Summary
-
1)
Overload in overflow ball mills is due to the approach to a critical axial flow velocity for pulp of 0.072 m/s.
-
2)
While so far important only with 5.0 and 5.5 m diameter mills, it should be found with smaller mills in combinations of very high circulating loads, excessive L/D ratios, very soft ores or coarse grinds.
-
3.
A proper balancing of lower Lf and higher F values can reduce the risk for existing operations, provided that Lf values are not too low or Fc values too high initially.
-
4.
Selection of mills for new, large capacity plants should take into account the importance of lower than conventional L/D ratios for overflow ball mills, leading to diameters in the 6–7 m range. No problems in the construction or mechanical operation of such mills are anticipated in view of extensive experience with SAG and autogenous mills of larger diameters and even smaller L/D ratios.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arbiter, N. and Harris, C.C., 1982, “Scale-up and Dynamics of Large Grinding Mills,” Design and Installation of Comminution Circuits, Mular, A.L., and Jergensen, G.V., eds., SME-AIME, New York, pp. 491–508.
Arbiter, N. and Harris, C.C., 1983, “Scale-up Problems with Large Ball Mills,” Mill Design and Performance of Large Ball Mills, SME-AIME, New York, pp. 15–21.
Arbiter, N., 1989, “Comparative Dynamics of Tumbling Mills,” SAG Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, (in press).
Barratt, D.J., and Sochocky, M.A., 1982, “Factors Which Influence Selection of Comminution Circuits,” Design and Installation of Comminution Circuits, Mular, A.L., and Jergensen, G.V., eds., SME-AIME, New York, pp. 1–27.
Burns, R.S., and Erskine, J.G., 1983, “Experience with Large Diameter Ball Mills at Bougainville,” Mill Design and Performance of Large Ball Mills, SME-AIME, New York, pp. 39–53.
Dor, A.A., and Bassarear, J.H., 1982, “Primary Grinding Mill Selection, Sizing and Current Practice,” Design and Installation of Comminution Circuits, Mular, A.L., and Jergensen, G.V., eds., AIME, New York, pp. 439–473.
Harris, C.C., and Arbiter, N., 1982, “Grinding Mill Scale-up Problems,” Mining Engineering, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 43–46.
Herbst, J.A., and Fuerstenau, D.W., 1980, “Scale-up Procedure for Continuous Mill Design,” International Journal of Mineral Processing, Vol. 7, pp. 1–31.
Hively, E.E., and Wipf, E.H., 1983, “Flow Criteria/Retention as a Design Limit to Large Ball Mills,” Mill Design and Grinding Performance of Large Ball Mills, SME-AIME, New York, pp. 47–58.
Lo, Y.C., Herbst, J.A., and Rhin, C.G., 1990, “Transport Limitations in Tumbling Mills,” presented at SME Annual Meeting, Feb. 26–March 1, Salt Lake City, UT.
McArthur, C.K., 1937, “Modern Trends in Classification,” Mining Technology, T.P. 815, Transactions, AIME 94, pp. 274–281.
Rowland, C.A., and Erickson, M.T., 1983, “Large Ball Mill Scale-up Factors,” Mill Design and Performance of Large Ball Mills, SME-AIME, New York, pp. 29–33.
Taggart, A.F., 1927, Handbook of Ore Dressing, Section 4, Wiley, New York, pp. 345–365.
Taggart, A.F., 1945, Handbook of Mineral Dressing, Section 5, Wiley, New York, pp. 99.
Weller, K.R., 1980, “Hold-up and Residence Time Characteristics of Full-scale Grinding Circuits,” Mining, Metallurgical and Mineral Processing, IFAC, Montreal, pp. 303–309.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
SME preprint 90-53, SME Annual Meeting, Feb. 26–March 1, 1990, Salt Lake City, UT.
M&MP paper 90-611. Discussion of this paper must be submitted, in duplicate, prior to Aug. 30, 1991.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arbiter, N. Dimensionality in ball mill dynamics. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 8, 77–81 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03402936
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03402936