FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

Department Of Chemical, Material and Metallurgical Engineering

LEVEL 200
UNIT OPERATIONS (CHEE 220): SIZE REDUCTION AND SIEVING

Group Members
KITSO OBUSENG 21001172
TINOTENDA
THUBATSI
THANDI

SUBMITION DATE; Friday 24 February 2023

1.Declaration
3.Acknowledgements
3. Abstract

The experiment carried out was on size reduction which can also be referred to as Comminution
or grinding. It is defined as a mechanical process of reducing large course solid particles into
smaller, finer particles. This process is carried out to ensure that particles are easier to handle and
work with, to increase the surface area of the particles in order to speed up chemical reactions
and remove any entrapped materials from the particle , just to mention a few.
This experiment is designed determine the crushing efficiency through the reduction ratio, power
requirements and determine the particle size distribution and percentage passing of the materials
through the sieve. A jaw crusher was used to first crush the materials. Then we sieved, the pieces
were then further broken down by the cone crusher which uses compression and squeezing to do
a secondary crushing process, resulting in smaller pieces of the rock samples. They were once
more sieved, giving grains of various sizes. The particle size distribution of the coarse and fine
aggregates can be determined using sieve stacks. After sieving and mass measurements, all data
on crushed material size was recorded. Calculations were performed and results were presented
in a table.
4. Introduction and theory
Size reduction also referred to as comminution, diminution or pulverization is the process of
breaking down solid matter into smaller particles that are of desired size, shape and/or grade,
through compression, impact, rubbing and shear force. The concept of size reduction is used in
various industries and areas including the food processing industry, pharmaceuticals, mining,
aggregate, demolition, industrial, construction and recycling of waste. Size reduction and size
separation are combined to obtain powder with desired particle size distribution for acceptable
flow and compressibility for downstream processing. This process has two stages which are the
primary and secondary crushing, primary crushing uses the jaw crusher machine and secondary
crushing which uses the Cone crusher machine.
Size-reduction equipment is divided into crushers, grinders, ultrafine grinders, and cutting
machines. Crushers do the heavy work of breaking large pieces of solid material into small
lumps. A primary crusher operates on run-of-mine material, accepting anything that comes from
the mine face and breaking it into 150- to 250-mm (6- to l0-in) lumps. A secondary crusher
reduces these lumps to particles perhaps 6 mm (1/4in.) in size. Grinders reduce crushed feed to
powder. The product from an intermediate grinder might pass a 40-mesh screen; most of the
product from a fine grinder would pass a 200-mesh screen with a 74-µm) opening. An ultrafine
grinder accepts feed particles no larger than 6 mm (1/4in.); the product size is typically 1 to
50µm) lm. Cutters give particles of definite size and shape, 2 to 10 mm in length. (Warren
McCabe, Julian Smith and Peter Harriot, 1993)
The purpose of this experiment is to investigate and determine crushing efficiency between two
different crushers (Jaw crusher and Cone crusher) and determine reduction ratio and energy
required for crushing.
The principal types of size-reduction machines are as follows: A. Crushers (coarse and fine)
1.Jaw crushers 2. Gyratory crushers 3. Crushing rolls B. Grinders (intermediate and fine)
1.Hammer mills; impactors 2. Rolling-compression mills a. Bowl mills b. Roller mills 3.
Attrition mills 4. Tumbling mills a. Rod mills b. Ball mills; pebble mills c. Tube mills;
compartment mills C. Ultrafine grinders 1. Hammer mills with internal classification 2. Fluid-
energy mills 3.Agitated mills D. Cutting machines 1. Knife cutters; dicers; slitters. (Warren
McCabe, Julian Smith and Peter Harriot, 1993)
JAW CRUSHER MACHINE
This machine has quite a number of components, namely; the main frame, the stationery and the
movable jaw plate, the movable jaw itself, eccentric shaft, toggle plate and the adjustable toggle
seat. The no movable jaw has its maximum movement at the top of the crushing chamber and
minimum movement at the discharge point. The machine also has a toggle and a drawback rod
connected to it. As the flywheel rotates it causes the movable jaw to move towards the fixed jaw
hence crushing the material that is put as the feed to the machine.

i) image showing jaw crusher

CONE CRUSHER
This is a compression type of machine that works through squeezing or compressing the feed
material between a moving piece of steel and a stationery piece of steel. Final reduction is
determined by the closed 6 side setting or the gap between the two crushing members at the
lowest point. The crushed material is discharged at the bottom of the machine after passing
through the cavity. It delivers 4:1 or 6:1 reduction ratio. The drive turns the horizontal counter
shaft, then the pinion gear on the countershaft rotates the eccentric gear. The eccentric rotation
causes the main shaft and head to shake, this leads to the rock being crushed between the mantle
and the concaves. The final crushing is done at the parallel zone.

ii) Image showing cone crusher

The energy requirements for size reduction shows the relationship between the energy required
to breakdown the feed into smaller more manageable material. The relationship is shown by the
following formula:
dE= -Kx-ndx
Integrating this gives:
E=-KFPx-n dx

F-Feed particle diameter

P-Product particle diameter
There are 3 recognized principles that apply the above mentioned theory; Rittinger’s Law (1867),
Kick’s Law (1885) and Bond’s Law (1952).
Rittinger stated that the energy expended in crushing is proportional to the new surface area
formed:
ERV=K (1P-1F) n=2
The Kick’s Law states that for any unit mass of material, the energy required to produce a
reduction ratio is constant regardless what the initial size of the particle:
EK=K (lnFP) n=1

Bond’s Law suggests that the energy input is proportional to the new crack tip length produced
in particle breakage.
W=10Wi√P80-10Wi√F80 n=3/2
Key: W= work input (kWh/t)
Wi= 80% product size (kWh/t)
P80 = 80% feed size
5. Equipment Used
 Jaw crusher

 Cone crusher

 Sieve

 Weighing balance

 Basin
6. Methodology
Five pieces of rocks where selected and weighed in a calibrated weighing balance to determine
masses of each of these rocks. A bowel was first placed on top of the weighing balance,
zeroing /tare to remove the mass of the basin before placing those pieces of rocks in one after
another, Zeroing/tare after every rock to remove the mass of the previous rock and get the mass
of the next. The first rock was placed in a weighing balance and the readings where recorded; the
same procedure was followed until the fifth rock mass was recorded.
After that, the rocks were put in a jaw crusher to be crushed, in order to produce smaller-sized
rocks. Crushed samples were taken from the jaw crusher's collecting tray and put in sieves. Prior
to inserting the materials, sieve sizes were first noted down. The materials were placed in a sieve,
and five minutes were allocated for the sieving procedure to be completed. After 5 minutes, the
materials were returned to the weighing scale to record their masses. Starting with the material
from the first sieve and ending with the material from the pan, the masses of the materials were
recorded in the correct order.
Materials were transported to the cone crusher after being weighed and crushed into even smaller
pieces. After placing the material in a cone crusher, we waited for some time for the material to
be fully crushed. The cone crusher tray was used to collect the crushed material, which was now
slightly smaller than it had been previously. To screen the material, new sieves with smaller hole
diameter sizes were used, and the sieving procedure was carried out in the same way as in the
previous stage. The weight of the substance was then measured and recorded.
7.Results, Findings and Calculations

Table 1; for feed (Jaw crusher)

Equivalent n.d3
Material mass of feed mass fraction diameter n.d4
(g) (n) (mm)
7499.2
1 1444.20 0.66 10.33 725.78 2
1630.2
2 750.90 0.34 8.31 196.21 1
9129.4
TOTAL 2195.10 1.00 11.88 921.99 3

Total=1444.20 +750.90
=2195.10 g
mass feed
6hmass fraction(n)=
total mass
1444.2
mass fraction(n)=
2195.0
mass fraction ( n )=0.66

Equivalent diameter=2
√
3m
3

4Π ρ
Equivalent diameter=
3

√3∗1444.2
4∗3.142∗2.5
Equivalent diameter=10.33 mm

3 3
n . d =0.66∗10.33
3
n . d =725.78
4 4
n . d =0.66∗10.33
4
n . d =7499.22

Volume Mean Diameter =

∑ n.d
4

∑ n . d3
9129.23
Volume Mean Diameter =
921.99
Volume Mean Diameter (feed)=9.90 mm
Table 2: For product (Jaw crusher)
mass
Mass fraction
Sieve size retained (n) n.d4
3
(mm) (g) n.d
20 681.8 0.32 149.456 1184.481
19 135.4 0.063 29.897 233.195
16 164.4 0.076 36.066 281.314
14 116.2 0.054 25.626 199.881
13.2 51.4 0.024 11.389 88.836
11.2 93.5 0.043 20.405 159.165
10 89.9 0.042 19.931 155.463
9.5 36.4 0.017 8.0199 62.926
Last 790.8 0.37 173.686 1369.557
total 2159.8 1 468.468 3734.818

TOTAL= 681.8 + 135.4 + 164.4 + 116.2+ 51.4+ 93.5 + 89.9+ 36.4 + 790.8
TOTAL=2159.8
mass of material
Mass Fraction(n)=
Total mass

681.8
¿
2159.8
n=0.316

4 3
mass ( m )= Π r ρ
3

r=
√
3 3m
4Πρ
r=
√3 3∗681.8

4 Π∗2.75
r =3.90 cm

d=2r
d=2∗3.90
 d=7.8 cm

3 3
n . d =0.316∗7.8
3
n . d =149.456
4 4
n . d =0.316∗7.8
4
n . d =1184.481
∑ n .d 3 =¿ 149.45+29.897+36.066+ 25.626+11.389+20.405 +19.931+ 8.0199+173.686 ¿
∑ n .d 3 =468.468
∑ n .d 4=¿ 11874.481+233.195+ 281.314+199.881+88.836 +159.165+155.463+62.926+1369.557 ¿
∑ n .d 4=3734.818

volume Mean Diameter ( VMD )=

∑ n.d
4

∑ n .d 3
3734.818
( VMD ) product=
468.468
( VMD ) product=7.972

(VMD)feed
Reduction Ratio(RR)=
(VMD) product
9.90
Reduction Ratio(RR)=
7.972
Reduction Ratio ( RR )=1.242

[( √ (
Power Required ( PR )=Wi∗
1
−
1
VDM ) product √ ( VDM ) feed )]
Power Required ( PR )=13.7∗
[(1
−
1
√ 7.972 √9.900 )]
Power Required ( PR )=¿
Table 3: Percentage and Cumulative Percentage Passing in the Jaw crusher
sieve size mass retained cumulative percentage
(mm) (g) percentage passing passing
(%) (%)
20 681.8 31.6 68.4
19 135.4 6.27 93.73
16 164.4 7.61 92.39
14 116.2 5.38 94.62
13.2 51.4 2.38 97.62
11.2 93.5 4.33 95.67
10 89.9 4.16 95.84
9.5 36.4 1.69 98.31
last 790.8 36.6 63.4
total 2159.8 100.0

Table 4 ; For products (Cone crusher)

mass
sieve size mass retained fraction n.d3 n.d4
(mm) (g) (n)

11.2 320.8 0.173 38.502 233.397

9.5 122.8 0.066 5.642 24.832
7.1 473.3 0.255 83.808 578.363
6.3 165.4 0.089 10.235 49.751
4 37.7 0.020 0.532 1.579
3.35 105.7 0.057 4.180 17.501
2 212.6 0.115 16.910 89.371
1 171.3 0.012 1.378 6.776
0.0085 21.5 0.012 0.173 0.426
last 225 0.121 18.940 102.010
Total 1856.1 1.000 180.298 14026.576

TOTAL= 320.8 + 122.8 + 473.3 + 165.4 +37.7 + 105.7 + 212.6 + 171.3 + 21.5 + 225
TOTAL=1856.1
mass of material
Mass Fraction(n)=
Total mass
 320.8
¿
1856.1
n=0.173

4 3
mass ( m )= Π r ρ
3

r=
3m
4Πρ√
3

r=
√
3 3∗320.8

4 Π∗2.75
r =3.03 cm

d=2r
d=2∗3.03
d=6.06 cm

3 3
n . d =0.173∗6.06
3
n . d =38.04
4 4
n . d =0.173∗7.8
4
n . d =233.397

∑ n .d 3 =¿ 38.502+ 5.642+ 83.808+10.235+0.532+ 4.180+16.910+1.378+0.178+ 18.940¿

∑ n .d 3 =180.298
∑ n .d 4=¿ ¿223.397 + 24.832 + 578.363 + 49.751 + 1.571 + 17.501 + 89.371 +6.776 + 0.426 +
102.010

∑ n .d 4=1104.005

volume Mean Diameter ( VMD )=

∑ n.d
4

∑ n .d 3
1104.005
( VMD ) =
180.298
( VMD ) product=6.12

(VMD)feed
Reduction Ratio(RR)=
(VMD) product
7.972
Reduction Ratio(RR)=
6.12
Reduction Ratio ( RR )=1.302
 Power Required ( PR )=Wi∗
[( 1
−
1
√ ( VDM ) feed √ ( VDM ) product )]
Power Required ( PR )=13.7∗
[(1
−
1
√ 6.12 √7.972 )]
Power Required ( PR )=¿

Table 5: Percentage and Cumulative Percentage Passing in the Cone Crusher

sieve size mass retained cumulative percentage
(mm) (g) percentage passing passing
(%) (%)
11.2 320.8 17.3 82.7
9.5 122.3 6.59 93.4
7.1 473.3 25.5 74.5
6.3 165.4 8.91 91.1
4 37.7 2.03 98.8
3.35 105.7 5.69 94.3
2 212.6 11.5 88.5
1 171.3 9.23 90.8
0.0085 21.5 1.16 98.8
Last 225 12.1 87.9
Total 1856.1 100.0

Table 6; Sieve Analysis from the Jaw and Cone Crusher Product
Jaw Crusher
sieve size Product
(mm) (g) Sieve Size Cone Crusher
(mm) Product (g)
20 681.8 11.2 320.8
19 135.4 9.5 122.3
16 164.4 7.1 473.3
14 116.2 6.3 165.4
13.2 51.4 4 37.7
11.2 93.5 3.35 105.7
10 89.9 2 212.6
9.5 36.4 1 171.3
last 790.8 0.0085 21.5
Total 2159.8 Last 225
Total 1856.1
8.Discussion of results
9. Conclusions
10. Recommendations
11. References