analysis by Statistical Methods,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 113.

Horst, W.E., and Bassarear, J.H.,

1976, "Use of Simplified Ore
Grindability Technique to Evaluate
Plant Performance," Trans.
SME-AIME, Vol. 260, pp. 348-351.

Kapur, P.C., 1970, "Analysis of the

Bond Grindability Test ,'I Trans.
-IMM, Vol. 79, pp. C-103-108.

Karra, V.K., 1981, "Simulation of the

Bond Grindability Test ,I1 CIM
Bulletin, Vol. 74, No. 827,~~.
195-199.

Kick, F., 1885, "Das Gesetz der Pro-

portionalem Widerstand und Seine
Anwendung," Leipzig.

Rittinger, P.R., 1867, "Lehrbuch der

Aufbereitungskunde," Berlin.

Rowland, C.A., 1975, "The Tools of

Power Power: How to Evaluate
Grinding Mill Performance Using
the Bond Work Index to Measure
Grinding Efficiency," AIME Annual
Meeting, Arizona Section, Tucson,
Arizona .

Smith, R.W., and Lee, K.H., 1968,

"A Comparison of Data from Bond
Type Simulated Closed-Circuit and
Batch Type Grindability Tests,"
Trans. SME-AIME, Vol. 241, pp.
99-101.