Está en la página 1de 11

MIN 313 Handout 3

Handout 3: Particle Size Analysis Handout based on book (Mineral Processing Technology) by Barry Wills, 6th edtion. Particle Size Analysis Particle size analysis (PSA) is simply the quantification of the distribution of particles within given size ranges. Typically, this is combined by assay of particles within the various ranges to identify the distribution of minerals within the ranges. PSA is a very fundamental requirement of mineral processing. At the planning stage, it helps determine the liberation and separation needs for the ore. In the operational phase, it helps determine the performance of the liberation stage. Challenges of PSA on Minerals Size can be easy to define; for example, for a spherical particle, the diameter or radius defines the size. However, the same becomes very difficult when the particles are of irregular shapes. Irregular shaped particles are the norm in mineral processing. Therefore, many definitions/practices have evolved, in order to effectively define particle sizes. A common term used is the equivalent diameter. The types of equivalent diameter are: - Stokes diameter, which is determined by sedimentation and elutriation - Projected area diameter, which is determined microscopically - Sieve aperture diameter, which is determined by sieving For most particles, the equivalent diameter is really the second largest dimension. Note that since the defined equivalent diameter depends on the method used for its determination, such methods should be similar to the mineral processing techniques for which they are the basis of design. When specifying particle sizes, it is a good practice to indicate the shape of the particles (such as needle shaped and fibrous) as well. The common methods of PSA are: Method Test Sieving Elutriation Microscopy Sedimentation (gravity) Sedimentation (centrifugal) Electron microscopy Useful Range (microns, 10-6 m) 100 000 10 40 5 50 0.25 40 1 5 - .05 1 - .005

Of these, test sieving is the most popular since most mineral applications are in this range. Sieving simply involves passing the sample successively through multiple sieves of sequentially finer apertures.

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

Sieve Analysis Sieving can be thought of as a two step process. In the first, particles that are significantly smaller than the aperture fall through (very quickly) and in the second, the slow elimination of the near size particles (those with sizes close to sieve aperture sizes). Near size particles can blind the aperture since they do not pass through easily, especially for fine mesh sizes. The charge (the amount of material dumped on the sieve for sizing) and sieve movement determine the efficacy of sieving. Common sense dictates that if the charge is too deep then most of the particles will not have access to the apertures. For large samples, the charge may have to be split into various sub-charges. When sieving, it is advised that no more than 5% of the material is retained on the coarsest sieve and no more than 5% of the material passes through the finest sieve. Sieve analysis is typically done using a Rotap, which is shown below in Fig 1. It is simply a stack of successively finer screens, mounted vertically on top of each other and mechanically vibrated. Successively smaller mesh screens separate oversize from undersize material. The fines are left in the bottom pan.

Fig 1: Rotap Use hearing protection and make sure the Rotap is clamped down before using. After the sample has been Rotaped for 15 minutes or so, the portion of sample in each screen is weighed and compared to the total sample weight. Table 1 is a typical sieve analysis. Fig 2 is its accompanying graph. Table 1: Typical sieve analysis.

Fig 2: accompanying graph.

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

When reading a graph for particle sizing, remember that the Y-axis is usually cumulative percent for undersize material. Note that dry sieving is not done if particles tend to agglomerate on sieving. This can happen for finer sieve sizes (typically <100 microns). When wet sieving is done, water is typically the medium used. Results of sieving are often plotted either as Gates-Gaudin-Schuhmann (GGS) plots or as RossinRammler (RR) plots 1 . In the GGS method, the percentage cumulative passing (P) is plotted against the sieve sizes on log-log axis. The RR plot involves plotting the sieve size (d) against loge (100/100-P) on a log-log plot. Because of the log-log scale, in GGS plots, the portion of the curve representing less than 50% passing (cumulative) gets stretched, while that above 75% gets squeezed. RR plots, on the other hand, stretch out the cumulative undersize below 25% and above 75%. See next page. It has been suggested that RR method is the better form of plotting data.

Go to www.sagmilling.com for free GGS and RR plots of your data.

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

Example: Consider the size/assay analysis of tin (Sn) below. What do you observe?

A major conclusion would be that very little tin (4.6%) is present about 210 micron size, though it represents a significant mass (24.9%). This means one could start classifying at that size level discarding all the oversize without losing much. Additionally, note that even though the -75 micron size represents only 1.9% of the material by weight, it contains 22.7% of the tin! This could be a problem since gravity separation is a problem at this size level. Sieving is normally not carried out on particles smaller than 40 m. Sizing below this size is called subsieving. Techniques for this range include sedimentation, elutriation and microscopy. However, given the range of techniques, it can be useful to have a single or at the least only a few ways of quantifying the size. Stokes diameter (used in sedimentation and elutriation) and projected diameter (used in microscopy) are two common ways of describing the size. They relate to sieve sizes as follows: Stokes diameter = 0.94 times sieve size Projected diameter = 1.4 times sieve size Stokes equivalent diameter is obtained from:
d 2 g D D S f v= 18

where v is the fluid velocity (m/s), DS is the particle density (kg/m3), Df is the fluid density (kg/m3), is fluid viscosity (=0.001 N s m-2 for water), g is acceleration due to gravity (m/s2) and d is the particle diameter (or equivalent diameter) in meters. Note that while the formula holds for spherical particles only, in mineral processing, experiments are done to obtain v, following which the above equation is used to obtained d.

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

The above equation works only for viscous flow, which is defined by a Reynolds number, R, of 0.2 or less.
R= vdD f

Thus, sedimentation and elutriation have to be limited to conditions of viscous or laminar flow. Though viscous flow normally applies to particles of sizes less than 40 microns, sometimes it applies to larger particles as well (Quartz < 125 microns; cassiterite < 70 microns; gold < 53 microns). For other larger particles, turbulent flow and transitional flow apply (based on Reynolds number).
1 2 3.33 g D S D f d = D f 1 2 4 g DS D f d = 3C D

Newtons Law:

Vt

Turbulent Flow (Re > 1000)

Transitional:

V t

(1 < Re < 1000)

Beaker Decantation - Simple and cheap - True Fractional Analysis. - Long and tedious, especially when done for fine and/or multiple sizes o 25 micron quartz particle settles at 0.056 cm/s 3.5 m for 12 cm tube 18 min for 5 decantations. Not bad. o 5 micron quartz particle settles at 0.0022 cm/s 1.5 hr for 12 cm 8 hr for 5 decantations !! Imagine if you had to do it for many other sizes

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

Large quantities of water required Large number of decantations required for near sizes

Andreasan pipette - 3-5% suspension of the sample introduced into the dispersion fluid (water, usually) - Fixed amount of fluid (10 ml usually) draw out at regular intervals. The drawn out sample is dried and weighed - Fluid level and time noted after each draw. - There is a particle size D which corresponds for a given settling height (or distance) h and time t. Therefore, the sample collected within a given time frame, gives the distribution of particles (below the size D) in the original sample. - Quicker than beaker decantation. Total time taken is the time for the smallest particles to settle. - The biggest disadvantage: samples representative of all sizes below a certain size, rather than being representative only for a particular size. Therefore, not as useful as beaker decantation.

Sedimentation General Comments - Tedious - Difficult to completely disperse material. Really fine particles can agglomerate Modern techniques include optical devices.

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

Elutriation Reverse of sedimentation. Separation by means of upward moving fluid Particles with terminal velocity less than that of the fluid with move upwards More efficient than decantation. Elutriation requires only 11 volume changes even for near size particles compared to 50 for decantation

Complete separation possible by elutriation No operator needed for fluid changes Issues include unequal fluid velocity across sorting column width. Minimum velocity at the walls and maximum in the center. Since size is computed from the mean flow, analysis boundaries are not sharp (for example, some oversize reports to the overflow). Decantation has a better sharpness than elutriation. Agglomeration and longer required settling times become a problem under 10 micron particle size. Use of centrifugal forces help with settling times. As an example, Warman cyclosizer is used in the 8-50 micron range for particles similar to quartz in density (sp.gr 2.7) and down to 4 microns for heavier particles such as galena (sp. gr. 7.5).

Apex Vortex outlet

Cyclosizers : Inverted hyrdrocylone. Fluid enters cyclone tangentially at the bottom. Tangential entry results in the formation of a vortex. High velocities, which carry larger particles, are at the walls. Since the high velocity fluid spirals up, the larger particles are discharged at the top (apex outlet). The smaller particles remain in the vortex in the center and proceed (thru vortex outlet) to the next cyclone. Inlet diameter and vortex outlet diameter both successively decrease in succeeding cyclone separation size reduces (i.e. more fines are separated). Complete elutriation takes about 20 minutes. Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

General Comments Particles in suspension (in water) will settle at a rate depending on density, size (the particles volume) and shape. Density is pretty self explanatory. A particle of gold with a specific gravity of 18 and diameter () will settle faster than a particle of quartz of the same diameter and with a specific gravity of 2.7. Since the drag force on a round object increases with the square of its radius and its mass, and hence, weight, increases with the cube of its radius, one can see that as radius increases, the objects free fall velocity becomes increasingly dependant on mass as its mass increases. Very small particles may stay in suspension for a very long time. The most common method of mathematically modeling the drag force is the equation,

FD = Drag Force. SI: N CD = Drag Coefficient. SI: Dimensionless A = Coss-sectional Area perpendicular to the flow. SI: m2 3 = Density of the medium. SI: kg/m v = Velocity of the body relative to the medium. SI: m/s

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

MIN 313 Handout 3

A round particle of mass (M) will settle much faster than a flat particle of the same mass (M) because i) the particle will have a larger surface area normal to the direction of travel, and ii) a flat plate has a higher coefficient of drag than a sphere (0.07-0.5 vs. 1.28). General considerations: 1. If two particles have the same density, then the particle with the larger spherical diameter has the higher settling velocity. 2. If two particles have the same spherical diameter, then the denser particle has the higher settling velocity 3. If two particles have the same density and diameter, then the particle with the higher Corey shape factor has the higher settling velocity. The Corey shape factor (SF) is a measure of how spherical a particle is, and depends on the short, intermediate and long dimension of the particle (ds, d, andi dl respectively). ds SF = di dl 4. Stokes Law applies to spherical quartz particles less than 125 microns, cassiterite less than 70 microns and gold less than 53 microns. 5. Newtons law applies to spherical quartz particles greater than 3 mm, cassiterite greater than 2 mm and gold greater than 1.5 mm.

Handout prepared by Michael Anderson and Rajive Ganguli, with some material from Dan Walsh

También podría gustarte