Thesis File 81524

REAL TIME ANALYSIS WITH
DEVELOPMENT, SIMULATION AND VALIDATION OF

DISCRETE ELEMENT METHOD MODELS FOR
TUMBLING MILL CHARGE MOTION AND LINER WEAR
BY
CHAITANYA AREKAR
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Faculty of Engineering
McGill University, Montreal
September, 2004
A thesis submitted to Mc Gill University

In the partial fulfillment of the requirement of degree of
Master of Engineering
© Chaitanya Arekar 2004

Library and Bibliothèque et
1+1 Archives Canada Archives Canada
Published Heritage Direction du

Branch Patrimoine de l'édition
395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington

Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4
Canada Canada
Your file Votre référence

ISBN: 0-494-06541-9
Our file Notre référence
ISBN: 0-494-06541-9
NOTICE: AVIS:
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive
exclusive license allowing Library permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives
and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver,
publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public
communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter,
telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans
loan, distribute and sell th es es le monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres,
worldwide, for commercial or non- sur support microforme, papier, électronique
commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats.
paper, electronic and/or any other
formats.
The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur

ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse.
this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de
nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement
may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation.
reproduced without the author's
permission.
ln compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne

Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privée,
forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires
from this thesis. ont été enlevés de cette thèse.
While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires

in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination,
their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant.
any loss of content from the
thesis.
•••
Canada
Abstract
Tumbling mills, which consume around 6% of world's electric power, though inefficient (use
1% of the supplied energy) have been used in minerai processing industry for over a century.
Harsh internaI mill environments have prevented the access to in-miil dynamics. This situ-
ation has led researchers to develop models based on the Discrete Element Method (DEM)
to predict internaI mill dynamics. But before DEM models can be used in the mineraI
processing industry, their rigorous validation is essential.
In this thesis, we have carried out reaI time analysis of the DEM model to enable online
availability of the mill parameters for the mill operators. We have completed rigorous valida-
tion of a DEM model based on nine mill parameters by comparing the predicted parameters
under varying operating conditions of a 30" pilot mill and some simulated industrial mills.
Further, we have also developed a simulator to predict the wear on the tumbling millliner
profile.
Results show that the charge motion simulator used is faster than real time. The validation
exercise showed that improvements to charge motion are possible, liner wear prediction is
feasible but affects real-time simulator behaviour. Based on these results, it is recommended
to continue the improvement of the charge motion model as weil as the liner wear mode!.
Résumé
Les broyeurs, qui consomment environ 6% de la puissance électrique du monde, quoique

inefficaces (utilisant seulement 1% de l'énergie fournie), sont utilisés depuis plus d'un siècle
dans les industries de traitement des minérais. L'hostilité de l'environnement interne du
broyeur empêche l'accès à la dynamique interne de ce dernier. Cela a amené les chercheurs
à développer des modèles basés sur la méthode des élément discretes afin de prédire la
dynamique interne du broyeur. Mais avant de pouvoir utiliser les modèles DEM dans
l'industrie de traitement minier, une validation rigoureuse de ces derniers est essentielle.
Dans cette thèse, nous avons réalisé une analyse en temps réel d'un modèle DEM afin de
rendre disponible en ligne les paramètres du broyeur aux opérateurs du broyeur. En ten-
ant compte de neuf paramètres du broyeur, nous avons réalisé une validation rigoureuse
du modèle DEM en comparant sous des conditions d'opérations différentes les paramètres
prédits d'un broyeur d'usine-pilote de 30 pouces et ceux simulés de broyeurs industriels. De
plus, nous avons développé un simulateur afin de prédire l'usure du profil de revêtement du
broyeur.
Les résultats démontrent que le simulateur du mouvement de la charge utilisé est plus rapide
que le temps réel. L'exercice de validation a démontré que des améliorations du mouvement
de la charge sont possibles, la prédiction de l'usure du revêtement est faisable mais elle
affecte le comportement en temps réel du simulateur. En tenant compte de ces résultats, il
est recommandé de continuer d'améliorer le modèle du mouvement de la charge ainsi que
le modèle d'usure du revêtement.
11
Acknowledgements
1 would like to acknowledge the following people for their contribution, both directly and
indirectly, to the preparation of thesis.
Dr. P. Radziszewski, my academic supervisor, for his general guidance, encouragement

and suggestions on the structure of the thesis. In particular, 1 would like to thank
him for giving me the liberty to work on different aspects of the thesis.
Sylvain Caron, Arnaud Faucher and Daniel Roy, for project guidance, solving prob-
lems related to computer programming and developing pilot mill setup respectively
at McGill's sponsors site.
AlI the technicians at McGill's sponsors site, who have helped in developing the experi-
mental pilot mill setup.
The sponsors of the McGill's Comminution Dynamics laboratory for their support and
cooperation, particularly with regard to the allowing me to carry out the research and
unrestricted access to their pilot plants.
My parents for their influence particularly in my formative years and for their ne ver-
falling interest and support throughout my life.
My brother and sister-in-Iaw who have constantly encouraged me to strive hard to get
good results.
Lastly, though by no means least, 1 would like to thank GOD.
III
Contents
i
Abstract
ii
Résumé
III
Acknowledgements
IV
Contents
viii
List of Figures
Xl
List of Tables
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Thesis Origins . 2
1.2 Objectives of Thesis 3
1.3 Structure of Thesis 4
2 Literature Review 6
2.1 Introduction . . . 7
2.2 Review on validation of the Charge Motion Simulator for tumbling mills 7
2.2.1 Mishra and Rajamani (1990) 7
2.2.2 Powell (1991) . 9
2.2.3 Morrell (1996) 10
2.2.4 Cleary (1996) . 10
2.2.5 Radziszewski (1998) 12
2.2.6 HCItasca (1999) .. 13
2.2.7 Hinde and Moys (2001) 14
2.2.8 Kojovic (2001) 15
2.2.9 Herbst (2003) . 15
2.2.10 Other authors . 16
IV
2.2.11 Comments on the review .......... . 17
2.3 Review on Liner Wear Simulators for tumbling mills 18

2.3.1 Radziszewski (1993) 18
2.3.2 Cleary (1996) 18
2.3.3 Glover (1997) 19
2.3.4 Qui (2001) 19
2.3.5 Comments on the review 20
2.4 Conclusions............ 20
3 Real time analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator 22

3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2 Analysis of simulator computational time 23
3.2.1 Analysis of simulator time step .. 23
3.2.2 Analysis of real time consumption 25
3.3 Integration of the Simulator with Pro cess Optimization Project Software (POP) 27
3.3.1 How to integrate the Charge Motion Simulator with POP? 29
3.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4 Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 31

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.2 Strategy for validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 32
4.2.1 What is validation? 32
4.3 Experimentation . . . . . . 33
4.4 Identification of parameters 35
4.4.1 Power... 36
4.4.2 Toe Angle . 38
4.4.3 Shoulder Angle 39
4.4.4 Center of Mass (CoM) / Center of Charge (CoC) 41
4.4.5 Number of Layers ... 43
4.4.6 Number of 'frajectories 44
4.4.7 Forces on the Liner . 45
4.4.8 Charge Volume 46
4.4.9 Layer Speed .. 47
v
4.5 Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 49
4.5.1 On the Basis of Power Prediction . . 50
4.5.2 On the Basis of Toe Angle Prediction 50
4.5.3 On the Basis of Shoulder Angle Prediction 51
4.5.4 On the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction ... 51
4.5.5 On the Basis of Predicted Number of Layers 52
4.5.6 On the Basis of Predicted Number of Trajectories 52
4.5.7 On the Basis of Predicted Forces on the Liner . 53
4.5.8 On the Basis of Predicted Charge Volume 54
4.5.9 On the Basis of Predicted Layer Speed . . 55
4.5.10 Summary on validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 56
4.6 Development of difIerent Charge Motion Simulator Versions 56
4.6.1 Shoulder Clipping (V-L1) 57
4.6.2 Layer Adjustment (V-L2) 57
4.7 Validation of difIerent Versions of Charge Motion Simulator 59
4.7.1 On the Basis of Power Prediction . . . 59
4.7.2 On the Basis of Toe Angle Prediction 59
4.7.3 On the Basis of Shoulder Angle Prediction 60
4.7.4 On the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction ... 60
4.7.5 On the Basis of Predicted Number of Layers 61
4.7.6 On the Basis of Predicted Number of Trajectories 62
4.7.7 On the Basis of Predicted Forces on the Liner . 62
4.7.8 On the Basis of Predicted Layer speed . . 63
4.7.9 On the Basis of Predicted Charge Volume 64
4.7.10 Summary on the comparison of difIerent versions of the CMS 64
4.8 Conclusions . . . . . . . . ........................ 65
5 Simulation of Liner wear 66

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.2 Strategy for development of the Liner Wear Simulator 67
5.2.1 What is wear? . . . . . . 67
5.3 Force investigation on mill liners 68
VI
5.3.1 Forces acting in the Abrasion Region. 69
5.3.2 Forces acting in the Impact Region . 70
5.4 Wear Models . . . . . . . . . . . 70

5.4.1 Abrasive Wear Modeling . 70
5.4.2 Impact Wear Modeling. . 72
5.5 Integration of Wear Models with the Charge Motion Simulator 79
5.5.1 Charge Motion Algorithm . . . 79
5.5.2 Wear Computation Algorithm . 81
5.5.3 Collision Detection Algorithm . 82
5.6 Liner Discretization 82
5.7 Simulation Results . 85
5.8 Statistical Analysis of Results 90
"5.8.1 Smoothing Liner Profile 90
5.8.2 Application of the selected smoothing technique 92
5.9 Real Time Analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator with Wear Module 93
5.10 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
6 Conclusion and recommendations 96

6.1 Conclusions........ 97
6.1.1 Real time analysis 97
6.1.2 Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 97
6.1.3 Liner Wear simulation 98
6.2 Recommendations 99
References 100
Appendix
A Visual validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 107
B Additional features of the Liner Wear Simulator 113
C Source code for the Liner Wear Simulator 119
vu
List of Figures
2-1 Snapshot of MILLSOFT simulator 8

2-2 Snapshot of MillTraj simulator .. 9
2-3 Snapshot of JKSAGCharge simulator 10
2-4 Snapshot of Cleary's Charge Motion Simulator . 11

2-5 Snapshot of Radziszewski's Charge Motion Simulator 13
2-6 Snapshot of Charge Motion Simulator by HCItasca . 14
2-7 Snapshot of the Charge Motion Simulator reported by Kojovic 15

2-8 Snapshot of HSF simulator . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2-9 Radziszewski's technique for simulating Liner Wear 18
2-10 Cleary's technique for simulating Liner Wear . . . . 19
3-1 Variation in power predicted with change in the time step 24
3-2 Real time consumed with varying time step 25
3-3 Real time analysis for industrial mills 26
3-4 Real time analysis for pilot mills . . . 27
3-5 Integration of POP workstation in mill computing network 28
3-6 Schematic diagram showing integration of Charge Motion Simulator with POP 29
3-7 Snapshot of the Charge Motion Simulator integrated with POP . . . . . . . . 30
4-1 Strategy for validation of the CMS . . . . 32

4-2 Schematic plan of the experimental setup 33
4-3 Actual experimental mill setup . . . . . 34
4-4 Typical charge motion in tumbling mill 36

4-5 Identification of the Toe Angle . . . 39
4-6 Identification of the Shoulder Angle 40
Vlll
4-7 Comparison of Shoulder Angle computation approach: McIvor vs Morrell 41
4-8 Identification of the Center of Charge . 42
4-9 Movement of computed Center of Mass 43

4-10 Identification of the Number of Layers . 44
4-11 Identification of the Number of Trajectories 45
4-12 Schematic of Forces on a Liner 46
4-13 Measuring the Charge Volume 47

4-14 Procedure for Identifying Layer Speed 48
4-15 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Power: Predicted vs Observed 50
4-16 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Toe Angle: Predicted vs Observed 51

4-17 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Shoulder Angle: Predicted vs Observed 51
4-18 Validation of CMS on the Basis of CoM /CoC: Predicted vs Observed. . . 52

4-19 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Number of Layers: Predicted vs Observed 52
4-20 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Number of Trajectories: Predicted vs Observed 53
4-21 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Normal Forces on the Liner 53

4-22 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Tangential Forces on the Liner 54
4-23 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Charge Volume: Predicted vs Observed 54

4-24 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Layer speed 55
4-25 Development of the CMS: Shoulder Clipping (V-l.I) . 57

4-26 Development of the CMS: Layer Adjustment (V-l.2) . 58
4-27 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Power Prediction 59

4-28 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Toe Angle Prediction 60
4-29 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Shoulder Angle Prediction 60
4-30 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction . . . 61

4-31 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Number of Layers Prediction 61
4-32 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Number of Trajectories Prediction 62

4-33 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Forces on the Liner . . 62
4-34 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Layer Speed Prediction 63
4-35 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Charge Volume prediction 64
5-1 Strategy for the development of the Liner Wear Simulator . 68

5-2 Cross sectional view of simulated tumbling mill . . . . . . 68
IX
5-3 Contact regions of the charge particles with the mill liner 69
5-4 Schematic of forces acting in the Abrasion Region of mill 69
5-5 Coefficient of Restitution: Measured vs Computed . 76
5-6 Coefficient of Friction: Measured vs Computed 77

5-7 Comparison of Impact Wear Models . . . . 78
5-8 Algorithm of the Charge Motion Simulator 80
5-9 Algorithms for Wear Computation 81
5-10 Liner discretization . . . . . . . . 83
5-11 Algorithm to compute liner wear profile 84
5-12 Geometry of the liner in simulated mill for wear validation 86
5-13 Validation of Simulated Liner Wear (V-l.Ü): Simulated vs Measured 87
5-14 Validation of Simulated Liner Wear (V-l.2): Simulated vs Measured 88
5-15 Validation of smoothed Liner Wear: Simulated vs Measured . . . 89
5-16 Contribution of Impact wear to total wear: No impact vs Impact 90
5-17 Simulated Impact Liner Wear with no Abrasion Wear 90
5-18 Selection of smoothing technique. . . . . . . 92

5-19 Application of selected Smoothing Techniques 93
5-20 Real time analysis of the CMS with Impact Wear Algorithm 94
5-21 Real time analysis of CMS with Abrasive Wear Algorithm. . 94
A-1 Visu al validation of the Charge Motion Simulator -1 : Pilot Mill . 109
A-4 Visual validation of the Charge Motion Simulator: Simulated Industrial Mills 112
B-1 Change in the direction of mill rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
B-2 Schematic diagram showing feedback of Liner Wear to the CMS . 116
B-3 Effect of Liner Wear on the CMS. . . . . . . . . . 116

B-4 Mill Liner with different lifter discretization values . 117
B-5 Accumulated wear on aH the mill liners ...... 118
x
List of Tables
4.1 Operating conditions of the pilot mill tests . 34

4.2 Example showing calculation of Layer speed 48
4.3 Summary of validation of CMS . . .. 56
4.4 Summary on validation of CMS Versions . 64
4.5 Over aH view on validation of CMS 65
5.1 Operating Parameters of Simulated Mill 85
B.l Parameters of Initialization File . . . . 114
Xl
Chapter 1
Introduction
1
1.1 Thesis Origins
The pro cess of size reduction of mineraIs - comminution which occurs towards the end of
the mineraI processing circuit - grinding in a tumbling mill has interested researchers since
long time mainly because the pro cess consumes very high amount of energy and is ineffi-
cient. It has been reported that comminution pro cess in tumbling mills uses no more than
1% of the supplied energy with the rest being wasted in producing noise and heat [Hu, 2000].
As the environment in the tumbling mill is harsh, it is difficult to put sens ors inside to
get accurate information about internaI mill dynamics. This has led researchers to de-
velop models to predict the mill parameters, as an attempt to improve the understanding
of internaI mill motion. The earliest effort reported was by Davis (1919), who developed
an equation to predict mill power. Since then a number of researchers [Rose and Evans,
1956; Bond, 1961/1962; Hog and Fuerstenau, 1972; Arbiter and Harris, 1982; Lindell, 1986;
Austin, 1990; Mishra and Rajamani, 1990; Morrell, 1993; Radziszewski, 1998] have tried
to develop models that either predict certain parameters of the mill motion or predict the
entire motion of charge particles inside the mill.
With considerable effort put in the field of modeling - the movement of the charge par-
ticles in mill - it was realized that the parameters and motion of charge particles predicted
required thorough validation [Moys, 2001]. The simple analysis given below shows that the
total cost of energy alone makes any improvement in efficiency economically attractive.
Analysis
Electricity consumed in communition pro cess : 6% of world's electric power
(Rajamani, 1993) generation
Worlds Electricity Generation (as per 2005) 18,000 kWh / year
(International Energy Outlook)
Cost of Electricity : 0.07 $US /kWh
Energy utilized in comminution : 18,000 x 0.06
=1,080 Billion kWh jyear
So, Energy cost :1,080 x 0.07
=76 Billion $US/year approx.
2
Validation of the charge motion models helps to get an inside view about the comminution
process in a tumbling mill. This knowledge can certainly increase our understanding of
internaI mill dynamics, thus opening doors for optimization and leading to improvements in
the grinding efficiency of mills. Thus ultimately leading to increased profitability through
reduction in operating cost and maximization in production.
AIso, sponsors of McGill's Comminution Dynamics Laboratory had a project for developing
online indicators of the mill. The project is described in brief as follows:
Due to the harsh internaI mill environment, usually mill operators depend on their experi-
ence (in the majority of the cases on the sound and on the power consumption) to predict
the mill performance. The sponsors wanted to develop online indicators for mill that could
precisely show the internaI mill dynamics. These indicators would help mill operators make
well-informed decision to optimize the mill performance rather than solely depend on their
experience. Of the number of indicators for the mill, wear profile on the tumbling millliners
was one of the indicators to be developed.
Another unstated (indirect) but most important need in the project of developing mill
indicators was "the online aspect" as it is essential for mill operators ta get the internaI
mill information instantly so that corrective action can be taken immediately.
1.2 Objectives of Thesis
The objectives of the thesis were as follows:
• To validate a charge motion simulator so that the parameters predicted by the charge
motion simulator could be used as mill indicators.
• To develop a simulator to predict the wear on the tumbling millliners and to integrate
it to the charge motion simulator so that the liner wear can be computed from the
simulated charge motion.
3
1.3 Structure of Thesis
The thesis is organized in to six chapt ers and three appendices, including this introduction.
To achieve the objectives of the thesis a comprehensive review of the published literature
was undertaken. Chapter 2 covers the details of the literature review highlighting the
methodology followed by various authors in validating their charge motion simulator and
liner wear simulator specifying the advantages and disadvantages in their approach.
The main goal of the project was to develop online mill indicators which required that the
Charge Motion Simulator performed as a real time system. Hence the next logical step was
to verify the real time aspects of the Charge Motion Simulator. Chapter 3 covers the real
time analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator. The details of integration of the Charge
Motion Simulator with the plant's Distributed Control System (DCS) are also discussed in
this chapter. Integration with the DCS allows the online charge monitoring in the mineraI
processing plants.
After having laid the ground work of having the Charge Motion Simulator online, it is
essential to validate the parameters predicted by the Charge Motion Simulator. Chapter
4 is specifically dedicated to the validation of the Charge Motion Simulator. This chapter
is divided broadly in two parts. The first part covers the description on the experimental
setup developed to ob tain the actual charge motion from the pilot mill under varying con-
ditions, followed by a detailed analysis of numerous mill parameters and selection of sorne
parameters which formed the basis for validation of the Charge Motion Simulator.
The second part covers the details of a comparison of the actual charge motion with the
simulated charge motion on the basis of parameters selected in the first part of the chap-
ter. AIso, the attempts made to improve the predictive capabilities of the Charge Motion
Simulator are discussed in details.
Another objective of the thesis was the development of a Liner Wear Simulator. Chapter
5 is dedicated to this objective. This chapter has three major sections. The first section
4
analyzes the definition of wear as applied to the tumbling mill liners. The second section
covers theoretical developments which include details on wear models and algorithms that
computes millliner wear from the simulated charge motion. This section also covers details
of the discretization of the mill liners which allows the computation of wear at a precise
location of the millliner. The third section covers the validation part of the developed liner
wear simulator with details of statistical analysis and real time aspect.
Chapter 6 forms the last chapter of the thesis and summarizes the main conclusions and
recommendations for further research.
Appendix A is the continuation of Chapter 4 of the thesis. It gives a pictorial view of

validation of the Charge Motion Simulator for pilot and simulated industrial mills.
Appendices Band C are related to Chapter 5. Appendix B de scribes additional features of

the Liner Wear Simulator along with results while Appendix C covers the code of the Liner
Wear Simulator.
5
Chapter 2
Literature Review
A review of literature on validation of the charge motion simulation and simulation of liner
wear was undertaken. It was found that currently there existed number of efforts to pre-
dict the profile of the charge motion. In most cases, the charge motion was validated on
the basis of Power prediction. Some researchers have used the Toe and Shoulder Angle
prediction [Mishra and Rajamani, 1994,- Cleary, 2003} for validation purpose. On detailed
investigation it was found that the methods used by Mishra and Rajamani, Cleary, Moys,
Herbst seemed to predict charge motion reasonably well but consumed large amounts of time
in computation. Other efforts found were efficient in computation but were limited in ap-
plication [Morrell, 1996,- Kojovic, 2001,- Powell, 1991].
For liner wear simulation, it was found that few researchers had tried to simula te wear of
tumbling mill liners. Most of the work reported either lacked comparison of simulated wear
with the actual wear [Glover; 2001,- Cleary, 1996,- Radziszewski, 1993j or lacked the detailed
methods and techniques used to obtain the wear profile [Qui, 2001]. It is also surprising
that there is lack of data on the computational time aspect of the wear simulator.
Only Radziszewski's Charge Motion Simulator was found to be promising for further devel-
opment from the project's point of view since it followed a simplified approach to simulate
the charge profile which indicated a higher probability of being computationally efficient.
Since the simulator had been validated on basis of power prediction only, further rigorous
validation of the simulator was necessary.
6
2 .1 Introduction
Depending on the type of tumbling mill, the mill contains ores and / or balls for crush-
ing the ore. The ore and / or balls are termed mill charge or simply charge. This charge
moves inside the mill as the mill rotates, creating a profile which is termed charge profile.
Due to the rotation of the mill, the ore undergoes breakage and size reduction, a pro cess
termed comminution. Comminution is an extensive power consuming pro cess with very
lowefficiency [Rajamani, 1993]. To increase grinding efficiency and hence profitability, it is
essential to understand the behavior of charge particles inside the mill. lndustrial mills are
large in size, rotate and have closed ends, making it difficult to measure the internaI mill
dynamics. To increase our understanding of the movement of the charge inside the mills,
researchers have tried to simulate the motion of mill charge. The simulators so developed
are termed as Charge Motion Simulators (CMS).
The aim of this chapter is to review the existing CMS and work do ne by researchers for
validating their CMS. Development in the field of tumbling millliner wear simulators is also
described.
This chapter is primarily divided in to two major parts viz., review on the validation of the
Charge Motion Simulators and on the development of the Liner Wear Simulators.
2.2 Review on validation of the Charge Motion Simulator

for tumbling mills
This section describes the work done by various researchers for validating charge motion.
It begins by identifying the researchers, followed by a brief account of the charge motion
simulator developed and finally describes the efforts made in validating the simulator.
2.2.1 Mishra and Rajamani (1990)
Charge Motion Simulator: They have simulated the motion of particles using a Discrete
Element Method (DEM). DEM is a special class of numerical scheme for simulating the
behavior of discrete interacting bodies. In their DEM [Mishra, 1992], each particle (disc)
7
is identified separately by its radius, mass, moment of inertia, and collision properties.
Collision between the particles is determined by their overlap. The amount of overlap is
used to compute the acceleration, velo city and displacement of the disc based on force
balance equations. This procedure is carried out on every disc resulting in new position of
the discs. The dynamic equilibrium equations used are given below [Mishra, 1992]:
mXi + CiXi + KiXi, i = 1,2 (2.1 )

2
M Ië + l:(KiXi + Cdi)Si (2.2)
i=l
where
Si = short est distance of force from disc i, M =moment about the disc
Fi = force acting in direction, m,x,! =mass, position and centroid of each disc,
K = spring constant, C =dashpot constant.
Their simulator is termed MILLSOFT. Figure 2-1 shows the a snapshot of MILLSOFT.
Figure 2-1: Snapshot of MILLSOFT simulator

(redrawn from Mishra, 2003)
Parameters chosen for validation:

• Toe angle • Shoulder angle
• Power • Path followed by single particle
Approach: They captured the actual charge motion of the pilot mill (25cm / 30cm in dia.)
on video tape using a camera, analyzed and compared the images thus obtained with the
MILLSOFT simulator for validation of toe and shoulder angle [Mishra, 1994; Aggrawal,
1997; Venugopal, 2001]. They also used a special computer program to track coordinat es
8
of individual balls in the video to validate the path followed by a single particle. The path
followed by the particle was compared with the displacement history of the particle in the
MILLSOFT simulator under similar operating conditions [Mishra, 1990,1994]. Mill power
was validated using a data base developed for indus trial mills (mostly SAGs) and pilot mill
experiments [Datta, 1999; Abd El-Rahman, 2001; Mishra, 2003].
2.2.2 Powell (1991)
Charge Motion Simulator: DEM simulation technique is used by the author to develop
the CMS. The technique predicts the trajectories of the particles in the outer layer of the
charge. Equations developed to predict the exact point at which the charge particle stays
in contact with the lifter until the particle slides [Powell, 1991] were used. The simulator is
termed MillTraj. A snapshot of MillTraj is shown in Figure 2-2.
Figure 2-2: Snapshot of MillTtaj simulator

(redrawn from Powell, 1991)

• Center of charge • Angle of Repose
• Number of trajectories • Path followed by particle
The validation of CMS based on the ab ove parameters requires a full ftedged CMS and
not a CMS as reported by the research group. But the research group has reported their
validation, hence are described below.
Approach: The trajectory history of particles within a laboratory mill was recorded us-
ing an automated tracking technique and bi-planer X-ray filming device (an angioscope)
[Govender, 2001]. The experimental set-up provided enough statistically significant and
accurate data for validation of the particle path. The data obtained from the same experi-
mental set-up was used to validate the Center of Charge (CoC) and Angle of Repose. The
9
Angle of Repose and the CoC were calculated from the charge motion simulator using the
equations developed [Powell, 1996]. The number of trajectories were validated after the
theoretical development on the interaction of ball and lifter by filming the charge motion
of the glass front end mill with a high speed camera [Powell, 1991].
2.2.3 Morrell (1996)
Charge Motion Simulator: The CMS developed uses the Shoulder and Toe Angle equa-
tions developed by fitting the data of observed Toe and Shoulder Angles to compute the
charge geometry [Morrell,1993]. The charge geometry obtained from toe and shoulder
position is used to compute the Power [Morrell, 1992, 1994,1996]. The CMS is termed
JKSAGCharge. Figure 2-3 given below shows JKSAGCharge software.
Figure 2-3: Snapshot of JKSAGCharge simulator

(redrawn from online simulator manual)

• Power
Approach: The accuracy of the model developed was tested by comparing the predicted
and observed power. The database developed during the Ph.D thesis of Morrell was used
for this purpose. The database consisted of Ball, SAG and AG mills with sizes ranging from
pilot / laboratory sized mills to industrial mills.
2.2.4 Cleary (1996)
Charge Motion Simulator: A DEM technique was also used to simulate the motion of
charge particles. The particles are modeled as either dis cs or super -quadrics whose general
10
form in two dimensions is as follows [Cleary, 1996]:
xn + (~) n = sn (2.3)
where
n = particle sharpness, a = particle aspect ratio with semi-major axis s,
The collision forces for the particles are determined using a spring and dashpot model, using
the following equations:
Fn -kn 6. x + Cnv n (2.4)

Ft = min{J-lFnkt J Vt dt + CtVt} (2.5)
where
Fn= normal force, Ft = tangential force, k =spring stiffness,

Vt = tangential velocity, V n = normal velo city, ,6,x=amount of overlap,
f-l = coefficient of friction, C = dashpot stiffness.
These collision forces are evaluated for each of the particles. AIl the forces acting on each
of the particles are then summed up and the resulting equations of motion are integrated
to compute the next position and velocity of the particle. A typical output of the Charge
Motion Simulator is shown in Figure 2-4.
Figure 2-4: Snapshot of Cleary's Charge Motion Simulator

(redrawn from Cleary, 2003)
• Shoulder angle • Toe angle

• Vortex angle • Charge profile
11
Approach: An experimental mill with 592mm diameter X 200mm length was used for the
purpose of validation. This mill was 1:10 scaled model of the Alcoa SAC mill located at
Pinjara. The mill was run at different speeds and percentage filling in or der to obtain varied
charge profiles and Toe and Shoulder Angles. Toe, Shoulder and Vortex Angles (CoC) were
verified using the streak diagrams developed from the Charge Motion Simulator [Cleary,
2003], while the charge profile obtained from the simulator was compared with snapshots
of actual motion of charge particles in the mill [Cleary, 2000,2001].
2.2.5 Radziszewski (1998)
Charge Motion Simulator: It may seem that the author has developed his Charge
Motion Simulator recently but actually the development of the simulator can be dated
back to 1986, when the author did his Master degree. The stage wise development of the
simulator is detailed below:
1986: Communition process was modeled as a function of crushing, tumbling

and grinding in the ball mill [Radziszewski, 1986]
1989: Kinetic models were developed and verified for ball mill charge motions
[Radziszewski, 1989].
1990: Models for breakage energy and batch grinding were developed [Radziszewski, 1990].
1993: Models to predict the wear on the liner and balls were developed with
considerable effort put on mill optimization [Radziszewski, 1993]
All the ab ove models were combined together to develop the Charge Motion Simulator.
The basic method used is DEM with an agglomerated ball approach [Radiszewski, 1986].
Initially, the particles are agglomerated through the use of arbitrary discretization scheme,
equations of motion [Radziszewski, 1998] are applied to each particle (represented by their
center of mass in this case), to predict its position in the next time interval. Figure 2-5
shows the profile of the charge motion inside the mill as obtained from the simulator.
• Power • Charge profile
Approach: To compare the power simulated with that observed under similar operating
conditions, published data [Morrell, 1996] was used [Radziszewski, 1998,1999]. The database
contained different types of mills viz., Ball, SAC and AC with sizes ranging from pilot to
industrial. Also, the profiles of the simulated charge motion were compared with the CMS
developed by other authors viz., Mishraj Rajamani and Powell [Radziszewski, 1999].
12
Figure 2-5: Snapshot of Radziszewski's Charge Motion Simulator
(redrawn from Radziszewski, 2002).
2.2.6 HCItasca (1999)
Charge Motion Simulator: Researchers of this company have developed a Particle Flow
Code 3D (PFC3D) [Djordjevic, 2003]. This code models the behavior of the particles, which
may be enclosed within a finite volume by the non-deformable walls. Each calculation step
of the code includes application of the laws of motion to a particle, a force-displacement
law to each contact and constant updating of wall position [Cundall and Strack, 1979]. The
normal contact force vector (Fn) is calculated as follows:
(2.6)
where
Kn = normal stiffness at contact, Un = relative normal contact dis placement ,
nz = unit normal vector.
The incremental shear force (Fs ) is calculated as follows:
(2.7)
where
Ks = shear stiffness at contact, Us = relative shear displacement.
Since a full sized mill can be reliably represented by a vertical slice of sufficient thickness
[Djordjevic, 2003], motion mill charge particles can be modeled with PFC3D code. Figure
2-6 shows charge motion modeled by PFC3D code:

• Power
13
Figure 2-6: Snapshot of Charge Motion Simulator by HCItasca
(redrawn from Djrodjevic, 2003)
Approach: The power predicted through PFC3D code was compared with that predicted
by empirical models for tumbling mills [Djordjevic, 2003].
2.2.7 Hinde and Moys (2001)
Charge Motion Simulator: They have also used a DEM simulation technique to develop
the charge profile in the mill. They used a spring-slider-dashpot model to determine the
force and displacement of the particle by using following equations [Van Nierop, 2001]:
(2.8)
(Ft> muFn) (2.9)
(Ft::; P,Fn) (2.10)
where,
Fn = normal force, Ft = tangential force,

C = dashpot coefficient, v = velocity,
p, = coefficient of friction, dt = time step,
• Forces acting on liner • Dynamic torque

• Power • Trajectories of particles
Approach: In majority of the cases they have used a 0.55m dia. laboratory mill for the
experimental purpose. The forces acting on the liner were measured using an instrumented
14
boIt fitted on a liner with strain gauge [Moys, 2000]. The dynamic torque was measured
using a load beam for considerable amount of time at different speeds and compared with
actual torque required under similar operating conditions [Monama, 2002]. Power was
measured by changing the mill speed, number of lifters and the percentage charge volume
[Hlungwani, 2003]. Trajectories formed were validated by superimposing the snapshot from
the simulator on image of actual charge motion by varying the speed [Dong, 2002]. They
have also compared the images of the charge particles inside the mill with snapshot of the
simulator [Hlungwani, 2003].
2.2.8 Kojovic (2001)
Charge Motion Simulator: The developed charge simulator is for online charge pre-
diction. JKMRC's tumbling mill power model is used in the CMS [Kojovic, 2001]. The
simulator is designed to estimate the mill filling from the measured mill power, mot or speed
and ball filling. Aiso in the simulator the calculations to predict the outer trajectory of the
charge are incorporated [McIvor, 1983; Powell, 1991]. Since their simulator uses a standard
iterative procedure to find out the mill filling that would match the measured power with
the given mill speed and ball load, it is a custom designed simulator for the mill. Figure
2-7 shows the snapshot of their simulator output.
Figure 2-7: Snapshot of the Charge Motion Simulator reported by Kojovic

(redrawn from Kojovic, 2001)
2.2.9 Herbst (2003)
Charge Motion Simulator: A High Fidelity Simulation (HFS) technique is used to

simulate the charge motion [Herbst, 2003]. HFS combines DEM, Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) and Discrete Grain Breakage (DGB) to mathematically describe and
study processing systems. Their DEM in HFS is similar to that developed by Rajamanij
15
Mishra (1992) and Cleary (1996). CFD is used to simulate the flow field velocities using
multi-phase flow equations which take into account the forces of interactions between the
fluids and partides [Tsuji, 1993]. DGB uses the crack energy balance equation to determine
the breakage [Potapov, 1996]. Figure 2-8 shows the snapshot of their simulator output.
r
Figure 2-8: Snapshot of HSF simulator
(redrawn from Herbst, 2003)
Parameters chosen for validation: The author daims that tools used for developing
the simulator viz., DEM, CFD, DGB have already been validated at one level or another in
laboratory and full-scale continuous operation, thus requiring no further validation [Herbst,
2003].
2.2.10 Other authors
Other authors have tried to simulate charge motion of tumbling mills. Most notable among
them is the CMS developed by Inoue and Katsunori (1996). They have also used DEM
method, similar to Mishra jRajamani (1992) and Cleary (1996) to simulate the charge mo-
tion profile. No data for validation of their simulator has been published.
Other notable research do ne is this area is by Zhang and Whiten (1998). As described
earlier a majority of the Charge Motion Simulators developed predict the motion of charge
particles using collision forces modeled through a spring and dashpot arrangement. These
authors have done research on the effectiveness of the spring and dashpot model. They have
shown that the commonly used single spring and dashpot model gives unrealistic results
and have proposed a two spring dashpot model [Zhang, 1998].
16
2.2.11 Comments on the review
As can be observed from the review, there are number of charge simulators existing today,
which show various aspects of tumbling mill charge profile. Each simulator has its own
advantages and disadvantages. The methods used to obtain the charge profile can be
broadly categorized grouped in four groups as follows:
1. Use of Newton's laws to determine the contact forces on collision of partides (Mishra
and Rajamani, Cleary, Moys, Inoue, HCItasca group).
This technique gives the most accurate results among the results reported so far
but consumes enormous amounts of computing time [Mishra, 2003; Djordjevic 2003;
Herbst, 2003]. It has been reported that to compute one rotation of indus trial sized
mill, it takes about six to eight ho urs [Mishra, 1996]. This might be the reason
for going towards parallel computing while making 3D simulations [Ghaboussi, 1993;
Ferrez, 1996]. From a validation point of view, the authors daim that the technique
had been thoroughly validated, but in a recent workshop on DEM held in South Africa
(August, 1999), it was felt that more rigorous verification of DEM applied to grinding
was required [Moys, 2000]. overall , considering the project objectives, this technique
though it yields good results is not suitable.
2. Use of agglomerated approach and application of Newton's laws to determine motion

of partides (Radziszewski).
The approach is unique. Most of the data pertaining to Energy Spectrums, Forces
can be extracted using this technique. There is lack of data published on the com-
putational time required for this technique. The technique seems to predict power
weIl, but do es not necessarily indicate that the technique provides a reliable model for
mill behavior [Moys, 2000]. Overall, this technique certainly seems promising since it
follows a simplified approach.
3. Use of Shoulder and Toe Angle equations to determine the charge geometry, using
this geometry to calculate power (Morrell, Kojovic).
This technique can be used for online charge monitoring, but has limited use. Also
there is lack of data reported on charge motion parameters like Trajectories formed
and Energy Spectrums. Overall, this technique has limited application and hence is
not advisable for utilization from project point of view.
4. Use of equations of motion to determine the outer trajectories of the charge (Powell).
This technique is good for prediction of trajectories but lacks the data on charge
profile. Hence, it has extremely limited usage.
17
2.3 Review on Liner Wear Simulators for tumbling mills
In this section, work done by different researchers to simulate liner wear is described. This
sections identifies the researchers and briefly describes their simulation approach.
2.3.1 Radziszewski (1993)
Approach: The author calculates the abrasion wear on the liner using the following equa-
tion [Radziszewski, 1993,1997]:
. tan(B)
mZin = P s t - NtVsurf (2.11)
7f H R
where
mlin = liner wear, Pst = metal density,

() = abrasion factor of material, HR = metal hardness,
Nt = total normal force, Vsurf = surface slippage velo city.
In wear simulation, the author mainly calculates the forces acting on the liner. These forces
form the input to the equation 2.11, which enables the wear computation on the liner profile
using material properties. The author computes the wear at precise points by discretizing
the liner in one dimension as illustrated in Figure 2-9.
Figure 2-9: Radziszewski's technique for simulating Liner Wear
2.3.2 Cleary (1996)
Approach: The liner wear is computed from the charge motion developed by the author.
The data for computing the wear is collected along the surface of the liners. The data
include normal, tangential and total boundary forces acting on the liners. For the purpose
of data collection on the liner surface, each liner is subdivided into sequences of equal sized
bins as illustrated in Figure 2-10. Wear predictions are made by using the data collected
in the object bins as an input to Finnie's wear model [Finnie, 1970], thus computing the
Liner Wear profile.
18
Figure 2-10: Cleary's technique for simulating Liner Wear
2.3.3 Glover (1997)
Approach: The wear model developed by Hutching, [Hutching, 1993] was used to compute
liner wear. As per the model the volumetrie wear rate (Q) per unit sliding distance is given
as follows:
Q= KFn (2.12)
H
where
Fn = normalload on particle, K = dimensionless wear coefficient,

H = met al hardness.
To determine the extent of wear on the liners, each liner was discretized into number of
straight- line elements (an approach similar to that of Radziszewski). During each particle
contact with a liner element, the normal forces and the tangential sliding distances were
recorded and used to compute wear using equation 2.12. The wear values were converted
into liner wear rate by dividing the wear values computed by length of each element with
an assumption that wear proceeds in the y-direction of each element [Glover, 1997].
2.3.4 Qui (2001)
Approach: As described in section 2.2.9, the author uses High Fidelity Simulation (HFS)
technique to simulate charge motion inside the mill. Archad's law is used for calculating
the wear and is incorporated in HFS simulations to obtain the liner wear profile [Qui, 2001],
but there is no mention of how this law has been incorporated and how the data to compute
wear on the liners are obtained. There is also a lack of explanation as to how the wear is
calculated at a precise point on the liner, as the presented in results.
19
2.3.5 Comments on the review
From the literature review on the Liner Wear Simulators the following points can be noted:
1. Radziszewski was one of the first researchers to simulate wear on the tumbling mill
liner. Maybe due to the lack of actual wear data at that time, the results reported by
the author lack a validation.
2. Clover and Cleary have followed an approach similar to that adopted by Radziszewski
as regards to the liner discretization and accumulation of forces on the liner, though
they have used different equations to compute the wear.
3. Clover and Cleary's approach to ca1culation of wear involves use of a DEM technique
as commented in part 1 of Section 2.2.11. Since this technique already consumes
large amounts of time in computation of the charge profile, if wear computations were
included, overall computation time must be quite high. It has been reported that
Finnie's model used in computing wear gives good results when the angle of impact of
the particle is less than 45 deg [Finnie, 1979], which may not be true in the majority
of the cases for tumbling mills.
4. The same argument with regards to time as described in point 3 of Section 2.3.5,
applies to HFS simulations used by Qui. From the results reported, Archad's law
used by Qui seems to give good results. But the approach lacks details.
2.4 Conclusions
From the literature review do ne on the validation of charge motion simulators, the following
points can be concluded:
• Simulators developed by Mishra jRajamani, Cleary, Moys and Herbst seem to predict
the charge profile accurately but consume large amount of computational time, hence
are not suit able from the project's point of view.
• Techniques used by Morrell, Powell seem to work on the computational time aspect,
but have limited applications
• Radziszewski's approach seems to be promising since it is simplified but requires a

more rigorous validation. The simplified approach indicates that the simulator should
20
be efficient in computational time but there is lack of data published on this aspect.
From the literature review on Liner Wear, the following points can be concluded:
• Few researchers have tried to simulate wear on the tumbling millliner
• Radziszewski, Glover and Cleary have reported sorne details on their liner wear sim-
ulators but lack a validation with the actual wear.
• Liner wear profiles obtained from the simulations have been validated with by Qui, but
published data lacks the details on wear computation as described by Radziszewski
and Cleary.
• There is a lack of data published on the topic of computational time for liner wear
simulation.
21
Chapter 3
Real time analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator
From the literature review, it is clear that most of the Charge Motion Simulators available,
though accurate, are inefficient in the computational time, which defeats the main objective
of the project. Radziszewski 's simulator apprears to be promising since it follows a simplified
approach.
In this chapter, an analysis done on computational time aspect of Radziszewski 's simulator
is presented. The method adopted for making the simulators available for online charge
monitoring in mineraI processing plant is also described.
22
3.1 Introduction
The Charge Motion Simulators (CMS) predict the motion of the charge particles in the mill
using various techniques as described in Chapter 2 and while doing so consume computa-
tional time. Since in the project the main goal is to have online charge motion, the first
step is to investigate the computational time aspect of the simulators versus the real time.
This time analysis is presented in this chapter.
For the purpose of online charge monitoring in mineraI processing plants, it was necessary
to integrate the CMS to the plant's Distributed Control System (DCS). The method of
integration is described here, results are presented.
3.2 Analysis of simulator computational time
An analysis of computational time consumed for the simulation involves two major steps:
1. Analysis of time step (increments) between two consecutive iterations
2. Analysis of real time consumed
It is important to accurately determine the time step between two consecutive iterations of
the simulator as the time step affects accuracy, numerical stability and total computational
time [Rajamani / Mishra, 1990; Cleary, 1996]. The smaller the time step, the greater the
number of iterations required within a fixed time frame, which increases overall computa-
tional time.
The determination of an accurate time step was based on the following aspects:
1. Accuracy of the predicted parameters
2. Time consumed in computation
3.2.1 Analysis of simulator time step
Strategy: As the CMS was validated on the basis of the Power prediction [Radziszewski,
1998], the variation in the Power with a change in time step was observed. The strategy
was to change the time step, to record the Power (accuracy) and the real time consumed
over a fixed number of iterations.
Method: lndustrial and pilot mills were simulated over a fixed number of iterations (3000
in this case) and the values of the Power predicted by the simulator at each iteration
23
for a particular time step were recorded. This procedure was repeated for difIerent time
steps. The values of Power predicted were plotted for each time step as shown in Figure 3-1.
To keep track of real time consumed, the simulations were run for fixed number of iterations
(18000 in this case) for difIerent step and real time consumed to complete the iterations was
stored. The values of consumed time were plotted against each time step and are shown in
Figure 3-2
Results: Figure 3-1 shows the variation in the predicted power with change in the time
step. It should be noted that the time steps in Figure 3-1 are in milliseconds. It can ob-
served from Figure 3-1a, that for lower time steps (lms to 5ms), the simulator takes more
number of iterations to converge. The zoomed view of Figure 3-1a near the convergence for
various time steps is given in Figure 3-1b. Figure 3-1b shows that power values converge in
the time steps 10ms to 20ms. From the time steps 20ms to 100ms, divergence is observed
as in the case of 1ms to 9ms.
5000 4700
4 5 ' 6
4500 10 11 12
4600 16 ·17 ' 18
50 75 100
4000
"
Divergence
3500 Zoomed in adjacent figure 4500
~ 3000
[ 4400
~ TIme Step [ms)
~ 2500
.i:. 2000
·1 ' 2
5 ,6
!
"-
4300
•8
1500 10 11 12 4200
1000 13 14 15
16 • 17 . 18 4100
500 19 20 . 25
50 15 ' 100
oj 4000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 2DO 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Humber of Iterations Humber of Iterations
a. Predicted power b. Zoomed view of a.
Figure 3-1: Variation in power predicted with change in the time step
(Diameter: 9m, Speed: 11rpm, Charge volume: 30%)
It can be concluded from Figure 3-1 (from accuracy point of view) , that convergence occurs
in the results for the time step in range of 1O-20ms.
Figure 3-2 shows the variation in time consumed by changing the time step. It can be ob-
served that as the time step is increased, the real time consumed in computation decreases.
From the histograms plotted, it is evident that there is drastic reduction in the computa-
24
tional time as the time step is increased from 1 to 9ms as compared to the reduction in the
computational time when time step is increased from 10 to 100ms.
450
400
350
1
I300
-;; 250
=
.:: 200
l 150
" 100
50
0
10 13 16 19 50
TIme Step (ms!
Figure 3-2: Real time consumed with varying time step
From the above discussion it can be concluded that the simulator converges faster and is
computationally efficient for the time steps between 10-20ms.
Selecting a particular time step from the domain of lü-20ms for further investigation de-
pended on the accuracy of the simulator to predict the power for each time steps between
lü-20ms. As the power prediction for each time step was almost same and considering
that Iower time step means greater number of iterations in a fixed time frame which means
higher accuracy, it was decided to keep time step as 10ms for further investigation.
3.2.2 Analysis of real time consumption
It is very difficult to de termine exactIy by how much is the simulator faster or slower than
real time, as real time consumed depends on the mill operating parameters / conditions.
However, a strategy was devised which could give an approximate idea about the real time
aspect of the simulator.
The real time aspect of the simulator is the ratio of simulator computational time and real
time. This ratio being greater than one indicates that the computation is faster than the
real time.
Strategy: The idea was to carry out real time analysis of one industrial mill and devise a
method to generalize the results.
25
Method: As per the strategy one industrial mill was selected. To generalize, the parameters
used to describe the mill charge motion - mill speed, percentage charge volume, percentage
steel volume, media size, liner number and mill diameter varied by 25% on higher and lower
side. This method generated 13 simulation cases and allowed a wide variety of operating
conditions.
The simulation were run for 30000 iterations with 10ms as time step for each case which
gave 300s as simulation time. The real time consumed during this 30000 iterations was
noted. The real time aspect ratio thus ca1culated for each case with the different mill pa-
rameters is shown in Figure 3-3. The computer used for performing the simulations was a
Pentium-4 with 2.4GHz processing speed.
8
El High Cl Law
7
"
.;: 3
!
~ 2
Speed Charge Volume Steel Volume Media Size Liner number Diameter
Mill Parameter!!
Figure 3-3: Real time analysis for industrial mills
Results: From Figure 3-3, it is evident that for all the simulated cases, the real time aspect
ratio is greater than 1 indicating that the CMS is faster than real time.
From Figure 3-3, it can be observed that variation in the real time aspect ratio is maximum
in the case of change in the mill diameter. The change in the number of liners do es not
result in dramatic change in the simulator computational time. Also, it can be observed
that computational time is reduced by increasing the media size; this can be attributed
to the fact that with an increase in media size the number of charge particles de creas es
for the same charge volume, which reduces the number of computations for each parti-
cle resulting in lower computational time. One important conclusion drawn from Figure
3-3 is that since the pilot mill's diameter is considerably lower than the indus trial mill,
it is expected that for the pilot mill simulations, the real time aspect ratio will be higher
26
25
20
$
"
.",
;;
~ 15
Speed Charge Volume Media Size Diameler

Mill Parameters
Figure 3-4: Real time analysis for pilot mills
than that of industrial mill. This can be verified through results in Figure 3-4 for pilot mills.
From the above analysis it is clear that Charge Motion Simulator is faster than the real time
for a variety of cases ranging from industrial mills to pilot mills. There is no upper limit to
the size of the mill that can be simulated with real time as the number of transistors used
in the circuit board of the computer double ever year (Moore, 1965) and is true even today
(refer Intel Corporation's website) which means exponential increase in the computing speed
with the increase in the mill diameter over the years.
3.3 Integration of the Simulator with Process Optimization

Project Software (POP)
As per the project, the simulator should be available online for the mill operators to visu-
alize or to know the in-mill parameters / indicators. To serve this purpose it was necessary
to integrate the Charge Motion Simulator with a software which communicates with the
process DCS. This software is POP. Figure 3-5 shows the integration of the POP worksta-
tion in the mill computing network.
27
User WorkstatÎon
OFFICE NETWORK
POP Wol'kstatiOfl
StatiOfl Operator
StatlOfl Opetator
CONTROL NETWORK
PtC'f PlC2 PI..C3
PROCESS
Figure 3-5: Integration of POP workstation in mill computing network
The POP software is operated from the POP workstation as shown in Figure 3.,5. The
POP workstation is integrated to the control network of the pro cess via a FIX driver which
includes specifie drivers for various brands of DCS, PLC and SCADA systems. The POP
workstation is also linked with office network to have access to other business facilities.
If the CMS can be integrated with POP then the values predicted by the simulator can be
written to the process's DCS and hence it becomes possible to display the same to the mill
operator. This makes the integration of the CMS with POP essential.
28
3.3.1 How to integrate the Charge Motion Simulator with POP?
Before going into details on integration of the simulator with POP, it is essential to under-
stand the broad structure in which the CMS was programmed.
The simulator program was developed in C++. The program can be broadly divided in to
two major portions as follows:
• MB.exe - The simulator executable file which formed the graphical user interface for
data input and output .
• MBLIB.dlI- The dynamic link library which constituted the mathematical kernel for
computation.
In other words, the algorithms for the computation of charge motion are separate from the
simulator interface.
POP software can use the MATLAB executable programs. Since the Charge Motion Simula-
tor was developed in C++, to integrate the simulator a bridge between C++ and MATLAB
was necessary. MATLAB allows interface with C++ using MEX functions. Rence a bridge
was build using MEX functions such that when MATLAB program was run, the functions
from the mathematical kernel of the simulator were called using MEX functions. This pro-
cess is shown in Figure 3-6, with the help of block diagrams.
~---------------------------------------------------ï
1
1
1
1
1
MS.exe MBTemplete.dll 1
(ùraphical User 1
{Mex Functions) 1
InU,lrfaœ) 1
SIMULATOR MATLAB BRIDGE POP

1• _ _..... _ \)T'LlTY
. _ _ • __ ._••••• _ _ J
1
:
POP
i ........___
L ........__J i:
! 1
~ _______________I~!r:~~~!19~_~': ~~My_~],9!'_\!I!!:'!_O!_________ J
Figure 3-6: Schematic diagram showing integration of Charge Motion Simulator with POP
In Figure 3-6, the arrows show the direction of movement of data when simulations are run.
This integration has another indirect advantage. AlI the internaI data generated is readily
accessible through MATLAB; this means that MATLAB standard functions available could
be readily used on the data generated for analysis purpose.
29
_ !112Ul
"'~111:
-~
('A~1II:
-In_.
N...we
__ P·!Il4l'!i
.~
....,.......,........._ _ _ _ _ _ _~......,...-...........1 -~
Figure 3-7: Snapshot of the Charge Motion Simulator integrated with POP
The Figure 3-7 shows the output of the CMS on integration with POP. Also it shows
the indicators of the tumbling mill charge motion - the Toe Angle (PhiFootVC) and the
Shoulder Angle (PhiFlight VC).
3.4 Conclusions
The following can be concluded:
• The value of 10ms as time step for the CMS was found to be accetable for real time
analysis on the basis of Power prediction and computational time consumption.
• The CMS performed faster than real time.
• A method was developed which made online charge motion monitoring possible for
mill operators.
30
Chapter 4
Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator
From the literature review in Chapter 2, it is apparent that most of the charge simulators
available, though validated on the basis of certain parameters, consumed enormous amount
of computational time - defeating the main goal of the project.
From the real time analysis of Radziszewski's Charge Motion Simulator, presented in Chap-
ter 3, it is clear that simulator demonstrated real time performance, th us satisfying the main
objective of the project. The mode, however, still demands rigorous validation (Chapter 1).
In this chapter, the method used to validate Radziszewski's Charge Motion Simulator is
described with results.
31
4.1 Introduction
In mineraI processing it is essential that mill operators know the internaI charge dynamics
to optimize mill performance. For the reasons described at the beginning of Chapter 2,
researchers have developed simulators which predict the internaI charge dynamics through
mathematical models. But before these simulators can be used by mill operators, these
mathematical models are required to be thoroughly validated to ensure that the simulators
predict realistically mill internaI charge dynamics.
4.2 Strategy for validation of the Charge Motion Simulator
4.2.1 What is validation?
Validation is defined as the act of testing for compliance with a standard [McGraw Hill
Dictionary, 3rd Edition]. Following this definition, for doing validation the following things
are required:
• Standards
• Act of testing for compliance.
After determining standards and an act of testing for compliance, it might happen that
results may not be promising. In this case, modifications in the Charge Motion Simulator
(CMS) may be required. With this basic understanding, the strategy as shown in Figure 4.1
was developed to initiate the work on CMS validation. The description on the validation
of CMS follows the strategy.
Standard Data
(Secti0l'14.4)
MQdlfy Charge
' - - - - - - 1 Motion Simulator f + - - - '
(Section Hi)
Figure 4-1: Strategy for validation of the CMS
In context of tumbling mills the standards developed were as follows:
32
• 16 movies of pilot mills through experiments
• 4 MILLSOFT simulations for industrial mills.
4.3 Experimentation
The main aim of the experimentation was to generate information about the mill charge
when the mill rotates. A pilot tumbling mill, 381mm in length and 762mm in diameter was
used for this purpose. The power to the mill was supplied through an electric motor which
was connected to an AC Drive. A gear box was used to reduce the speed of the motof.
The speed was further reduced by using a bull and pinion gear, with the bull gear mounted
on the mill and pinion gear mounted on the shaft of the gear box. A torque meter was
mounted on the shaft of the gear box to measure the torque input to the mill. A schematic
plan view of this arrangement is in Figure 4-2
6uUGear---...r,;
Shaft
rc--------=;.j o
AC Drive Electrie Motor Gear Box Torquemeter Mill Camera
Figure 4-2: Schematic plan of the experimental setup
To obtain the inside mill information, the mill was fitted with a glass plate at the front. A
camera was mounted in front of the glass end of the mill to record information about the
internaI mill charge dynamics in the form of a movie. In order to get a clear picture, lights
were installed at the rear end of the mill. The actual experimental setup is shown in Figure
4-3.
Sixteen tests were carried out with the pilot mill by varying the Charge Volume, Speed,
Media Size and Number of Liners, generating sixteen movies.
33
Figure 4-3: Actual experimental mill setup
Varying the operating parameters in this manner allowed variety in motion of charge par-
ticles inside the mill. The operating conditions of the tests are given in Table 4.1. Using
Table 4.1: Operating conditions of the pilot mill tests

Test Charge Speed Media Number of
Volume(%) (rpm) size(m) Lifters
1 30 29 0.019 4
2 30 40 0.019 4
3 45 29 0.019 4
4 45 40 0.019 4
5 30 29 0.05 8
6 30 40 0.05 8
7 45 29 0.05 8
8 45 40 0.05 8
9 30 29 0.019 8
10 30 40 0.019 8
11 45 29 0.019 8
12 45 40 0.019 8
13 30 29 0.05 4
14 30 40 0.05 4
15 45 29 0.05 4
16 45 40 0.05 4
the software AVISPLIT, each movie thus generated was split into individual frames for the
purpose of data extraction and validation.
For getting the information about the internaI charge dynamics of indus trial mill, MILL-
SOFT simulations of 4 industrial mills, available from McGill's sponsors were used (refer
appendix A for further details). However, at this point it should be noted that MILLSOFT
34
simulations are just simulations. They may not the represent reality accurately and are
only used here as a reference for validation.
4.4 Identification of parameters
There are a large number of parameters that describe the charge motion. Identification of
a particular parameter (which formed the basis of validation) was based on the following
points:
• Importance of the parameter with respect to mill grinding.
• Economy / Profitability
Based on the ab ove criteria the following parameters were identified:
1. Power 2. Toe Angle

3. Shoulder Angle 4. Center of Mass / Center of Charge
5. Number of Trajectories 6. Number of Layers
7. Forces on the Liner 8. Charge Volume
9. Layer Speed.
All the above parameters come into the picture as the mill starts rotating. Hence this
section begins by explaining the mill motion in brief.
For validation purposes it is important that the above parameters be identified distinctly
in experimental and simulated charge motion when the mill rotates. Hence the following
sections explain the importance and method of identification of mill parameters in the ex-
perimental charge motion, with examples. Aiso given is a short description on the method
used to compute the same parameters in the CMS.
The following points should be noted regarding the computation of parameters in the CMS:
• Whenever more than one methods was available for calculating the same parameter,
comparison was made among the methods so that the best available method would
be used for validation (eg, Shoulder Angle calculation).
• New algorithms and calculations were incorporated in the CMS for extracting the
required data (eg, Center of Mass, Forces acting on the Liner).
35
As the mill rotates, the charge inside the mill moves and go es through the different zones
as shown in Figure 4-4
Grinding zone: which is described by ball layers sliding over one another, grinding the
material trapped between them.
Tumbling zone: which is described by balls rolling over one another and breaking the
material in low energy impact.
Crushing zone: which is described by balls in flight re-entering the ball charge and crush-
ing the material in high-energy impact.
Figure 4-4: Typical charge motion in tumbling mill
4.4.1 Power
Charge particles move in the mill because of the power supplied to the mill. Knowledge of
the Power is essential as it is directly linked with economy of mill operation. For the actual
experiments, the Power consumed was measured in the form of torque applied to the mill,
using a torque-meter.
36
Calculating / Determining Power: Power (PTotal) calculated in the simulator is the
sum of No-Load Power (P NoLoad) and mill Net-Power (P Net). P Net is determined separately
for the Charge(P Charge) and the Slurry Pool(P Slurry) if overflow discharge is present. Thus,
PTotal
PNoLoad + (PCharge + PSlurry) (4.1)
No-Load Power is determined as follows [Morrell, 1996]:
PNoLoad = 1.68D2.05[4>(0.067Ld + L)]O.S2 (4.2)

where
D = mill diameter, cp = critical speed,

L = length of cylindrical mill section, Ld= length mill cone end.
The Charge Power is given as follows [Radziszewski,1999]:

n
PCharge = L m egri COS (4)i)WO (4.3)
i=l
and
nslurry
PSlurry = L mslurrygricos(4)i)WO (4.4)

i=l
where
Ti element radial position,

= CPi = element angular position,
Wo = mill speed, 9 = gravit y,
n = number of particles, nslurry= number of slurry elements,
me = mass of element, mslurrY= mass of slurry element.
The P Net is determined for each time step in the CMS.
Earlier, the validation of the CMS was limited to comparing the Power drawn by mills
[Agrawala, 1997; Mishra and Rajamani, 1990,1992]. But it has been reported that "Good
prediction of mill power do not neeessarily imply that the charge motion simulation provides
a reliable model for mill behaviour." [Moys, 2000; DEM workshop in South Africa August,
1999].
Henee for rigorous validation other parameters were identified.
37
4.4.2 Toe Angle
Explanation: The Toe region is generally located in the Crushing zone (Figure 4-4). As
the charge particles move with the mill, sorne of particles, after being in flight (zone of
Falling Particles, Figure 4-4), strike the ore or liners and sorne particles slide from Grinding
zone (Figure 4-4) into the Crushing zone. As a result a region is formed near the mill shell
in the Crushing zone where charge particles reach their highest point and are reduced in
number: this region is called the Toe region. The angle from the reference corresponding
to this highest point is the Toe Angle.
Importance: Knowledge of the Toe Angle is important for the following reasons:
• It helps in adjusting the mill operating point to maximize crushing and prevent direct
impact of the charge particles on the mill liners.
• It influences the power consumption in the mill.
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: The method of identification of the

toe is difficult, as it involves isolating and neglecting the cataracting particles and following
the trend of movement of layers in the toe region of the charge. This procedure is easy
if the mill is operating at lower speeds (::; 90% critical speed). When the mill rotates at
higher speed (> 90% critical), the cataracting charge particles fill the entire mill chamber,
making it difficult to determine the Toe Angle. Hence the following criteria were developed
for identification of the Toe Angle depending on the speed [Cleary, 2003]
For higher speeds -
• The lower limit of the Toe Angle is deemed to be the point below which the largest
concentration of cataracting particles have impacted on the liner.
• The higher limit is identified by determining the point at which the curve of the free
surface of the charge intersects the mill liner.
For lower speeds -
• The Toe Angle is associated at the point where the charge particles have reached the
highest point near the mill shell in the toe region.
The above criteria for lower and higher speeds are illustrated in Figures 4-5a and 4-5b
respectively.
Calculating / Determining the Toe Angle: The Toe Angle is computed in the CMS
using foot stability criteria [Radziszewski, 1998]. The criteria calculates the stability of the
particle at the foot based on momentum calculations.
38
a. Lower speed b. Higher speed
Figure 4-5: Identification of the Toe Angle
4.4.3 Shoulder Angle
Explanation: As the charge goes through the Tumbling zone (Figure 4-3), the charge
particles reach a point where, under the action of gravitational forces and mill speed, they
adopt a projectile motion. The angle associated with this point and get separated from the
mill shell is the Shoulder Angle.
Importance: The knowledge of Shoulder Angle is important due to the following reasons:
• It is related to the mill power consumption.
• Righ particle height indicates, more particles will be thrown at the toe of the charge,
indicating more breakage and increasing the probability to impact the millliner.
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: For higher speeds, the formation

of a cataracting stream of charge particles makes the identification of the Shoulder Angle
more difficult. Renee the following criteria were developed to determine the Shoulder Angle
depending on the speed [Cleary, 2003] and illustrated in Figure 4-6:
For higher speeds:
• The lower limit of the Shoulder Angle is chosen to be the point where the trajectories
of the charge particle near the liners begin to diverge from the mill shell.
• The upper limit is chosen to be the point at which the trajectories of the particles
deemed to be in the bulk of charge have reached their highest point (refer Figure 4-6a)
For lower speeds:
• The Shoulder Angle is an angle associated with the point when the charge particle
near mill shell get separated in the Tumbling zone (refer Figure 4-4).
39
Figure 4-6: Identification of the Shoulder Angle
Calculating j Determining the Shoulder Angle: The Shoulder Angle is calculated

using McIvor's equation [McIvor, 1983] where the point of flight is given as a function of
mill rotation speed and liner effect as follows:
2
<jJ w R
= (J - (3 + arcsin [ -g-cos((J - (3) ] (4.5)
where
cp = flight angle, (3 = angle representing lifter,

(J = arctan(J-L), J-L = coefficient of friction,
R = mill radius, g = gravit y,
w = angular mill speed.
The Shoulder Angle can also be calculated, using the following equation [Morrell, 1996]:
(Js = ~- (<jJ - ~) [(0.3386 + 0.1041<jJ) + (1.54 - 2.5673<jJ)Jt] (4.6)
where
cp = fraction of critical mill speed, Jt = fraction of mill charge volume.
A small study was undertaken to determine the accuracy of the two approaches. Published
data [Moys, 1984] were used for validation. According to published data, the Angle of
Repose was calculated using the following equation:
(Jo = 180(tB + tD - 2tA - 0.75P)j P (4.7)

where
(Jo = angle of repose, tB = time when sensor enters mill toe,

tD= time when sensor at mill shoulder, tA = sensor at reference point,
P = period of mill rotation.
40
The value of tA was 45 degrees as per the published data. Using the published values of tB,
{Jo and P, the Shoulder Angle was computed using equation 4.7.
The graphs given in Figure 4-7 compare the Shoulder Angle computed using the two different
approaches (equations 4.5 and 4.6) under varying conditions. As can be observed, McIvor's
approach predicts the Shoulder Angle better than Morrell's, especially for the cases (A),
(C),(D) and (F) and it is similar to Morrell's approach in cases (B) and (E).
t:. Morftll • McllX)f
Observcd Shoulder angle [degl Observed Shoulder angle [deg)
1""
o
Observe<! Shoulder at.gle Idegl Obserwd ShoUlder angle [deyl Obserwd Shoulder angle ldegl
A-Wet balls, B-Lubricant added, C-Low slurry, D-High slurry, E-Dilution, F-Wet balls
Figure 4-7: Comparison of Shoulder Angle computation approach: McIvor vs Morrell
Rence Mel vor's approach for prediction of the Shoulder Angle was selected as the basis of
validation of the CMS.
4.4.4 Center of Mass (CoM) / Center of Charge (CoC)
Explanation: As the charge partic1es rotate in with the mill, partic1es in the Grinding
zone (Figure 4-4)- enmasse move in a concentric path with decreasing radius. The position
associated with the point at which the radius of the concentric path is minimum is the
location of the Center of Charge (CoC). The Center of Mass (CoM) is a theoretical position
which defines the equivalent point to which aIl the mass of the charge could be condensed
and still exert the same lever arm about the center of the mill. It has been reported that
when the mill critical speed ranges from 68 % to 82 %, the CoM and the CoC merge [Powell,
1996]. Since in most of the tests the critical speed was near this range, it was possible to
validate the CMS on the basis of the CoM / CoCo
41
Importance: Knowledge of the CoC / CoM is important from the following aspects:
• It helps to understand the distribution of charge particles in mill
• It is directly linked with mill Power calculation if the Torque-Arm model is used.
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: The exact position of the CoC is

difficult to determine as charge particles are always in motion. The best way to determine
is to run the movie of the charge motion again and again to estimate the point at which
the charge particles are relatively stable. The identification of the CoC is shown in Figure
4-8 for lower and higher mill speeds.
Figure 4-8: Identification of the Center of Charge
Calculating / Determining the CoM: CoM can be calculated using the following equa-
tions [Powell, 1996]:
(4.8)
where
mi = mass of particle i, n = no. of particle in enmasse region,

xi, Yi = coordinates of particle i, XCOM, YCOM= coordinates of center of mass.
If the mass of an particles is identical the above equations reduce to
(4.9)
As the coordinates of aIl the charge particles is known in the simulator, the above equations
were incorporated in the charge motion simulator to calculate the CoM of the charge. Figure
4-9 shows a pictorial view of the evolution of the CoM as the mill starts to rotate.
42
Mill hegins rotation
ofCoM
4 ~àS ~3 ~2!î ·2 .IS1().5 1) OS

X· Ctordin:lle of Mill {ml
Figure 4-9: Movement of computed Center of Mass
4.4.5 Number of Layers
Explanation: It is observed that when the charge starts moving with the mill, layers of
charge particles are formed in the enmasse region. If observed carefully, two different kinds
of layers are formed as described below:
• Layers formed below the CoCo These layers move in the direction of the mill rotation.
• Layers formed above the CoCo These layers move in the direction opposite to layers
formed below the CoCo
Here the term -N umber of Layers refers to the layers of charge particles formed below the
CoC. At this stage, the Number of Layers is applicable to charge particles having same
diameter.
Importance: Knowledge of the Number of Layers is important from the following point
of view:
• The N umber of Layers formed plays an important role in the mill Power calculation
• The Abrasion Energy Spectrum which shows the mill energy used to reduce the size of
the mineraIs due to abrasion force depends largely on the Number of Layers formed.
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: The Number of Layers formed can

be determined distinctly at lower mill speeds but it can be complicated especially when
the mill is operating at high speed and the charge particles have a smaller size. For such a
case the procedure adopted was to count the Number of Layers formed in the mill charge
43
from different angles (viz, 180, 225, 270) then average the Number of Layers measured to
determine the N umber of Layers formed.
Figure 4-10: Identification of the Number of Layers
Figures 4-10a and 4-10b illustrate the identification of number of layers at low and high
mill speeds, respectively.
Calculating / Determining the Number of Layers: In the simulator, a discretization

scheme is used by agglomerating a number of balls into a dis crete element through the use of
an equivalent volume criteria between dis crete elements [Radziszewski, 1986; Radziszewski
/ Tarasiewicz, 1989]. Using the discretization scheme, the charge is discretized in the mill.
Depending upon the percentage charge filling, the height of the charge in the mill is de-
termined. This charge height when divided by the media size gives the number of layers
formed when the charge is at rest. AlI these layers formed move in the direction of mill
rotation, depending on the fiight angle calculated for each layer the final number of layers
are determined in the charge. The Number of Layers can be identified distinctly from the
pictorial view of the CMS.
4.4.6 Number of Trajectories
Explanation: At the Shoulder Angle, the charge particles start the projectile motion and
follow a projectile path. Charge particles in a row following the projectile path form a
Trajectory.
Importance: Knowledge of the Number of Trajectories formed is important from the

following point of view:
• The Impact Energy Spectrum that gives the information about the mill energy utilized
in crushing ore depends largely on the number of impacting particles which in turn
44
depends on the N umber of Trajectories formed .
• The more Number of Trajectories the higher the probability that the charge particles
in flight will impact the liner directly causing more wear on the liner, which is not
desired.
Figure 4-11: Identification of the Number of Trajectories
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: The Number of Trajectories formed

can be distinct in the case of lower mill speeds or when the charge particles are bigger
in size. It may not be distinguishable in the case of high mill speeds or when the charge
particles are smaller in size. Figures 4-11a and 4-11b illustrate the identification of Number
of Trajectories at low and high mill speeds respectively.
Calculating / Determining the N umber of Trajectories: As explained, Equation

4.5 is used in calculating the Shoulder Angle. The same equation is applied ta each layer
formed in the charge ta determine the point of flight of the charge particles in that layer.
Depending on the results of the equation, charge particles in sorne layers start the projectile
motion resulting in ta the Trajectories.
4.4.7 Forces on the Liner
Explanation: As the mill rotates, the charge particles inside the mill move and exert dy-
namic forces on the Liners.
Importance: Knowledge of the forces is important from the following point of view:
• Accurate prediction of Forces on the Liner is associated directly with the wear pre-
diction of the liner. Accurate wear prediction results in efficient mill operation and
reduction in down time production cast.
45
• Forces are linked with the orientation / distribution of the charge particles in the mill.
Proper prediction of forces gives an estimate of charge distribution.
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: The forces cannot be identified

from the charge motion snapshots but can be measured with exp eriments, using a number
of methods. Extensive work in measurement of Forces acting on the Liner has been reported
[Moys, 2001, 1996,1993; Van Nierop, 1999]. Here, the forces as measured and reported are
used for comparison purpose [Moys, 2000].
Calculating / Determining Forces on mill Liner: Mainly two types of forces act on
the liner [Radziszewski, 1993]: CentrifugaI (FC) and Gravitational (FG) as shown in Figure
4-12. From this a Normal Force (Fn) and a Tangential Force (Ft) can be computed as
follows:
p q
L migisin((}i) + L mi w2ri (4.10)
i=l i=l
p
L migicos((}i) (4.11)
i=l
where
p = particles causing gravitational force, 8 = particle orientation,

q = particles causing centrifugaI force, r = radial position of particle,
w = velocity of layer.
Charge Partiele
Lifter
Figure 4-12: Schematic of Forces on a Liner
4.4.8 Charge Volume
Explanation: Charge Volume means the volume occupied by the enmasse region of the
charge particles in the mill when the charge motion becomes relatively stable. Since here a
46
two-dimensional CMS is under validation, the Charge Volume becomes the area occupied
by the enmasse region in the mill.
Importance: A majority of grinding parameters such as Power consumed, are directly

related to the area occupied by charge particles in the enmasse region - Charge Volume.
Method of Identification in experimental tests: To measure the enmasse region of

the charge a macro feature of the software - VISIO was used which calculates the area of
the bounded region as illustrated in Figure 4-13. Figure 4-13b illustrates the macro feature
used.
a. Charge profile b. Bounded Enmasse region
Figure 4-13: Measuring the Charge Volume
Calculating / Determining Charge Volume: The charge motion in the CMS estab-
lishes the Charge Volume. There is no specifie formula to calculate the Charge Volume
in the CMS. After the charge motion is stabilized, the Charge Volume can be determined
using the same procedure as discussed in the case of experimental tests.
4.4.9 Layer Speed
Explanation: As described in section 4.4.4, a Number of Layers are formed when the
charge particles move with the mill. As there is the CoC for the charge particles and the
mill rotates, it is evident that the speed of the charge particles decreases from the mill shell
towards the CoCo Also as numerous layers are formed from the mill shell to the CoC, these
layers should have different speeds [Vermeulen, 1986J.
Importance: Knowledge of the speed of individuallayers is important from the following

points of view:
• The loss of speed in each layer with respect to the mill speed is the slippage speed.
47
This slippage speed is directly related to wear on the liner [Radziszewski, 1993] .
• The lower Layer Speed, lower Abrasion forces. A lower Abrasion force means lower
Abrasion energy, which in turn means lower energy available for grinding the ore.
Method of Identification in Experimental Tests: The speed of the layers can be

obtained from image analysis of the actual charge motion. In the method used, the position
of the same particle is identified in consecutive mill snapshots. The change in the particle
position is related to the time difference of the consecutive frames which gives the speed of
the particle in that layer. The above procedure is required for number of particles belonging
to the same layer to determine the Layer Speed.
a. Frame-1 b. Frame-2
Figure 4-14: Procedure for Identifying Layer Speed
Table 4.2: Example showing calculation of Layer speed

Sr.No Particle Position Angle Speed = Angle Difference /
Framel Frame 2 difference time (*)
1. -84.56 -94.65 10.09 25.48
2. -110.44 -121.08 10.64 26.86
3. -118.82 -129.27 10.45 26.38
4. -127.59 -138.61 11.02 27.82
5. -141.52 -152.35 10.83 27.34
6. -150.07 -160.77 10.70 27.02
7. -158.31 -169.05 10.74 27.12
8. -166.23 -176.62 10.39 26.23
(*) Tlme dlfference III between the frames is 0.066s
Figure 4-14 illustrates the method of calculating the the Layer Speed, where in the position
of particles in the outer layer is determined in two consecutive mill snapshots and entered
in Table 4.2. Table 4.2 shows calculation of the speed of the outer most milllayer. As can
be observed the speed in the outer layer is roughly 26.8rpm indicating a loss in the speed
48
by 2.2rpm with respect to the mill speed.
Calculating / Determining Layer Speed: In the simulator, the loss of rotational rate
between the layers is given as follows [Shi, 1999]:
(4.12)
where
z = (1 - Jtr )0.4532, JtF fractional mill filling,

ri = inside mill radius, 8 = slip parameter,
r = mill radius, W r = angular velo city of layer at radiusr.
Thus if the mill is rotating at w, then the speed of i th layer can be given as foIlows:
n
Wi = W - L6.w (4.13)
i=l
More examples on identification of the parameters discussed above are given in Appendix
A of the thesis. For identification of the parameters in the sixteen tests on pilot mills and
four indus trial mill simulations, the above discussed methods were followed.
After having prepared the foundation for validation of charge motion simulator, comparison
will be made between the identified and simulated parameters for validation of the CMS in
the next section.
4.5 Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator

In a majority of cases, the parameters were compared with the data extracted from the
sixteen pilot mill tests and four industrial mill simulations (MILLSOFT) following the pro-
cedure elaborated in section 4.4. Graphie sheets comparing aIl the sixteen pilot mill tests
and four MILLSOFT simulations with CMS were prepared, details of which are given in
Appendix A.
In sorne cases, for example for validating the CMS on the basis of Forces acting on the
Liner, data as reported in the published papers were used. Here the simulations were run
under similar operating conditions as reported in the research paper with relevant equations
integrated in the CMS for data extraction.
Here it should be noted that the pilot mill is rotating in a clockwise direction whereas the
industrial mills are rotating in an anticlockwise direction.
49
4.5.1 On the Basis of Power Prediction
The data from the following was used for validation of power:
1. Power observed for the sixteen tests do ne on the pilot baIl mills.
2. Power observed as published [Morrell, 1996]:
• 42 data sets of ball mill
• 31 data sets of SAG mill
• 8 data sets of AG mill
3. Published data [Mishra, 2003; Abd El-Rahman, 2001] of observed mill power consist-
ing of 18 data sets of SAG mill.
The charge motion was simulated with similar operating conditions as specified in the
published literature, which predicted the power for each data set. Figure 4-15 combines all
the above data sets. For most of the cases the CMS closely predicts the power.
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 -12000

Observed Power (WJ
Figure 4-15: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Power: Predicted vs Observed
4.5.2 On the Basis of Toe Angle Prediction
The Toe Angles were determined for the pilot mill tests and simulated industrial mills
(MILLSOFT) following the procedure described in section 4.4.2. The Toe Angle from the
CMS was determined by simulating the same tests and locating the last particle in the
charge profile. Figure 4-16 compares the Toe Angles obtained from the tests and the CMS.
The CMS under predicts the Toe Angle in majority of cases.
50
340 300
;:;;
..
:2.320
"E>
..,'"'" 300
.::
~ 280
'tl
.
:;;
d:: 260
240 -l''--~-~~-~-'-~-~ 220 -l''---,----,----.---~

240 260 280 300 320 340 220 240 260 280 300
Observed Toe angle [deg) Observed Toe angle (deg]
a. Pilot mill b. Industrial mill (MILLSOFT)
Figure 4-16: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Toe Angle: Predicted vs Observed
4.5.3 On the Basis of Shoulder Angle Prediction
The Shoulder Angles were determined from the pilot mill tests and simulated industrial
mills (MILLSOFT) following the procedure described in section 4.4.3. The Shoulder Angle
from the CMS was determined by simulating the tests using McIvor's approach. Figure
4-17 compares the CMS with actual test on the basis of Shoulder Angles prediction. As can
be observed, CMS closely predicts the Shoulder Angle for simulated industrial mills and in
few cases for the pilot mills.
_180
..,""
::!.
..,
.."".
"E> 160
c:
~
~ 140
oC
Cf)
..,
.",
1;! 120
.",
d:
120 140 160 180
Observed Shoulder angle Ideg) Observed Shoulder angle (deg)
Figure 4-17: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Shoulder Angle: Predicted vs Observed
4.5.4 On the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction
The CoC was determined for the pilot mill tests and simulated industrial mills (MILLSOFT)
following the procedure described in section 4.4.4. The CoM from the CMS was determined
by simulating each tests with equation 4.8. Figure 4-18 compares the CMS with actual test
on the basis of the CoM prediction. As can be observed, the CMS under predicts the CoC
51
for majority of the cases.
360
...
=23û "ai
...
i"'" 340
::!.
::l:
210
u"
Q:
.....
U
.",
B 190 "
tl
...
"CI
:g 320
0.: 0.:
170
150 ~-~-~--..,..--~-~
150 170 190 210 230 250 320 340 360
Observed CaC [degl Observed CaC [deg)
Figure 4-18: Validation of CMS on the Basis of CoM jCoC: Predicted vs Observed
4.5.5 On the Basis of Predicted Number of Layers
The Number of Layers formed was determined for the pilot mill tests following the procedure
described in section 4.4.5. The Number of Layers for simulated industrial mill was not
determined as it was very difficult to identify the layers distinctly in MILLSOFT simulation.
Figure 4-19 compares the CMS with actual tests on the basis of Number of Layers predicted.
Here there is a tendency to over-predict at high Number of Layers.
20
..,f!
>-
~ 15
Q
0;
.CI
~ 10
....
c:
tl
'6 5
0.:"
0
0 5 10 15 20
Observed number of layers
Figure 4-19: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Number of Layers: Predicted vs Observed
4.5.6 On the Basis of Predicted Number of Trajectories
The Number of Trajectories formed was determined for each pilot mill test (refer section
4.4.6) and the CMS run. Due to difficultly in identifying trajectories distinctly in the case
of simulated indus trial mills (MILLSOFT), these were not used. Figure 4-20 compares the
52
Observed number of trajectories
Figure 4-20: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Numher of Trajectories: Predicted vs Ohserved
CMS with actual test on the basis of Number of Trajectories predicted. As can be observed,
the CMS closely predicts the Number of Trajectories for most of the cases of pilot mill tests
4.5.7 On the Basis of Predicted Forces on the Liner
As described in 4.4.7, the Normal (NForce) and the Tangential (TForce) forces acting on
the liner were computed from the CMS. The computed forces were compared with the data
published [Moys,2000]. Figure 4-21 shows the comparison with respect to Normal forces
270 360
As Simulated
Angle (degreesJ
Figure 4-21: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Normal Forces on the Liner
from which the following points can he noted:
• The magnitude of the force computed through simulation and that as published are
different .
• The angle at which the force computation starts and ends is different for simulated
and published results. This is expected as the Toe and Shoulder Angle shown earlier
differs from the experimental data.
53
Figure 4-22 compares the Tangential Forces acting on the liner. The following points can
be noted with respect to Figure 4-22:
• The angle at which the force computation starts and ends are different for simulated
and published results .
• The magnitude of the forces is comparable with the measured data to a certain extent.
As Published
tt<lrm.1
As Simulated
270 360
Figure 4-22: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Tangential Forces on the Liner
4.5.8 On the Basis of Predicted Charge Volume
The charge area was determined for the pilot mill tests and the simulated industrial mill
(MILLSOFT) following the method described in Section 4.4.8.
0,001 0,001
N N
E E
...
-;0,0008
.., -; 0,0008
iO ++
..
Ë> 0,0008
'fi
+
+ +
+ ~
.
'fi
0,0006
~ O,CIOO4 ..+ ~ 0,0004

+ .. +
t'i t'i
:0
ct 0,0002
..
:0
d: 0,0002
o 0,0002 0.0004 0,0006 0.000$ 0.001 o 0.0002 0.0004 0,0006 0,0008 0,001
Observed charge area [m2) Observed charge ares [m2)
a. Pilot mill b. lndustrial mill (MILLSOFT)
Figure 4-23: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Charge Volume: Predicted vs Observed
Figure 4-23 shows the results of comparison. As can be observed, the CMS under predicts
the charge area for most of the cases of pilot mill tests and the industrial mills.
54
4.5.9 On the Basis of Predicted Layer Speed
The Layer Speed in experiments was determined following the procedure described in sec-
tion 4.4.9. To ensure the consistency of the data, for each test, three samples of consecutive
snapshots were identified and Layer Speeds were determined. As the speed of the charge
particles in each layer varied, for the purpose of comparison, the speed of charge particles
in each layer was averaged, which enabled to determine approximate Layer Speed. As the
procedure was cumbersome, it was carried out on four selected tests. The criterion for the
selection of tests was mainly the clarity in identification of charge particles in mill snapshot.
In the CMS, the Layer Speed was determined using equation 4.11. The graphs in Fig-
ure 4-24 compare the CMS with the actual test on the basis of Layer Speed:
40 40
;}!)
_ - V·1.0
Ê 30
e
: ; 25
Q,)
~2°i- __ .1__ _
~
... 1!)
~, -"""---0
~
.5 10
!)
2 3 4 5 S 7 2 3 .. 5 6 7
Number of layers Number of layers
40
~ " • Enperimem,,' 40 EnperimE'...t~1
_- v·to -0- v·tO
"
:2 :1 4 5 G 7 2 3 4 5
A. Ch. Vol.:45%, Speed:29rpm, Lifters:8 B. Ch.Vol.:45%, Speed:40rpm, Lifters:8
C. Ch. Vol.:45%, Speed:29rpm, Lifters:4 D. Ch.Vol.:30%, Speed:29rpm, Lifters:4
Figure 4-24: Validation of CMS on the Basis of Layer speed
The above graphs show that the Layer Speed predicted by the CMS is not in accordance with
that actually measured and certainly requires improvement. Also the above curves further
55
solidify the conclusion about the Number of Layers drawn in section 4.4.5. It should be
noted that the same procedure was not carried out on simulated industrial mills due to
varying particle size.
4.5.10 Summary on validation of the Charge Motion Simulator
Mean Error and Standard Deviation (Std. Dev) were computed from the data generated
for pilot and industrial mills. The table 4.3 shows the data.
Table 4.3: Summary of validation of CMS
Parameters Mean Error(%) Std. Dev.(%)

Relative Absolute
V-l.ü V-l.Ü V-l.Ü V-l.ü
Power (P) 9 25 32 22
Toe angle (TA) 8 13 14 6
Shoulder angle (SA) -7 7 4 4
CoM / CoC 8 8 6 5
Number of layers (NoL) -34 46 37 2ü
Number of trajectories (NoT) -19 24 43 4ü
Charge volume (CV) 32 32 11 11
The following points can concluded from the validation summary and graphs for the CMS:
• the Shoulder Angle is predicted closely,
• the spread of the values is almost even in the case of Power, indicating close Power
prediction,
• the prediction of Toe Angle, Number of Layers, Charge Volume, CoM / CoC along
with forces requires improvement.
4.6 Development of different Charge Motion Simulator Ver-

.
Slons
With an aim to improve the prediction of identified parameters, two major avenues were
explored by changing the charge motion and are described below:
Avenue 1 : Shoulder Clipping - Version 1.1 (V-LI) [Faucher, 2003]. The analysis of this
version was done by the author.
56
Avenue 2 : Layer adjustment - Version 1.2 (V-1.2). Development and analysis by the
author.
Hence forth, the original CMS is referred to as Version 1.ü (V-1.Ü).
4.6.1 Shoulder Clipping (V-LI)
As evident from the validation, the computation of the Toe Angle required improvement.
Aiso the validation of CoM / CoC indicated that a proper distribution of charge parti-
cles was required, while maintaining the results obtained from validation of the Number
of Trajectories and the Power. As mentioned the point of flight is determined by a force
balance calculation [McIvor, 1983]. This relationship applied to a system of particles or
more precisely to a set of layers leads to forming of the corner as show in Figure 4-25a
(shown by line AB in Figure 4-25b). A more appropriate description would be to have the
McIvor's relationship to describe the point of flight of the outer most layers and then have
an angle such as Angle of Repose defining the second line A'B' as shown in Figure 4-25b.
The elements about this would be in flight and the charge would redistribute itself slightly
lower. Hence it was decided to clip sorne charge in the shoulder region (Figure 4-25c).
a. V-l.ü b. Modifications c. V-l.I
Figure 4-25: Development of the CMS: Shoulder Clipping (V-l.I)
4.6.2 Layer Adjustment (V-L2)
While analyzing the images of the actual charge motion, it was observed that layers of the
charge particles move in a concentric manner. But in the simulator all the layers formed
where moving in the direction of mill rotation. Further, while validating the Number of
Layers, the actual Number of Layers formed was lower than that predicted by the simulator.
57
Henee following equation was used in the prediction of Number of Layers [Morrell, 1992J:
2cjÛt )0.5
r
m
( 1 - ..,----':---:-
211" + es - eT
(4.14)
11"
2.5307(1.2796 - JT){l - exp[-19.42(4)c - 4»]} + "2 (4.15)
where
()s = shoulder angle equation (4.5), ()T= toe angle,

Jt = fraction of mill filling, ri = inner radius of charge,
r m = mill radius.
a. V-l.ü b. Modifications c. V-l.2
Figure 4-26: Development of the CMS: Layer Adjustment (V-l.2)
Figure 4-26 illustrates the change in the charge motion due to the Layer Adjustment. Fig-
ure 4-26a shows the charge motion (V-1.0). Figure 4-26b shows V-Lü but with the hatched
region. The arc A'B' which for ms the beginning of the hatched region is determined using
equation 4.14. The hatched region shows the exeess of the charge particles in the charge
region. These charge particles are adjusted near the toe region of the charge, which results
in Figure 4-26c.
Following the conclusion of section 4.4.9, the Layer Speed was changed by using the following
equations [Morrell, 1992J:
NT = Nmrm(r - ri) (4.16)

r(rm - ri)
where,
N r = speed of layer r Nm = mill speed,

rm = mill radius, ri = inner mill radius
58
The above changes were incorporated in the charge motion. The charge motion (V-L2)
thus developed was compared with the standards.
4.7 Validation of different Versions of Charge Motion Simu-

lator
For each parameter, the same procedure as specified while validating V-Lü is carried out
to identify the parameters in V-L1 and V-L2. The detailed visual comparison is given for
sorne cases in Appendix -A. Below, graphs comparing identified parameters obtained from
each version with those obtained from the standard are given to give an overall picture.
4.7.1 On the Basis of Power Prediction
12000
ï 10000
.
Q,)
)
8000
Q
0..
"0
Q,)
6000
tl
.
:0 4000
Q.l
0-
2000
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Observed Power (WJ
Figure 4-27: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Power Prediction
Figure 4-27 reveals that V-L1 gives more scatter than V-L2, but V-L2 is more scattered
than V-Lü. This can be verified from the statistical analysis presented in the Table 4.4
at the end of this chapter. Thus it can be concluded that for power, V-Lü gives the best
results.
4.7.2 On the Basis of Toe Angle Prediction
It is evident from Figure 4-28 that V-L2 closely predicts the Toe Angle for most of the
pilot plant tests and in major cases of simulated industrial mills. Aiso V-L1 predicts the
Toe Angle slightly better than V-Lü which is expected as V-L1 was created by clipping the
charge at the shoulder and adjusting it at the toe.
59
340 300
<>V-1.0 ... V-1.1 +V-1.2
'El 'El
~320 "
:;2BO
"
0, 0,
.,
1:
~ 300
+
"
~
"
~ 260 +
13 280 "'ti.,"
ti
'6
•
'6
è:" 260
d: 240
ll •
.. OY-1.0 .... V.1.1.V-1.2
240 -l"'--~--~-~-<>::..-~--, 220 -l''---~--~--~--~
240 260 260 300 320 340 220 240 260 280
Observed Toe angle Idegl Observed Toe angle [degJ
Figure 4-28: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Toe Angle Prediction
4.7.3 On the Basis of Shoulder Angle Prediction
The scat ter in the data seen in Figure 4-29 using V-1.I indicates that for the pilot mill V-1.I
has not resulted in the improvement of the Shoulder Angle. V-l.O predicts the Shoulder
Angle slightly better than that done by V-1.2. However for simulated industrial mills, all
the three versions predict the Shoulder Angle closely.
180
oV-1.0 .... V.1.1 .V.1 ::!

O~--.--~---.---.
100 -l''---~--_--~--~
100 120 140 160 180
o 20 40 60 80
Observed Shoulder angle [deg) Observed Shoulder angle (deg)
Figure 4-29: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Shoulder Angle Prediction
4.7.4 On the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction
The modifications in the CMS have changed the prediction of CoC drastically, especially
for pilot mill. Figure 4-30 shows both the attempts have resulted in an improvement in the
prediction of the CoC, which means a better distribution of charge particles in the pilot
mill. However, for the simulated industrial mill V-l.2 closely predicts the CoC as compared
to the other versions. Thus it can be concluded that V-l.2 gives a better charge distribution
for the pilot and simulated industrial mills, which can be verified also through the statistical
60
analysis done on the data, presented in Table 4.5.
~~------~------~----~
l1Xl 210 m 21Xl 7Xk1 320 34ü R
Obscrved C()C Id(9) Oblltlrved CoC Idtlg)
ss
Figure 4-30: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction
4.7.5 On the Basis of Predicted N umber of Layers
20
ôV~1 0 AV-1.1 .V~12

O~----~-----r-----.-----.
o 5 10 15 20
Obscrved number of laycrs
ss
Figure 4-31: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Number of Layers Prediction
As described in section 4.6.2, V-1.2 was mainly developed to properly predict the Number of
Layers. Hence as expected V-l.2 closely predicts the Number of Layers (Figure 4-31). Since
layer prediction in V-l.l is similar to that in V-l.O, no drastic improvement in prediction
of layers is observed for V-l.1 when compared with the standards for pilot mill. The
comparison with the simulated industrial mills is not presented due to reasons specified
earlier. However, it was observed that an versions of charge simulator predicted similar
Number of Layers (refer to Appendix A)
61
4.7.6 On the Basis of Predicted N umber of Trajectories
Here comparison with the simulated industrial mill is not presented due to reasons specified
earlier but the visual comparison indicates that the Number of Trajectories predicted by V-
1.2 is similar to that by the MILLSOFT simulator. Also V-1.Ü and V-1.I show a considerably
higher number of trajectories (refer Appendix A). As far as pilot mill is concerned, Figure
4-32 shows that V-1.Ü and V-1.2 predict Number of Trajectories equally weIl.
.
",6
~
9V·1.0 "V· 1.1 .V.12
.
ti
~4
"4;
JO
E • • •
'"
'"
..,2
... <>
..
ti
'6
à:
•
0
0 2 4 G
ss Observed number of trajectories
Figure 4-32: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Number of Trajectories Prediction
4.7.7 On the Basis of Predicted Forces on the Liner
Âs PUbiished
l~· ~ l~rnJ#:
~~~~r~-- ~ ......,,~~i
pa 'tIiIJ i:~ As Slmulated
As Simulated V·1.0
V·HI
·8 Ah ..,,, Id""."",,1
ar-------------~ ~--~--~------~
As Simulated
v·u
Angle Id"9"'''''1 Ahgle ~gre"sl

6
270 )SC Z-
As Slmulated - AJ<S!mulatod
V.U ~ 4 V·U
~~~~~~~~------~
.::Z
o
Angle l~gfeesl
a. Tangential force b.Normal force
Figure 4-33: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Forces on the Liner
62
Figure 4-33 compares the forces acting on the liner using different simulator versions. As
can be observed, the measured forces resemble more closely to that predicted by V-l.2 in
terms of the magnitude, the starting point (Toe Angle) and the peaks. Also the forces
acting, especially in the toe region resemble closely that predicted by V-l.2, which is in
accordance with the conclusion drawn for the Toe Angle parameter. The higher magnitude
of the forces computed using V-l.Ü and V-l.I can be attributed to the variation in Number
of Layers and CoM / CoC predicted by the respective simulators versions, which is in line
with the analysis done earlier.
4.7.8 On the Basis of Predicted Layer speed
zo ... ,. '" E8p~time-nt.a1
25
- '" _ " Y·1.0
-_Y·1.2
Ë
.§: 20 "-
""C
~
~ 15
..
!Il
~ 10
\Q
...J
5
0
2 3 4 ~ a ~ 4 \; e
-0-
• "" -
-c--V·t2
E.peJim~nt'"
Y·tO
,..
-.-v·ta
><>4e"
-<>" Y·tO
E~p6'rÎm~ntal
Ë 25 ~
0..
.:::.ao
"Cl
~
~ 15
..>-
fil
~ 10
('II
...J ~
2 345 S 2 3 4
A. Ch. Vol.:45%, Speed:29rpm, Lifters:8 B. Ch.VoL:45%, Speed:40rpm, Lifters:8
C. Ch. VoL:45%, Speed:29rpm, Lifters:4 D. Ch.Vol.:30%, Speed:29rpm, Lifters:4
Figure 4-34: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Layer Speed Prediction
Since while creating V-l.I, no change with respect to the Layer Speed was done, the Layer
Speed predicted by V-l.I is the same as that by V-l.Ü. Hence in Figure 4-33 V-l.I is not
considered. From Figure 4-34, it is evident that V-l.2 predicts the tendency of the actual
Layer Speed, which can be fine tuned with calibration. Further Figure 4-34 confirms the
accurate prediction of the Number of Layers using V-l.2.
63
4.7.9 On the Basis of Predicted Charge Volume
No drastic improvement in the prediction of the Charge Volume was observed from the
two avenues. But V-l.2 predicts the Charge Volume slightly better than the V-l.Ü and
V-l.I because in V-l.2 there is an improvement in the distribution of the charge particles
as discussed in section 4.6.2
0.001 0,001
N N
E E
";0,0008 -;0.0008
.
E
;0,0006
.,
~
~O.0006
"
.t:
"
.c
il'" 0,0004 -g'" 0,0004
't ti
:s :s
.:t 0.0002 .:t 0,0002
o~--~--~---- __ --~--~
o 0,0002 0,0004 0,0006 0,01..108 0,001 o 0,0002 0,0004 O,OOOS 0,0008 0,001
Observed charge area 1m2) Observed charge arca [m2)
ss
Figure 4-35: Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Charge Volume prediction
4.7.10 Summary on the comparison of different versions of the CMS
Using the format of Table 4.3, Table 4.4 compares the different versions of the CMS sta-
tistically, where decrease in the Mean Error and Std. Dev. means improvement. As can
Table 4.4: Summary on validation of CMS Versions
Mean Error(%) Std. Dev. (%)

Relative Absolute Relative Absolute
V-l.Ü V-l.1 V-l.2 V-l.Ü V-l.1 V-l.2 V-l.Ü V-l.1 V-1.2 V-l.Ü V-l.l V-l.2
P 9 ü 14 25 32 31 32 46 37 22 33 24
TA 8 7 2 13 12 5 14 13 6 6 5 4
SA -7 -26 -9 7 32 10 4 16 5 4 10 5
CoM 8 0 -1 8 5 4 6 6 5 5 3 2
NoL -34 -38 -3 46 46 10 37 38 15 2ü 26 11
NoT -19 94 10 24 94 17 43 25 25 4ü 25 21
CV 32 35 26 32 35 26 11 9 6 11 9 6
be observed in the Table 4.4, the absolute mean error and standard deviation for the Toe
Angle and CoM / CoC is lowest using V-l.2. Also, the Mean Error and the Std. Dev.
is the least in the cases of Number of Layers, Charge Volume and Number of Trajectories
64
with V-l.2. However, higher Mean Error and Std. Dev. for the Power indicates its under
predicted by V-l.2
Table 4.5 shows an over appraisal on the validity of the CMS.
Table 4.5: Over aU view on validation of CMS

Parameters Pilot mill Industrial mill
V-l.I V-l.2 V-l.I V-l.2
Power ,j x x ,j
Toe angle x + x +
Shoulder angle x ,j ,j ,j
CoM / CoC ,j + x +
Number of layers x + ,j ,j
N umber of trajectories x ,j x +
Charge volume ,j + ,j ,j
Legend: +:Improvement, ,j:Almost same as before, x :UnderjOver prediction
4.8 Conclusions
From the above work on the validation for the CMS the following can be concluded:
• An experimental set-up was developed which enabled the capture of actual charge
motion in a pilot tumbling mill for validation of CMS.
• The CMS was rigorously validated on basis of 9 charge motion parameters with pilot
mill tests and indus trial mill simulations.
• Validation of the CMS - V-l.Ü has revealed that though the variance in the Power
and the Shoulder Angle prediction is lower, the prediction of Toe Angle, Number of
Layers, Charge Volume and CoM / CoC requires improvement.
• Analysis of the CMS - V-1.1, has not resulted in significant improvements in parameter
prediction however it appears to have improved the visual aspect.
• CMS - V-l.2 has certainly improved the prediction ofToe Angle, CoM / CoC, Number
of Layers, Number of Trajectories and Charge Volume, with slight under prediction
of Power.
• Though the validation of CMS - V-l.2 has shown promising results, it still requires
further improvement, especially in visual representation.
65
Chapter 5
Simulation of Liner wear
Another important aspect of the project as described in Chapter 1 was the simulation of wear
on the liner profile. The literature review in Chapter 2 has shown that few researchers have
worked in the area of liner wear simulation. The reported results can be broadly categorized
in two parts. The results of the first group [Radziszewski, 1993; Cleary 1996; Clover 1997}
lacks a comparison of simulated with the measured liner wear while that of the second group
[Qui, 2000} lacks technical details. Further, neither group has published results on the real
time aspect of the Liner Wear Simulator.
In this chapter, an attempt has been made to simula te wear on the liner profile. The details
covering force analysis, wear models, liner discretization and integration of wear models with
the Charge Motion Simulator are provided. The results comparing simulated with measured
industrial liner wear are presented along with a statistical analysis.
66
5.1 Introduction
In the mineraI processing industry, stable mill charge motion is desired for considerable
amounts of time. Since liner design plays an important role in the transmission of energy
from mill shell to the charge, change in the liner design due to wear can change energy
distribution (the charge motion) significantly, affecting the mill operation.
AIso, liner replacement costs and costs of lost production time for changing liner are sig-
nificant. Reducing these costs by predicting the liner wear can help in improving plant
performance there by maintaining grinding performance for longer periods of time thus in-
creasing profitability.
This chapter is dedicated to development of a Liner Wear Simulator and starts with the
fundamental definition of wear and describes in detail the development of the wear simulator
with results.
5.2 Strategy for development of the Liner Wear Simulator
5.2.1 What is wear?
Wear is defined as removal of material under the action of forces [Rabinowicz, 1996J. The
definition indicates that wear comprises of two major aspects- firstly the action of forces
and secondly the removal of material.
So, going by the definition, to develop a Liner Wear Simulator for tumbling mills the
following things are essential:
• Force investigation on millliners
• Wear models
After the force and wear model investigation it is necessary to integrate them inside the
Charge Motion Simulator (CMS). Further, to compute wear at precise points on the liner,
liner discretization is necessary.
With this basic understanding, the strategy shown in Figure 5-1 was developed to start the
work on the Liner Wear Simulator. The description on the development of the Liner Wear
Simulator in this chapter follows the strategy.
67
Figure 5-1: Strategy for the development of the Liner Wear Simulator
5.3 Force investigation on mill liners
Figure 5-2 shows a cross sectional diagram of a simulated tumbling mill. As can be seen
the mill mainly consists of :
• liners along the mill shell
• a charge consisting of either balls or balls and ore or just ore depending on the mill
type
Charge
Shen
Figure 5-2: Cross sectional view of simulated tumbling mill
Since liners cannot cause forces on them, it is the charge that causes the forces on liners.
Again, refereing to Figure 5-2, it can be seen that as the mill rotates, the majority of the
charge particles move along the mill shell while some charge particles are in flight and fall
near the toe region of the charge. The charge orientation gives two basic regions of contact
as shown in the Figure 5-3:
• the region where charge particles remain in contact with the mill when the mill rotates-
Region -1
• the region where charge particles in flight re-enter charge near the toe - Region-II
68
Region-I
Region-
(Erosion)
Figure 5-3: Contact regions of the charge particles with the mill liner
In Region-l, the charge particles are mainly sliding over each other or on the liner resulting
in abrasion, while in Region-II, the charge particles as mainly impact the ore or millliner,
resulting in erosion.
5.3.1 Forces acting in the Abrasion Region
a. Forces acting on one liner b. Force field on aU liners

Figure 5-4: Schematic of forces acting in the Abrasion Region of mill
In the abrasion region the charge mainly moves along the mill shell. Due to the motion of
the mill, the charge particles are pressed along the mill shen which is due to the centrifugaI
force, while as the charge particles rise along the mill shen, they exert force on the liners
directly below them by the action of the gravitational force.
Figure 5-4a shows a schematic diagram of the forces acting on one liner at one particular
instant in the tumbling mill. When this logic is extended to an the liners in the Abrasion Re-
gion of the charge a force field is developed which is shown in the Figure 5-4b [Radziszewski,
69
1993]. It should be noted that the vectors shown in Figure 5-4b approximately represent
the magnitude of the forces acting at different liner position which in turn reflect that the
forces are dynamic in nature.
5.3.2 Forces acting in the Impact Region
In Region-II of the mill, the charge particles impact the liners or charge particles near the
toe region of the charge. This type of force is the impact force.
Thus, from the investigation of forces acting on the liner it is clear that in Region-l, cen-
trifugaI and gravitational forces are the major forces acting on the liner and that in Region
-II, impact forces play the major role.
5.4 Wear Models
Wear modeling serves two aspects:
• Quantifies the forces
• Establishes a mathematical relationship that links the forces and the material removal.
As discussed in the earlier sections, there are two types of wear - Abrasive Wear (Region-I)
and Impact Wear (Region-II) related to tumbling millliners. Each type of wear modeling
is discussed in the sections given below.
5.4.1 Abrasive Wear Modeling
Here the centrifugaI and gravitational forces acting on the liner are quantified.
The centrifugaI force acting on the liner can be given as follow:
1 nbp
Fcp = "2 L mbiripw;p (5.1)

i=l
where
F ep = centrifugaI force, mbi = mass of particle i,

r ip = radial position of particle, Wip = angular speed of particle,
nbp = number of particles causing force.
The gravitational force acting on the liner can be given as follows:

nbq
Fgq = Lmbig (5.2)

i=l
70
where
nbq = particles causing gravitational force.
The total force acting on the liner at one particular instant can be given as:
(5.3)
The wear rate on the liner using these forces can be given as follows [Radziszewski, 1993] :
. tan(O)
rnZin = P s t - NtVsurf (5.4)
7r H R
where,
mlin = liner wear, Pst = metal density,

() = abrasion factor of material, HR = metal hardness,
Nt = total normal force, Vsurj= surface slippage velo city.
Vsur f can be given as follows [Lowrinson, 1974] :
f..ts - f..tk
Vsurf = 6f..tk - 112 (5.5)
. f..ts
where,
J-tk = coefficient of kinetic friction, J-ts= coefficient of static friction.
Here f..ts is constant and f..tk is based on the following equation [Radziszewski, 1998]:
1.12C + 1
f..tk (5.6)
6C+1
wr z8r 2
C (5.7)
sin(3(r - zrd
where,
z = (1 - Jtr )0.4532, J tr = fraction of mill filling,

6 = slippage parameter, ri = inside mill radius,
Wr= angular velo city of layer T, f3 = angle representing the lifter.
Analysis of equation 5.6 shows that as the number of layers increases (radius of the layers
decreases), f..tk decreases. For initial values of f..tk it was observed that the denominator of
equation 5.5 reduces to a large extent, increasing V sur f drastically.
71
Analysis of equation 5.5 shows that V sur f is computed depending on the friction of the layer
with respect to the friction of the shell. As the speed of the layers in the mill decreases from
the periphery towards the center [Shi, 1999, Morrell, 1993], Vsurf is expected to increase.
But this is contradictory to the results obtained from equation 5.5.
So the following equations were used to predict the speed of the layers and the slippage
velo city [Morrell, 1992; Shi, 1999]:
Nmrm(r - ri)
(5.8)
r(r m - rd
Vsurf = 2~(rm: ri) (~:) (5.9)
(5.10)
where
ri = inner mill radius, Nr = speed of layer with radius r,

N m = mill speed with radiusr m , 6.N = difference in speed of mill and layer.
5.4.2 Impact Wear Modeling
The impact forces result in Impact wear on the liner. The impact forces cannot be quanti-
fied as the abrasion forces as they mainly depend on the velo city and angle of impact at the
point of contact. Thus the approach in Impact Wear Modeling is to build a mathematical
model to compute Impact wear and then to determine inputs to the model.
Ways to calculate the removal of material due to impact by particles have been suggested
by many researchers. In the majority of the cases, the models involve lots of constants
which necessitate extensive experimental test and limit their usage for simulation purpose.
In the sections to follow, mathematical models developed by the authors listed below to
compute impact wear are described along with their advantages and disadvantages.
• Finnie (1960)
• Bitter (1963)
• Rabinowicz (1979)
• Sheldon and Khanhere (1972)
Here an effort has been made to modify the mathematical models to suit the following
purposes:
72
• to allow the simulation of impact wear on the liners
• to reduce the requirement for experimental tests.
Finnie (1960)
Finnie was one of the earliest researchers to propose a model for computing Impact wear
[Finnie, 1960]. The proposed model was revised later [Finnie, 1967] and is given below:
2
cMU
V = 4p ( 1 + mt) [2
cos a -
( 2] X )
U
(5.11)
where
V = wear volume, M = mass of eroding particle,

l = moment of inertia of particle, r = average particle radius,
a = angle of particle impact, U = particle velocity,
p = horizontal flow pressure, c = fraction of particle cutting,
x = horizontal velocity at particle tip, m = mass of individual particle.
With the above formula, the Impact wear can be calculated. But from the simulation
point of view, the above formula requires parameters like p,c and x which are difficult to
determine. Also the above formula is based on number of assumptions [Finnie, 1972]. Also
it has been reported that the above formula gives good results for angles of impact lower
than 45 degree [Finnie, 1979]. In reality, for the charge motion the angles of impact can be
greater than 45 degree. So, for developing the Impact liner wear, the ab ove formula was
explored but not utilized in calculations.
Bitter (1963)
Bitter's approach in calculation of Impact wear involves dividing the phenomena of Impact
wear into "Cutting wear" Wc and "Deformation wear" Wd [Bitter, 1963]. Each wear is
calculated separately and then summed to give total Impact wear.
Accordingly, the volume of material removed by Deformation wear is given as follows:

w _ M(V sina - K)2
(5.12)
d- 2Fd
where
M = mass of impacting particle, Cl! = angle of particle impact,

F d = deformation wear factor, K= constant,
V = velo city of impact.
73
(5.13)
where
VI, V2 = poisson ratio of particle and substrate, p = density of particle,

El, E 2 = Elastic modulus for particle and substrate, O"y=yield stress of substrate.
and the Cutting wear can be given as
w:c = M
2C1(Vsin(a) - K)2 (v cos ()a - CF. (Vsin(a) - K)2)
1 a < ao (5.14)
-yIlv sin(a)) c -yIlv sina) ,-
where
Cl = material constant, Fe = cutting wear factor,
Cl can be given as follows:
Cl = 0.00525 [ atP ] 0.25

(5.15)
when a > ao the wear can be given as follows:
(5.16)
where C2 is the material constant as is given by
1 - vi 1 - V~)2 [a;]0.25
C2 = 0.4589 ( - - + -- - (5.17)
El E2 P
Total impact wear (W) can thus be given as follows:
(5.18)
Thus the Impact wear can be computed. But from a simulation point of view, it is difficult
to determine value of constants Fe and Fd . A simple approach was thought to calculate
the values of Fe and Fd using the strain - strain curve. The approach is based on the fact
that area under the stress - strain curve gives energy. To estimate the strain-strain curve,
Hooke's law (for elastic zone) and Johnson Cook's model (1983) (for plastic zone) were
tested. It was difficult to estimate the plastic zone behaviour of the material as it depended
heavily on a number of factors, the major being velo city of impact. Since the mill rotates
at considerably lower speed than high speed machines (eg compressor, turbines), it was
assumed that slight changes in the impact velocity will not affect the computed Fe and Fd
values. To simplify further, the values of Fe and Fd published [Magnee, 1995] were used for
the simulation purpose.
74
Rabinowicz (1979)
Rabinowicz has proposed two ways to calculate Impact wear- first for high impact velocities
(~ 200ms- 1 ) and second for low impact velocities « 200 ms- 1 ). As impact by charge
particles is generally considered as low velocity impact, the low impact wear equation as
proposed was explored:
Q = WV 2 atan(cp)
(5.19)
27fJgP
where
Q = wear volume, v = velocity of particle,

ct = fraction of kinetic energy lost, f = coefficient of friction,
9 = gravity, P = hardness of substrate,
cp = angle of impact, W = weight of particle.
In this approach again, entities like a, f were unknown. Experimental methods were sug-
gested to find these quantities for computation of wear.
To reduce the experimentation, the following equations were used to compute the unknown
quantities.
Computing Coefficient of Friction f:

The coefficient of friction can be given as follows [Yabuki, 1999]:
f = Tangentialforce = As + A'p' 'lI-ds

4
2 + Lp'
12rs
(5.20)
Work mVn / t::,. t m(l + e)Vn / t::,. t
where
A = average contact area, A' = cross section area of torn crack,

s = shear strength of material, p' = pressure to remove soft material,
d = maximum crater diameter, rs = particle radius,
m = particle mass, /::;.t = contact time.
e = coefficient of restitution, Vn = normal component of striking velo city.
In the above equation, the striking particle is assumed to be a sphere. If, striking particle
has a different geometry, equation 5.20 can be modified. To determine the Coefficient of
Friction it is necessary to find out /::;.t, e, d. To determine these parameters the following
equations were used.
75
Computation of Contact Time 6.t:
The validated time of contact equation can be given as follows [Zhang, 2002, Whaton, 1988]:
_ (1.25V211"P(1 - v 2))0.4 R
Li - 2.94 E (2Vin)O.2 (5.21)
where
p = density of striking particle, v =Poisson's ration,

E = equivalent elastic modulus, R=particle radius,
Vin = velo city of striking particle.
Computing Coefficient of Restitution e:

By definition, the Coefficient of Restitution is a ratio of normal direction velo city component
before Vn and after V~ the impact and is given as follows [Tabor, 1953]:
e
v.'n (5.22)
Vn
v.'n ke (v; - ~ V; ) i (5.23)
ke is given as follows,
(5.24)
where
El, E 2 = Elastic modulus for particle and substrate, m=particle mass,

VI, V2 = poission's ration for particle and substrate, p =hardness of substrate,
rs = radius of particle corresponding to sphere.
c::
0,8
0,7
0,6
.,
L~
• Exp S30C
n Exp Coppe,
_à_~~F J>30~!urnjr
, Cal COD Rer S 0,9
1,1
•
o
A
Exp S30C
Exp Copper
Exp Duralumin
--CaIS30C
" Cal Coppe,
~ * ..... -Ca! Duralumin ~ 0,8
.
~
0,5 ... . ··· .... C.IDuralumin
II>
~ 0,7
!:! ~..
7; 0,4 7; 0,6
:.:.l .~ "'~'.,;'" •
ë
] 0,5
"
'0 0)
"
"V""'''''h'-,.W':: :-
>= ~ 0,4
"
u"
0,2
"
U 0,3
0,1 0,2
0,1 4 - - - - , . - - - - - - , - - - - , - - - - - ,
10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40
Velocity [ms-l) Velocity lms-l)
a. Hardened steel balls b. Glass beads

Figure 5-5: Coefficient of Restitution: Measured vs Computed
76
Using the above equations, the Coefficient of Restitution can be found. The approach was
verified by comparing the computed values of e with published experimental results [Kleis,
1999]. Figure 5-5 shows the results.
Estimation of Crater Diameter(d):

The crater diameter can be found out from crater volume v as given in [Yabuki, 1999]:
d (5.25)
v = (5.26)
To verify the accuracy of equations 5.21 to 5.26 in predicting the Coefficient of Friction, the
data published [Yabuki, 1999] was used. Figure 5-6 shows the results.
c')
••
.Stee! shol
.:) Bras,!' Shot
0,15 0,2 0,25 0,3

Predicted Coefficient of friction
Figure 5-6: Coefficient of Friction: Measured vs Computed
Computation of 0::
The fraction of the kinetic' energy lost can be given as follows:
v: 2- v:,2
a = n n (5.27)
Vr?
The above development allows the determination of aU the parameters a, f of Rabinowicz's
formula and hence the calculation of wear and reduces the necessity for experiments.
Sheldon and Kanhere (1972)
The approach consists of an energy balance between the kinetic energy of the particle and
the work done in indentation. Accordingly the volume of material removed V is given as:
V = KD 3 V 3 (;J"2 3
(5.28)
77
where
D= particle diameter, Hv=Vicker's hardness,

U = particle velo city, K =constant.
The above approach shows heavy dependence of wear on the velo city of impact (power of
3), but actually the wear varies as 2 -2.35 power of velocity [Finnie, Rabinowicz, 1996].
Hence while using the above equation a value of 2.35 was used for calculation of wear.
Approaches to compute impact wear have been suggested by other authors [Chen, 1998],
in which Hutching's approach to calculate impact wear is extended, but this approach is
mainly applicable for normal impacts which might not be always be true for charge impact-
ing the mill liner. Recently, the work on influence of particle rotation on the solid particle
erosion rate of met aIs has been reported [Deng, 2003], which combines Bitter's and Finnie's
models. The formulas from this work can also be used for computing impact wear.
In aIl the approaches discussed ab ove , it can be concluded that for ca1culation of wear,
besides the material properties and constants, velo city of impact and angle of impact are
unknowns and are obtained from the charge motion simulator.
Impact Wear Model comparison
Having introduced four models for computing the impact wear, it is essential to determine
the model which gives best results as applied to mill conditions.
0.05
--<-finnie
~
... __ ..... .. -tr--Exp
; ; 0.04
•2':
, • • '.
. • ..... Bitter
"
E
.::. ~
~'~
~ 0,03
""
~.,
Ë 0,02
\
""
;;;
~ 0,01
10 20 40 60 70
Angle of Impingement [degl
Figure 5-7: Comparison of Impact Wear Models
Data published [Bingley, 2003] has been used for the purpose of comparison of the models.
78
The published experimental results show the effect of the angle of impact of the particle on
the wear measured. Since in the models investigated, Bitter's and Finnie's models take in
to account the angle of impact, these two models are compared here.
From the graph in Figure 5-7, it is evident that Bitter's model gives best results. The
wear predicted by Finnie's model solidifies an earlier conclusion (refer section 5.4.2) that
the model does not accurately predict the wear for angle of impact greater than 45 degrees.
Though Bitters model gives the best results, Sheldon and Khanhere's model was used here
as a first step.
It is essential to note at this point that there is a lack of published data to further val-
idate the computed impact wear due to the following:
• In the majority of the cases the published results are either due to impact with sand
particles or at high impact velocities (> 50ms- 1 ) which is not accordance with mill
operating conditions [Bingley, 2003J.
• For the relevant data published there is lack of information about the exact material
grade and its properties [O'Flynn, 2001J.
5.5 Integration of Wear Models with the Charge Motion

Simulator
To simulate liner wear, it is essential to incorporate these models in the charge motion, so
that the computed liner wear is a function of the charge motion in the mill.
To understand the incorporation of the wear model in the charge motion, it is necessary to
discuss the charge motion model in brief.
5.5.1 Charge Motion Algorithm
Figure 5-8, shows the algorithm used for numerical implementation of the charge motion
[Radziszewski, 1998J. The blocks shown in the algorithm are discussed below in brief:
Data Input: This block allows the input of operating conditions of the mill.
Charge Discretization: Depending on the size of the media and percentage charge vol-
ume input, the charge in the mill is discretized using an arbitrary discretization scheme.
79
Charge Initialization: This block allows the computation of various intermediate parame-
ters required for the charge motion like speed of layers and number of layers formed.
Charge Rotation: This block rotates the charge particles depending on the speed of the
layers computed earlier and checks if the charge particles are in flight.
Charge Reentry Calculation: This block allows the reentry of the charge particles which
are in flight, inside the enmasse region of the charge.
Charge Foot Stability: This block adjusts the charge near the toe region of the charge
which allows the charge particles to be rearranged inside the charge enmasse region.
Figure 5-8: Algorithm of the Charge Motion Simulator
80
5.5.2 Wear Computation Algorithm
From the discussion on the wear computation it is evident that abrasive wear computation
is connected with the charge rotation and the charge foot stability block of figure 5.8 and
the impact wear computation is related to the charge reentry block. The algorithms for
computing the Impact wear and Abrasion wear are given in Figure 5-9:
a. Abrasion wear b. Impact wear

Figure 5-9: Algorithms for Wear Computation
As the charge rotates after initialization, each particle is checked to determine if it exerts
the centrifugaI force or gravitational force on the liner. If the charge particle exerts either
of the force, the force exerted is calculated using equations 5.1 or 5.2. The computed val-
ues of these forces along with the material properties of the liner are used to compute the
Abrasive wear on the liner. The algorithm in Figure 5-9a accumulates Abrasive wear on the
81
liner profile. The above algorithm is repeated for each time step till t <= tend (referring to
Figure 5-8).
On similar grounds, the Impact wear algorithm (Figure 5-9b) also accumulates Impact wear
on the liner profile. Here, each charge particle, is checked to de termine if it is in flight. If
the particle is in flight, using the Collision Detection Algorithm (described later), it IS
determined if the particle is impacting the liner. If so, the collision detection algorithm
gives the values of impact velocity and angle of impact at the contact point of the particle
with the liner. These values form the input to most of the Impact Wear Models. Using
one of the models, the Impact wear is computed on the liner. Just as for the abrasion wear
algorithm, the impact wear algorithm is also repeated for each time step.
5.5.3 Collision Detection Algorithm
This algorithm mainly de termines the point of impact of the charge particle with the liner.
In charge motion, these particles follow a path defined by the equations of motion, which is
dependent on the time interval of two consecutive iterations. By reducing this time interval,
a smooth path followed by particle in flight can be obtained. The intersection of this path
with the liner geometry determines precisely the point of impact / contact. The velo city
and angle of impact at the point of contact were obtained using the equations of motion.
To determine exactly at which place the wear is occurring on the liner, it is essential to
discretize the liner.
5.6 Liner Discretization
Discretization of liner means dividing the surface of the liner into fine elements, just like a
mesh. The tumbling millliner mainly consists of two parts, the lifter - which generally is
the projection and shellliner - which is close to the mill shell.
Earlier [Radziszewski, 1993], the entire liner was discretized in one dimension. Here the
lifter portion of the liner is discretized two dimensions due to the following reasons:
• Since the charge motion is in two- dimensions, the forces exerted by the charge par-
ticles may not be in one direction
• Adding a second dimension to discretization increases the accuracy in prediction of

the liner wear profile
82
The shellliner has been discretized in one dimension due to the following reasons:
• Through the data published on liner wear [Qui, 2001, Radziszewski, 1993], it was clear
that maximum wear occurred on the lifter portion of the liner and not the shell liner
portion.
• Adding a second dimension to the discretization in this region would definitely add
to more accuracy but at the same time increase computational time.
Figure 5-10 shows the discretized bevelliner. It can be observed that the lifter has been
discretized into a matrix with an equal number of rows and columns (two dimensions).
This feature provides facility in programming. It should be noted that each element of the
matrix need not be a square element, as the element dimensions depend on the dimensions
of the lifters entered initially by the user while specifying operating conditions.
lJmI
2+1
Figure 5-10: Liner discretization
Since tumbling mills utilize liners of varying geometry, a program was developed which
could discretize the liner profile of a given geometry into desired number of elements for the
lifter and liner shell. The program keeps an account of the position and area occupied by
each element of the lifter and liner matrix. The program was included in the initialization
phase of the charge motion simulator so that actual computational time is not consumed
for creating the liner discretization.
The algorithm in the Figure 5-11 shows the technique used to calculate wear on the liner
profile. The lifter part is divided into elements nx and ny, having a height of .6.x, a width
of .6.y and a unit y depth. The mass of the element i with density Pst can be given as:
(5.29)
83
The lifter width Lliftw and height Llifth is divided in to elements can be given as follows:
_ L1iftw _ L1ifth
nx - ~,ny - I:!.y (5.30)
The initial surface of the lifter is defined by the vector Yifjwhere =1,2,3.. nx and
ParticJes in Charge (m)

(n=O)
Compute Wear
(Section 5.5.2, 5.5.3)
Obtain Lifter
wear profile
(Equation 5.33)
Figure 5-11: Algorithm to compute liner wear profile
j=1,2,3 .... ,ny. With I:!.t as an interval for simulation step, computations are made to detect
which element is affected by charge particles using the algorithm described in section 5.5.
These algorithms detect which Ym/n element of the vector is getting affected. Wear on
the Vwearm/nis computed using models described in section 5.4 which gives the wear rate
mwearm/n for one collision.
mwearm/n = Vwearm/nPst (5.31)
Rence for a time interval Ot of the simulation where w particles affecting liner elements the
wear rate can be given as follows:
a=w
m wear = L VwearPst (5.32)
a=l
The new surface profile is determined by using the following equation:
a=l
y(t + Ot) = y(t)ifj - Ly'(8t) (5.33)
a=l
84
where
y(t + Jt)il fj'D= new vector after wear, y(t)iJj=original vector at time t,
y'(Jt) = vector lost due to wear.
5.7 Simulation Results
The results from the wear simulation were compared with published liner wear profile [Qui,
2001]. In the published paper, the author has reported wear on the liner of industrial mill
and has compared the simulation results with measured liner wear. The author claims to
have simulated liner wear in 1.5 mill rotations and by amplifying the wear by a factor of
10,000,000. A similar approach is followed here since for liner to wear it takes around six
months of continuous indus trial mills operation.
As discussed earlier in this chapter, gravitational, centrifugaI and impact forces mainly act
on the liner to produce wear. Hence for calibration purpose, three factors corresponding to
each type of force were considered. Further, to amplify the wear the amplification factor
was also included.
The operating conditions of the mill which were not published in Qui (2001), the same were
obtained after contacting the authors. The operating conditions for the mill are given in
Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Operating Parameters of Simulated Mill
Sr.No. Mill Parameters Values

l. Type SAG
2. Diameter (m) 10.36
3. Speed (rpm) 10.36
4. Number of lift ers 64
5. Charge volume (%) 24
6. Steel volume (%) 12
7. Media Diameter(m) 0.1333
The liner geometry and wear history were extracted from the published paper Qui (2001)
using a software "FINDGRAPH". The liner geometry is given in the Figure 5-12. Further,
85
0,4
0,35
~ 0,3
.s:; 0.15
1;
~ 0.1
o
il 0,15
>-
0,1 +----'
o+---~--~--~--~--~~
o 0,1 o.::t 0,3 0,4 0,5 0.6
X-Coordinates [ml
Figure 5-12: Geometry of the liner in simulated mill for wear validation
since there were two versions of the CMS [refer section 4.6] which showed good potential,
wear on the liner was simulated by each version and compared with published data.
In simulating the wear with different versions of the CMS, the same calibration factors for
impact, centrifugaI and gravitational forces were used. Aiso for both the cases the same
amplification factor were used.
Figures 5-13 and 5-14 show the results obtained from the simulation corresponding to dif-
ferent versions of charge motion simulators.
The main idea behind the development of Figures 5-13 and 5-14 was to give a pictorial view
of liner wear simulator results and at the same time compare the results with the reported
wear. Referring to Figures 5-13 and 5-14, the" initial" figure shows the snapshot of the liner
in its initial state, then the snapshots move in a c10ckwise direction. The "simulated" snap-
shots are the snapshots of the simulated liner wear profile which are used for comparison
with the measured lifter wear. The "intermediate" snapshots are snapshots of the simu-
lated lifter wear profile between the "simulated" snapshots. The central figure compares
the" simulated" and reported wear liner profiles at different instances of simulation by the
method of superimposition.
86
Intermediate -1 Simulated - 1 Intermediate - 2
.4,75 .Ifiliial
Me&s<Jfed-1
• Sunulal€'lI·1
-A,B
M~«,lUl!d":~
·~,a5
+
+
SnnI.JI;<1t!d·2
Me"$ured-J
SU!'U.délh!d·:~ "~'i ............._ . +.
.
:~.- ..,.
!: • 4,S
\ ... + •
=
Ê
1;
~
·4,95
] ·5 .,.~
;. -.#' ........
·5,05
~ H
--'.-. ~
-5,1
;~~,'JI':~é~;'
Initial
·5,15 -_._- Simulated - 2
-0,3 -0,1 -0,1 0,1 0,2 0,3
x ~ Cn(trdiIl81~ af mil! ln
Superimposed measured and simulated wear
~~~,--~~,~.,--~--~~7-~
):. ('{'~r:I'n:.lev.:'I',il;ln;
Simulated - 3 Intermediate - 4 Intermediate - 3
Figure 5-13: Validation of Simulated Liner Wear (V-l.ü): Simulated vs Measured
87
Intermediate ·1 Simulated • 1 Intermediate . 2
·4)5
.iM.lh31
Mea-sure';"1
• 3lmulaled·1
·-1.fJ
-4,131
M",a:H.I860~
• 3Iffi!j!.,led·2
MNulJled·3
..
~ $lmu!aled·3
E -4,9
'li
.
~
·4,flS
i"
<!l .;
>-
-5,05
·S,I
Initial Simulated . 2
.'
·5,1~
-0,3 -0,2 -û' 0,: D.l O"
X· Coordinatt of mm m
Superimposed measured and simulated wear
Simulated • 3 Intermediate . 4 Intermediate . 3
Figure 5-14: Validation of Simulated Liner Wear (V-1.2): Simulated vs Measured
88
Further Figure 5-15 compares the simulated liner and measured liner profiles after statisti-
cal analysis (discussed in Section 5.7).
~4)5 -4,75
.. Iniutial .!nÎullai
MeaSutBd-1 Me«$urad-1
• Simu!ated·l .. SimIJiated·l
-4,8 -4,6 .. 8rnooth-1
.. Smooth.. l
, t...leasu&d-2 Meêlsued-2
• Sirnuiated*2 .. Simui3Ied··2
-4,85 .Smoolh-2 -4,25 • Sm(loth.. 2
Measu!'li:d-3 , Measured·)
• Slmu!atecl-3 .. Simutated-3
l --4,9 • Smooth..3 ! -4,9 • Smooth·3
..
]
..
ê
~ ·~>95
~ ·4,95
~0 ~0
u -5 <..> .:,
.;. >-
··5.05 ·5,05
-5.1 -5,1
·5,1f. -5,15
·O,:{ -0,2 -0,1 0,1 0,3 -0,3 ~O,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3
X .. CoordÎnme of mUl [m] X - Coordinate of mil! (m)
a. V-l.Ü b. V-l.2
Figure 5-15: Validation of smoothed Liner Wear: Simulated vs Measured
Visual comparison shows that the wear profile agrees with the trend of the wear history
reported for both the types of charge motion. However there are certain differences observed.
Further in the research an impact wear algorithm was developed. It was interesting to
determine the contribution made by impact wear in the total wear, hence the wear on the
lifter was simulated with and without the impact wear algorithm using V-l.O. Figure 5-16
shows the results. It can be observed that impact wear does contributes to the total wear.
It is difficult to determine the exact contribution of impact wear to the total wear due to
the use of amplification factors and lack of data published on the liner wear. To show the
effect of impact wear on the liner, liner wear was simulated without taking into account the
abrasion wear algorithm. Results are shown in Figure 5-17.
89
-4.75
.initiill
A impact
• NQlmpfJC1
• Impact
• No Impact
O/'lrnpact
• No Irnp"ct
o
i ·4,95
]
8 .~
-5,05
-$,1
·0,3 ·0,2 -D.t 0,1 0,2 0,3

X· Coordinate of mm (ml
Figure 5-16: Contribution of Impact wear to total wear: No impact vs Impact
·4.8
-4.85
l -4.9
E ,4.95
'0
~ -5
i
ü
-5.05
>- ·5.1
·5.15
·5.2
X· Ccu:trdmate of miU lm]
Figure 5-17: Simulated Impact Liner Wear with no Abrasion Wear
5.8 Statistical Analysis of Results
The liner profile obtained after running the simulations need not always have a smooth
profile, which necessities the use of statistical techniques.
The statistical analysis of results from simulation was done to serve the following purpose:
• Smoothen the liner profile
5.8.1 Smoothing Liner Profile
There are a number of techniques available for smoothing. The following smoothing meth-
ods were explored:
90
• Average Moving Filter
• Cubic spline
• Tukey's smoothning technique
• Combination of Cubic spline and Tuckey's smoothning technique.
Average Moving Filter
Average moving filter is the most commonly used technique and can be described by equa-
tion 5.34:
y(k) = u(k) + u(k - 1) + ...... + u(k - ns)
(5.34)
ns
where,
y = output signal, u =input signal,

ns = filter length, k =current sample number (k=1,2,3 .... ).
As applied to the liner profile, the input signal are the liner heights as it wears. Performance
of the average moving filter as applied to liner wear was explored by varying the filter lengths.
The results are shown in Figure 5-18.
Cubic Spline
The use of cubic spline for obtaining a smooth lifter profile has been mentioned (Cleary,
1998), where the author has used Demmler- Reinsh formation of cubic spline. This al-
gorithm requires extensive programming with solid background knowledge on Time Series
smoothing. Moreover, this algorithm is not available in commercial packages like MATLAB
with spline smoothing tool box. Rence the above mentioned algorithm was not used but
the standard cubic spline smoothing algorithm as available in MATLAB spline tool box was
explored.
Tukey's smoothing techniques
A combinat ion of smoothing techniques have been suggested by Tukey (1977). This tech-
niques basically involve a combination of filters like running medians and hanning. Aiso
there are techniques which help to remove or reduce "the peaks" and "the valleys" in the
data. These techniques are easy to program, and can be combined and repeated certain
number of times to get satisfactory results.
91
Selection of Smoothing Technique
To determine the appropriate smoothing technique, the residuals were plotted from the
best results obtained from the techniques mentioned above. Figure 5-18 shows the plot of
residual vs element number on the liner profile. The Moving Average Filter used had a
25
+ Raw weal data
+ • Cubie spline
20 ~ Moving $:>1. filler
• 3RRSHRRSRR
+
15
l 10 ++
•
;;
•
"
"0
..,
Ci)
a:
5
..
•
• • •
0
-5
• •
•
•
•
..
-10
6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61
Element number on the lifter profile
Figure 5-18: Selection of smoothing technique
filter length of 10. Cubic spline smoothing was obtained by using the 'csaps' function of
MATLAB spline tool box with smoothing parameter set to 0.9999. 3RRSHRRSRR was the
Tukey's smoothing technique involving combinat ion of running median, hanning filters to
reduee the valleys and peaks of the data. As can be observed the 3RRSHRRSRR gives the
lowest residue in a majority of the locations. Henee the 3RRSHRRSRR technique combined
with cubic spline smoothing was selected.
5.8.2 Application of the selected smoothing technique
Figure 5-19 describes in detail the application of the selected smoothing technique on the
liner profile with results.
Figure A shows the liner wear profile result as obtained form the simulation.
Figure B shows the raw data extracted from the simulated profile.
Figure C shows the results obtained after applying 3RRSHRRSRR (Tukey's technique).
Figure D shows the smooth liner wear profile as obtained after the application of the cubic
spline on the 3RRSHRRSRR technique.
The above methodology was used to obtain the smooth lifter profile from the simulated
results (refer Figure 5-12 and 5-13).
92
·4,75
B • Original profile
.·. • Raw wear data
..
..
··•
.. ·.·.
"
. ".: .. :.... .•
..
. .. .. ' ...
.'
'.
".,--_...,-,
-5,1
-5.15
-.
-52
-5,2 - l - - - . , - - - - , - - - - , - - - - , - - - - , - - - - - ,
-U,3 -0.1 0,1 0,2 U,3
X (oordlnale of milljm) x - Corodi.ole of mm (ml

·4,75
·4,8 c .. Original predite

• Raw wear data ·4,8 D • Original profile
• Raw wear data
.4,85
.".
.. 3RRSHRRSRR
··4,S5 ··...
• .. 3RRSHRRSRR
." Cuble Spline
.•
. ···.
. ...•.. .. ••
·•·••
~ .. -.". .~
~A
. '" ,. --
• lit ... .
~ '. .
ru...............'... m · • ~ ...-.
..._ _
....
, j
....
.
'U.. . . ttt . . .
-5,1 ~5>1
·5,15
-. ·5,15
-.
·5,2 +---~---,----,---_r_----,-----, -5,2 +----,----.----,----.----.----,
·0,3 ~O,2 ·0,1 0,1 0,2 0,3
·0,2 ·0,1 0,1 0,2 0,3
X- Corodin.le of mil! m X· Corodin'Ie of mil! (ml
Figure 5-19: Application of selected Smoothing Techniques
5.9 Real Time Analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator with

Wear Module
Real time analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator with Liner Wear module was carried out
on lines similar to that of the Charge Motion Simulator as described in Chapter 2. Since
the wear simulator consisted of two major algorithms -Impact and Abrasive wear, the real
time analysis was carried out initially for each algorithm separately. The results from the
real time analysis of the wear algorithm are shown in Figures 5-20 and 5-21.
93
1,00
aLo... I!JHigh
6,00
"e
~ 5,00
&!
~ 4,00
.§
-; 3,00
<>
:;
~ 2,00
êii
1,00
0,00
Mill Parameters
Figure 5-20: Real time analysis of the CMS with Impact Wear Algorithm
Figure 5-20 shows, the reai time analysis of the CMS with the Impact wear aigorithm only.
It is evident that with the Impact wear aigorithm incorporated in the CMS, the computa-
tionai time consumed is definitely increased but still the CMS is faster than real time in aH
the cases.
aL.," I!JHigh
..e 6
:: 5
"
&!
-,
"e
;<> :~
i
~2
e
êii
,--,. ~-= n . ... r=ffl ="""'" Cl..,."

Speeo Ct'~6Irge Vol.ume steel Volume- Me-Oia Size Uner NUl'I'lber Dioo-eter
Mill Parame\ers
Figure 5-21: Real time analysis of CMS with Abrasive Wear Algorithm
Figure 5-21 shows, the real time analysis of the CMS with the Abrasive wear aigorithm only.
The Abrasive wear aigorithm increases the computational time considerably. With Abrasive
wear aigorithm incorporated, the CMS is considerably slower than reai time in aH the cases.
This necessitates that the algorithm for Abrasive wear be optimized.
94
5.10 Conclusions
From the above work on simulation of liner wear the following can be concluded:
• Simulation of the millliner was developed in detail by investigating the forces acting
on the liner in the mill, analysis of wear models, integration of wear models with the
CMS along with statistical analysis.
• For the first time, the liner wear was simulated and compared with the actual measured
indus trial liner wear profiles for validation purpose, with the Liner Wear Simulator
giving promising results.
• The new algorithm to compute Impact wear on the mill liner was developed and
introduced. It was also shown that Impact wear do es contribute to the total wear on
the mill liner.
• Mathematical equations to compute parameters like the Coefficient of Friction and

the Coefficient of Restitution were introduced and results were validated. Thus, ways
to calculate parameters which were assumed to be constants in majority of reported
CMS were introduced.
• Real time analysis was done for the first time on the wear simulation and results were
reported.
• Real time analysis has shown that Liner Wear Simulator developed gave accurate
results but was considerably slow, thus requiring optimization.
95
Chapter 6
Conclusion and recommendations
96
6.1 Conclusions
As stated in the Chapter 1, the objectives of the thesis were as follows:
• To validate the charge motion simulator
• To develop a simulator to predict the wear on the tumbling mill liner
To take into consideration the sponsor's project, it was essential to carry out a real time
analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator (CMS) before the above mentioned objectives
could be achieved. This resulted in one more objective of the thesis, which is stated as
follows:
• To define a real time bench mark for charge motion simulation.
The conclusions related to each of the objectives is as follows:
6.1.1 Real time analysis
The objective here was to determine if the Charge Motion Simulator (CMS) is faster than
real time.
To achieve the objective, a real time analysis of the CMS was carried out by determining
the optimum time step of the simulator and varying the main operating parameters of the
mill (Chapter 3). The determination of optimum time step was based on the accuracy in
power prediction and time consumed by different time steps. The variation in the mill pa-
rameters made it possible to encompass a wide range of mill operating conditions, ensuring
the accuracy of the main conclusion that the CMS was faster than real time.
It is possible that in the near future the mill diameter may increase which may lead to the
conclusion that after sorne years the CMS will be slower than the real time. But this will
eertainly not be the case sinee, the number of registers on the circuit boards double ever
year as per Moore's Law (1965) which has been out-performed at Intel every year (refer
Intel corporation's website) thus increasing the speed of the charge motion simulator. This
leads to the final conclusion that the Charge Motion Simulator will always be faster than
real time for existing operating conditions of tumbling mills.
6.1.2 Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator
The objective here was to determine whether the charge motion predicted by the CMS is
similar to the actual charge motion in the tumbling mills.
97
To achieve the objective, the following main issues were addressed:
• A pilot mill set-up was developed so that actual motion of the charge inside the
tumbling mill could be recorded un der varied operation conditions. MILLSOFT sim-
ulations were made to obtain the industrial mill data. The data from the above work
formed standards which could be used for validation purpose.
• The charge motion predicted by the CMS was compared to the standards on the basis
of nine mill parameters (Chapter 4) which ensured thorough validation (refer Chapter
2 where most of the other researchers used maximum four parameters for comparison).
• Further, different versions of the CMS (V-l.I and V-l.2) were developed and were
shown to have improved the accuracy in prediction of mill parameters when compared
with the standards.
6.1.3 Liner Wear simulation
The objective here was to develop the Liner Wear Simulator for the tumbling mill.
To achieve the objective, the following sub objectives were addressed
• Following the basic definition of wear, forces acting on the liner were identified and
equations were developed to quant ify the forces acting on the liner.
• A new algorithm for impact wear was developed which increased the accuracy of wear
prediction.
• Wear models were compared so that the best model could be selected.
• Liner was discretized in 2-dimensions which increased the accuracy of the results
predicted by the Liner Wear Simulator.
• Different algorithms like force detection and contact detection, an algorithm for com-
puting wear at precise points including wear models were incorporated in the CMS so
that wear on the liner can be computed from the charge in the CMS.
• A smooth liner wear profile was obtained by investigating different smoothing tech-
niques.
• Results were validated by comparing the simulated liner wear profile with measured
liner wear profiles of an indus trial SAG mill.
98
First cornes technical feasibility and then cornes optimization. Taking in to account the lack
in technical details on the subject of liner wear (Chapter 2), the above work has confirmed
that the liner wear as it occurs in reality can be simulated using the method described.
6.2 Recommendations
Based on the results obtained and outlined ab ove , following recommendations can be for-
mulated:
• Continue work to improve the charge motion simulation starting with combining the
Shoulder Clipping avenue (better visual representation) with the Layer Adjustment
avenue (improved prediction)
• Further investigate the development of a real time Liner Wear Model.
99
References
Abd E-Rehman M.K., Mishra B.K. and Rajamani R.K., 2001. Industrial mill power
prediction using dis crete element method. MineraIs Engineering, Vol 14, No 10, pp
1321-1328.
Agrawala S., Rajamani B.K., Songfack P., and Mishra B.K., 1997. Mechanics of media
motion in tumbling mills with 3D dis crete element method. MineraIs Engineering,
Vol 10, No 2 , pp 215-227.
Arbiter N. and Harris C.C., 1982. Scale-up and Dynamics of Large Grinding Mills - a
Case Study. Design and Comminution Circuits, Mular A.L. and Jergensen II.G.V
(eds) AIME, New York, Ch 26, pp 491-505.
Austin L.G., 1990. A mill power equation for SAG mills. MineraIs and Metallurgicai
Processing, pp 57-63.
Bingley M.S, Deng T. and Bradley M.S.A., 2003. Investigation into Particle Rotation
and its Influence on Erosion of Ductile. Wear, Article in press.
Bitter J.G.A., 1963. Study of erosion phenomena Part -1. Wear, Vol 6, pp 5-21.
Bond F.C., 1961. Crushing and grinding calculations. Allis Chaimers Publication No,
07R9235B, Revised Jan.
Bond F.C., 1962. Additions and revis ions to "Crushing and grinding calculations" [Bond,
1961J Jan.
Chen D., Sarumi M. and AI-Hassani S.T.S., 1998. Computational mean particle erosion
model. Wear, Vol 214, pp 64-73.
Cleary P.W., 1996. Discrete element modelling of granular flows. 2nd Biennial Australian
Engineering Mathematics Conference, Sydney Australia, pp 301-305.
Cleary P.W., 2000. CentrifugaI mill charge motion and power draw: comparison ofDEM
prediction. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 59, pp 131-148.
100
Cleary P.W., 2001. Modelling comminution devices using DEM. Int. J. Numer. Anal.
Meth. Geomech., Vol 25, pp 83-105.
Cleary P.W., 2003. Comparison of DEM and experiment of scale model SAG mill. Int.
J. Miner. Process., Vol 68, pp 129-165.
Cundall P.A. and Strack O.D.L., 1979. A dis crete numerical model for granular assem-
blies. Geotechnique, 1979, Vol 29, pp 47-65.
Datta A., Mishra B.K. and Rajamani R.K., 1999. Analysis of power draw in Ball mills
by dis crete element method. AIME Metallurgical Quaterly, Vol 39, No 2, pp 133-140.
Davis E.W., 1919. Fine crushing in ball mills. AIME tansactions, Vol 61, pp 250-296.
Deng T., Bingley M.S. and Bradley M.S.A, 2003. The influence of particle rotation on
the solid particle erosion rate of metals. Wear, Articles in Press.
Djordjevic N., 2003. Discrete element modelling of power draw of tumbling mills. Trans.
IMM, pp c109-114.
Djordjevic N., 2003. Discrete element modelling of the influence of lift ers on power draw
of tumbling mills. Minerals Engineering, Vol 16, pp 331-336.
Dong H. and Moys M.H., 2002. Assessment of discrete element method of one ball bounc-
ing in a grinding mi Il. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 65, pp 213-226.
Faucher A. and Radziszewski P., 2003. Shoulder clipping modifications to charge motion
simulationi, McGilljCOREM charge motion project (unpublished).
Finnie L, 1960. Erosion of surfaces by solid particles. Wear, Vol 3, pp 87-103.
Finnie L, Wolak J. and Kabil T., 1967. Erosion of met ais by solid particles. Journal of
Materials, Vol 2, pp 682-700.
Finnie I., 1972. Some observations on erosion of ductile materials. Wear, Vol 19, pp
81-90.
Finnie L, Levy A. and McFadden D.H., 1979. Erosion: Prevention and Useful Applica-
tions. ASTM STP, 664, pp 36-58.
Ferrez J.A., Mller D. and Liebling Th.M., 1996. Parallel Implementation of a Distinct
Element Method for Granular Media Simulation on the Cray T3D. EPFL Supercom-
puting Review, No 8, November.
101
Ghaboussi J., Basole M.N. and Ranjithan S., 1993. Three Dimensional Discrete Element
Analysis on Massively Parallel Computers. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Discrete Element
M ethods, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, March.
Govender 1., Balden V., Powell M.S. and Nurick G.N., 2001. Validated DEM - Potential
major improvments to SAG Mill modelling. SAG 2001, Vol IV, pp 101-114.
Herbst J.A., Qiu X. and Potapov A., 2003. High Fidelity Simulation offull mill transport
and breakage in SAG / AG and pebble mills. Proc. 35th Annual meeting of the
Canadian Mineral Processors, pp 577-587.
Hlugwani O., Rikhotso J., Dong H. and Moys M.H., 2003. Further validation of DEM
modelling of milling: effects of liner profile and mill speed. Minerals Engineering, Vol
16, pp 993-998.
Hogg R. and Fuerstenau D.W., 1972. Power relationship for tumbling mills. Tansactions
SME/AIME, Vol 252, pp 418-423.
Hu G., Otaki H. and Watanuki K., 2000. Motion analysis of a tumbling baIl mill based
on non-linear optimization. Minerals Engineering Vol 13, No 8-9, pp 933-947.
Hutching LM. and Winter RE., 1974. Particle erosion of ductile materials: A mechanism
of material removal. Wear Vol 27, pp 121-128.
Inoue T. and Katsunori O., 1996. Grinding mechanism of centrifugaI mills - a simulation
study based on discrete element method. Int. J. Miner. Process, Vol 44-45, pp
425-435.
Johnson G.R. and Cook W.H., 1983. A Constitutive Model and Data for Metals Sub-
jected to Large Strains, High Strain Rates and High Temperatures. In: Proc. 7th
International Symposium on Ballistics, The Hague, Net herlands , pp 541-547.
Kleis 1. and Hussainova L, 1999. Investigation of particle - wall impact process. Wear,
233-235, pp 168-173.
Kojovic T., Pyecha J.R and Corbin J.R, 2001. Use of online mill charge simulators at
the Red dog grinding circuit. Proc. SAG 2001, Vol IV, pp 11-23.
Liddell K.S., 1986. The effect of mill speed, filling and pulp rheology on the dynamic
behaviour of the load in a rotary grinding mills. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Witwa-
tersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Lowrinson G.C., 1974. Crushing and grinding, Butterworths, London.
102
Magnee A., 1995. Generalized law of erosion: application to various alloys and inter-
metallics. Wear, Vol 181-183, pp 500-510.
McIvor R.E., 1983. Effect of speed and liner configuration on ball mill performance.
Mining Engineering, June 1983, pp 817-822.
Mishra B.K. and Rajamani RK., 1990. Numerical simulation of charge motion in a ball
mill. Preprints of the 7th European Sumposium on Comminution, pp 555-563.
Mishra B.K. and Rajamani RK., 1992. The discrete element method for simulation of
ball mills. Applied math modelling, Vol 16, pp 598-604.
Mishra B.K. and Rajamani RK., 1994. Simulation of charge motion in ball mills. Part
-1: experimental verifications. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 40, pp 171-186.
Mishra B.K., 2003. A review of computer simulation of tumbling mills by the discrete
element method Part -1: Practical applications. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 71, pp
73-93.
Mishra B.K., 2003. A review of computer simulation of tumbling mills by the discrete
element method Part -II: Practical applications. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 1634,
pp 1-18.
Monama G.M. and Moys M.R., 2000. DEM modelling of the dynamics of mill start up.
Minerals Engineering, Vol 15, pp 487 -492.
Moore G.E., 1965. Cramming more components on to electronic circuits. Electronics,

Vol 2, No 8.
Morrell S., 1992. Prediction of grinding mill power. Trans. IMM, January -April, c25-32.
Morrell S., 1993. The prediction of power draw in wet tumbling mills. PhD. Thesis,
University of Queensland, Australia.
Morrell S., 1994. Power draw of grinding mills - Its measurement and prediction. Fijth
Mill Operator conference, Roxby Downs, October, pp 109-114.
Morrell S., 1996. Power draw of wet tumbling mills and its relationship to charge dynam-
ics -Part 1: a continuum approach to mathematical modelling of mill power draw.
Trans. IMM, Vol 105, c43-53
Moys M.H., 1984. The measurement of parameters describing the dynamic behaviour of
the load in a grinding mill. Proceedings MINTEK 50 International Conference on
Recent Advances in Mineral Science and Technology, South Africa, pp 205-219.
103
Moys M.H. and Skorupa J., 1993. Measurement of radial and tangential forces exerted
by the load on the liner in the ball mill, as a function of load volume and mill speed.
Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 37, pp 239-256.
Moys M.H., van Nierop, M.A. and Smith L, 1996. Progress in measuring and monitoring
load behaviour in pilot and indus trial mills. Minerais Engineering, Vol 9, No 2, pp
1201 -1214.
Moys M.H., van Nierop, M.A., van Tonder, J.C. and Clover C., 2001. Validation of the
discrete element method (DEM) by comparing predicted load behaviour of a grinding
mill with measured data. Proc. of XXI International Min. processing congress, C3,
Elsevier Science B.V., Rome, Italy, pp 39-44.
O'Flynn D.J., Bingley M.S., Bradley M.S.A. and Burnett A., 2001. A model to predict
the solid particle erosion rate of met aIs and its assessment using heat-treated steels.
Wear, Vol 247, pp 162-177.
Potapov A. and Campbell C.S., 1996. A Three dimensional simulation of brittle solid
facture. Int. J. Modern physics, Vol 7, No 5, pp 717-729.
Powell M.S., 1991. The effect of liner design on the motion of the outer grinding elements
in rotary mill. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 31, pp 163-193.
Powell M.S. and Nurick C.N., 1996. A study of charge motion in rotary mills Part 1-
Extension of the theory. Minerais Engineering, Vol 9, No 2, pp 259 -263.
Experimental work. Minerais Engineering, Vol 9, No 3, pp 343 -350.
Analysis of results. Minerais Engineering, Vol 9, No 4, pp 399-418.
Qiu X., Potapov A., Song M. and Nordell L., 2001. Prediction of wear of milliifters using
discrete element method. Proc. SAG 2001, Vol IV, pp 260-271.
Rabinowicz E., 1979. The wear equation for the erosion of metals by abrasive particles.
Proc. Fijth Int. Conf. on Erosion by Liquid and Solid Impact, Cambridge, pp 38-1
to 38-5.
Rabinowicz E., 1996. Friction and Wear of Materials, 2nd ed. John Wiley and sons,
Toronto.
104
Radziszewski P., 1986. Modelling comminution as a function of crushing, tumbling and
grinding in a baIl mill, (in French), Masters Thesis, D.Laval, Quebec, Canada.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1989. Part l - A kinetic model of BalI mill charge
simulation. Trans. Soc. Comp. Simu., Vol 6, No 2, pp 61-74.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1989. Part II - Numerical solution to baIl charge
model. Trans. Soc. Comp. Simu., Vol 6, No 2, pp 75-88.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1989. Part III - Energy and breakage event. Trans.
Soc. Comp. Simu., Vol 6, No 4, pp 291-306.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1989. Part IV - Verification of complex baIl mill
model. Trans. Soc. Comp. Simu., Vol 6, No 4, pp 307-324.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1990. Comminution Energetics Part l - Breakage

energy model. Materials chemistry and physics, Vol 25, pp 1-11.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1990. Comminution Energetics Part II - Batch

grinding equation and breakage energy. Materials chemistry and physics, Vol 25,
pp 13-20.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1990. Comminution Energetics Part III - Bond's
law and breakage energy. Materials chemistry and physics, Vol 25, pp 21-25.
Radziszewski P. and Tarasiewicz S., 1993. Simulation of baIl charge and liner wear.
Wear, Vol 169, 77-85.
Radziszewski P. and Morrell S., 1998. Fundamental discrete element charge motion
model validation. Minerals Engineering, Vol 11, No 12, pp 1161-1178.
Radziszewski P. and Valery W., 1999. Cadia SAG mill simulated charge behaviouor.
Canadian Mineral Processors, Ottawa, January, pp 267-283.
Rajamani R.K., Agrawala S. and Mishra B.K., 1993. Mill scale-up: BalI collision fre-
quency and collision energy density in laboratory and plant-scale mills. XVIII Inter-
natinal Mineral Processing Congress, Sydney, 23-28 May, pp 103-107.
Rose H.E. and Evans D.E., 1956. The dynamics of the baIl mill, part I: power require-
ments based on the baIl and shell system. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engineers, Vol 61, pp
250-296.
Sheldon G.L. and Kanhere A., 1972. An investigation of impingement erosion using single
particles. Wear, Vol 27, pp 195-209
105
Shi F.N. and Napier-Munn T.J., 1999. Estimation of shear rates inside baIl mills. Int. J.
Miner. Process., Vol 57, pp 167-183.
Tabor D., 1953. Hardness of Materials, Endeavour.
Tsuji Y., Kawaguchi T. and Tanaka T., 1993. Discrete particle simulation oftwo-dimensional
fluidized bed. Powder Technology, Vol 77, pp 79-87.
Tukey J.W., 1977. Exploratory Data Analysis. Addison-Wesley Publication.
Valderrama W., Magne L., Moyano G., Santander C. and Pontt J., 1996. The role of
cascading and cataracting in mill liner wear, SA G 1996, pp 843-856.
van Nierop M.A., Glover G., van Tonder, J.C. and Moys M.H., 1999. 2D DEM verifica-
tion: Load Behaviour and forces on a lifter bar. Jr. of South African Inst. of Min.
and Met., March / April, pp 93-96.
Venugopal R. and Rajamani R.K., 2001. 3D simulations of charge motion in tumbling

mills by discrete element method. Powder Technology, Vol 115, pp 157-166.
Vermeulen L.A. and Howat D.D., 1986. Fluctuations in the slip of the grinding charge
in rotary mills with smooth liners. Int. J. Miner. Process., Vol 16, pp 153-168.
Watson O.R., 1993. Numerical simulation of inelastic, frictional particle-particle inter-

actions. Particulate Two-Phase ftow, Stoneham, MA : Butterworth-Heinemann, pp
884-911.
Yabuki A. and Matsumura M., 1999. Theoretical equation for the critical impact velo city
in solid particles impact erosion. Wear, Vol 233-235, pp 476-483.
Zang D. and Whiten W.J., 1998. A rolling friction model. Australian mathematical soci-
ety, Vol 25, No 3, pp 246-249.
Zang X. and Vu-Quoc L., 2002. Modeling the dependence of the coefficient of restitution
on the impact velocity in elasto-plastic collisions. Int. J. Impact Eng., Vol 27, pp
317-341.
106
Appendix A
Visual validation of the Charge

Motion Simulator
This appendix is continuation of Chapter 4. This appendix contains figures that enable
visual validation of the CMS with the pilot mill test and simulated industrial mill. Aiso
parameters, such as Toe Angle, Shoulder Angle, Charge Volume are shown on these fig-
ures which makes the explanation provided on parameters in Chapter 4 more clear. This
annexure is divided in to two parts:
• Pilot mill
• Industrial mill
Each part starts with general description on the figures presented in the drawing sheets.
Pilot Mills
The drawing sheet for pilot mills is mainly divided in to two sections as described below:
• Figures showing the actual charge motion of mill.
As discussed earlier (refer section 4.3.1), a movie was developed for each pilot mill
test. From the movies, 3 snapshots of mill were taken at different time interval. These
snapshots are shown on the left hand side (lst column) of the drawing sheet. To ensure
the accuracy of actual mill parameters (refer section 4.4), parameters were determined
for each of the snapshots and then finally averaged.
107
• Snapshots of different versions of the CMS
The snapshots of each version of the CMS were taken after the charge motion was
stabilized. The identified parameters were obtained from each snap shot as shown
in the figures. For comparing the Charge Volume, the snapshot of charge motion
simulator was superimposed on the snapshot obtained from charge motion movie.
Figures A-l,A-2 and A-3, show validation of charge motion simulator in case of pilot mill
for 3 cases.
Ind ustrial Mills

In case of indus trial mills the CMS is compared with MILLSOFT simulation. The draw-
ing sheet in case of industrial mill consists of four different mills operating under different
condition. Snap shot of MILLSOFT and the CMS are taken after the charge motion was
stabilized.
Each row in the drawing sheet depicts different milL Each row shows a snapshot of MILL-
SOFT simulator of the mill and snapshots of different versions the CMS with similar oper-
ating parameters. For comparing purposes, the Shoulder and Toe angles are shown in the
Figure A-4.
As can be observed, it is extremely difficult to identify distinctly the Number of Layers and
Trajectories in case of MILLSOFT simulator hence these parameters were not compared.
108
SNAP SHon OF PflOT Mill COMPARISON OF MIll SNAPSHOn WiTH THE CMS VERSiONS
VCAlon 1.0 VI'tAlonl.t VCAlon1.2
~r~TOoI)A._ ~r ~ T04 Ar9I't- ~$r ~ TOoI) Ar9I't-
......
o
~
C~V<>t_ ChMgI't V<>t_ C~V<>tOOlC
TABLE OF COMPARISON ~
n.t.,. 4,..... "*'_....@"'_ "'*"" ëf.~ ..... IL}
lM, tMt
th.",..
'*_ il _ 0 4 b'l"'" ,u~'""""".\@\1
mtU
~ .t-tl'~l,jl*-~ $m
~.t ~ !f~~it 4~ il: ~~~ 'N~Qh t::~,.u~,t_~
~;
~>f-4,.rs-4. l.in.
~àukMr Af}~ l;\t<,.
tfMAr-,pLm6
C.~u. ~ V4-U: l;lJitq.+
O....'f t~~ t4 ~.tAA~ ttf .Âf'f.!.U.~
w""'.""' ....... _•• '-tlt.trMQ* w-rl.t,1il!
Fi9-<3
Figure A-1: Visual validation of the CMS -1: Pilot Mill
(Oiam9t...: O,786m. Spood: 4Orpm. Chaf'(JO Volum.: 45%. Media Slu: O,05m, Lin.no: 8}
SHAP SHOTS OF PilOT Mill COMPARISON Of MIll SNAPSHOTS MTH THe CMS veRSIONS
V.,...loo1.0 v~u V.,.,t<m 1~
. :~~~ lA1,"
.""
.. ..... UI,l'
.l.··..... ~"'~~ /.j/~
i~• •...•"oC: "'.#' '-",",
'" """lfl
•••
••• ,:::""*,\1
...."....... .
.
\'• • oo ••
,,\,+ ...
'- ...
"'/}$4,:'
'
'<'••••
'V!,,>,,11. .#i1
~oor lIJ'ld Too A~ ~.r lmdToo ArlgIM ~f lIJ'ld 1'00 A.rtQI$c$
>-'
>-'
o
C~VoIW'M C~V~ (:M~V~
TABle OF COMPAR1SOH ~
n
.l"~ .~M" _ ~"'1~ .. ""."" ~ 'iIf<t"" \.2.)
""--
lA). r"" .....,... _ ' "
\*1. r_ ...........,"'".... ~ ...,"'" t._""","_
1.t4.tIlA..
M-.~~~. ~nYt
."",.. _A,.,.l<oln...
C-.~";')f" •• 1:t.~
"' ....... '*',.".~ .... ""'*-'*-"'" lMA~l<Jit:'!.
C~.t,~ ftf Ifl-·$T~.,.ft{ et ~1#(J••
Figwe .)
.................. ,..... '-i." .(h**. . tJW.f-iol1tt<
Figure· 1: Visual Validation of the CMS ~2; Pilot Mm

(DiMnElI(lf {) 78&n. SPfJod 2<Jrpm. Cr«}fQt~ Volume. J.O'f4. MOOi.o Sile 005m. Unms 4l
SHAP SHOTS OF PILOT MilL eOMPARtSON Of MtlL SNAPSHOlS WlTH THE CMS VERSIONS
V~4:Io1AI VI.If1l4:lo ' . 1 Vilf.4:Io 12
Fllll'l.Im .1 ~de<f l'IfId Toc ~ ~dIC!f lllOO Toc .Attg!". ~dIC!f l'IfId Toc~.
f-'
f-'
f-'
Ctmr90 VoIulOO e~voIuIOO Char90 VO!I.IIOO
TABLE OF eOMPARISON ~
('t, t.,.,d ••'"' .. _ _ ft_ _ ....... $tf~•• ~Jl
14 ( , t ........~ .. _"",4 _ ."_""''''''''''II'h<

(~m~n m!lU '""'.~~
{o), , .... _ ... ~ ..."" _ _p •_ _
~f.l'IM • •#;. "4-")
~
_~tlJW<.l~
$1&wu~t? A~~ L~
e..ntl'* of M**\.\. ••
f"""",~~
Ih.".".... ", ... _ _ 04 cl .,.-"'0
F~·3
Figure A-3: Visual Validation of thé CMS -3: Pilot Mill
CI 700m, S~>d 2fJ(pm, O14itg<t Voh,Jl'n(}: 45%, M(K113 St<~o: 0 01\)rn, Lin&/' 4)
MlllSOFT SiMULATOR COMPARISON OF MlllSOFT SNAPSHOTS WlTH THE CMS VERSIONS
(S~ Im'll Toe angles) Î~" Mtlloe~)
v~u
~~C~Ikm$
-q"'j' $*
11-", ('1""1' H«
">'''_ _ • )là
Il;>00-_.. lf
OQ«mtlOQ C~IlOll!l
o-..~ Ml1' $,~
"'_<lj•..,) lU
\1\, CI\,_ \(,,_., t1
11<> m Mil.,,,, }Q
f-'
f-'
t-..:)
~jrl1J e~tlOll.
O"."' .... jml "n

$-", l'll"'l' tt*t
"> ,1",,11" Il,,,,,,. II
II~ mut... , 00
Opcmng CMtlltloM
04_.,,,,) t,~
$_H'1>'" 1 H$
"'~.",,-
nit Of IJft'lll:f" < " '•
,.
.
Figuré 3: Visuat validation of the CMS: Simulated Industrial Mills
Appendix B
Additional features of the Liner

Wear Simulator
The purpose of this appendix is to de scribe additional features of liner wear simulator.
As detailed in chapter 4 and chapter 5, there were different versions of Charge Motion Sim-
ulator(CMS), different slippage models, and different wear models. To analyze the effect of
different models and their combinat ion, lot of simulations were required to be carried out.
Since lot of parameters were required to be analyzed it was essential to reduce the time
consumed in re-co ding the simulator program and recompiling it.
To satisfy this requirement, Initialization File was developed (termed as "ini"). The simu-
lator was programmed to read the" ini" file first before starting the simulation, this ensured
that the parameters w.r.t the models -charge motion, slippage speed, wear be set. The
above method also set the values of calibration factors necessary for calibrating the Liner
Wear.
This annexure describes this "ini" file along with its parameters. It begins by describing
the structure of initialization file, followed by method of integration of file in the CMS, with
results using different parameters of Initialization File.
Structure of Initialization File

The basic idea in design of initialization file was to put together parameters used in the
code which acted like an on-off switch so that co ding and compiling time could be saved.
113
Table B.I: Parameters of Initialization File
No. Parameters Range Options

In Range Default Values
1 Rotation o or 1 0-Anticlockwise 1-Clockwise 0- Anticlockwise
2 WearComputation o or 1 O-Don't Compute 1-Compute O-Don't Compute
3 ImpactWear o or 1 O-Don't Compute 1-Compute O-Don't compute
4 AbrasiveWear o or 1 O-Don't Compute 1-Compute O-Don't compute
5 Method 0,1 or 2 0- Sheldon 2 - Rabinowicz 1-Bitter O-Sheldon
6 SlippageModel o or 1 O-Morrell 1-Radziszewski O-Morrell
7 FeedBack o or 1 O-No Feedback 1-Feedback O-No Feedback
8 LinerComputation o or 1 0-Ali liners 1-0ne Liner 1-0ne Liner
9 Lifter Discretization 20 - 100 Even number greater than 20 60
10 LinerDiscretization 20 - 300 Even number greater than 20 100
11 Imp Wear Amplification 1 - 10 7 1- No Amplification 1
12 AbrWear Amplification 1 - 10 7 1- No Amplification 1
13 ChargeCentroid o or 1 O-Don't compute 1-Compute O-Don't compute
14 CalifCF 1 - 10 5 1-No Calibration 1
15 CalifGF 1 - 10 5 1-No Calibration 1
16 CalifImp 1 - 10 5 1-No Calibration 1
Table B.I gives list of parameters included in the Initialization File with the available
options and their default values.
Integration of Initialization File in the CMS

Initialization File is actually a file written in text edit or with list of variables and the corre-
sponding values. During the initialization phase of the CMS, a function is written in C++
to load and read the initialization file. This function reads the contents of the initialization
file, which sets the relevant parameters of the charge motion model.
The main advantage of this file is that repeated change and recompilation of charge simulator
code is not required. After compiling the code once, the same code can be used repeatedly
with different initialization parameters. Added to this, a batch file can be generated with
different initialization files which allows thorough testing of the code, overnight and for days
together.
114
Results with varlous parameters of Initialization File
Direction of mill rotation
This option enables the change in the direction of mill rotation while maintaining the state
of the liners. Figure B.2 illustrates the feature, where the same mill is running in both
directions.
Figure B-1: Change in the direction of mill rotation
Wear compuation
This option allows the CMS to run with or without wear computation algorithms. The
results from this option have already been presented (refer Figures 5-13 and 5-14)
Impact wear computation
This option allows the computation of only Impact wear on the tumbling millliner provided
the wear computation option is enabled. The result using this option has already been
presented (refer Figure 5-17)
Abrasive wear computation
This option allows the computation of only Abrasive wear on the tumbling mill liner pro-
vided the wear computation option is enabled. Figures 5-16 illustrates the results.
Method
This option allows the computation of Impact wear following different approaches as dis-
cussed in section 5.4.2 of Chapter 5. In aIl the reported results Method -0 was used due to
the reasons specified earlier.
115
Slippage models
This option allows the user to toggle among different slippage models as discussed in section
5.4.1
ChargeCentroid
This option allows the computation of the charge centroid - Centre of Mass of the charge.
The result showing the computation of charge centroid has been presented earlier (refer
Figure 4-9).
FeedBack
As the liner wears, its geometry changes. This option allows the information on the change
in the liner geometry to be feed back to the charge motion. Figure B-2 illustrates the same
with results in Figure B-3.
Charge Motion Data Liner Wear

Initialization
Computation f--""'E"-x";:;tr"':act;':':;;"'io-n--+-l Computation
FeedBack
Mechanism
Figure B-2: Schematic diagram showing feedback of Liner Wear to the CMS
Figure B-3: Effect of Liner Wear on the CMS
116
Lifter Discretization
This option allows the user to specify the number of elements in to which lifter can be
discretized. Figure B-4 illustrates the results.
o
x ~ ~~'MI'tjlrlM~$ 01 th!! (ml
a. Liner Discretization =60 b. Liner Discretization=100
Figure B-4: Mill Liner with different lifter discretization values
Liner Discretization
This option allows the user to specify the number of elements in to which the shell liner
can be discretized.
Impact Wear AmplificationFactor
This option allows amplification of the computed Impact wear by multiplying the actual
wear computed by the user defined ImpactWearAmplificationFactor.
Abrasive Wear AmplificationFactor
This option allows amplification of the computed Abrasive wear by multiplying the actual
wear computed by the user defined AbrasiveWearAmplificationFactor.
CalifCF, CalifG F and CalifImp
These options are used to calibrate centrifugaI, gravitational and impact forces acting on
the mill liner.
LinerComputation
This option allows the computation of wear on one or all the liners separately. Figure B-5
shows accumulated wear on all (24) liners of the mill.
117
Number of Iterations
Figure B-5: Accumulated wear on all the millliners
The accumulated wear is in the form of steps. The rising portion of each step represents
wear while the fiat portion indicates that liner is out of the mill charge. The numbering of
the liner depends on the which liner first enters the charge. However it should be noted here
that the figure just illustrates the feature of LinerComputation parameter of Initialization
File.
118
Appendix C
Source code for the Liner Wear

Simulator
void CCharge::ComputelmpaetWear()
{
3 if (1 m_ImpaetLinerCoord)
4 m_ImpaetLinerCoord= new FloatCoord[m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint];
if (1 m_BallCoord)
6 m_BallCoord= new FloatCoord[125];
7 float h=m_BallTbl. GetSize 0 ;
8 if (balleount ==0)
9 {
10 if (1 m_ImpaetBall)
11 m_ImpaetBall=new FloatCoord [m_BallTbl. GetSize 0 /2];
12 for(int i=O; i<m_BallTbl.GetSizeO/2; ++i)
13 m_ImpaetBall ci] . x=O;
14 }
15 balleount =1;
16 float x11. x22;
17 float y11, y22;
18 for(int i=1; i<=(m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint) -2; i++);
19 int v=i;
20 BOOL BALLINLA YER;
21 float m_FTangle=m_FootAngle+PI2;
22 float m_FLinerPos =0, m_LLinerPos;
23 float debug=O;
24 //PART 3 ENDS HERE
25 float m_BallLimit=m_Mill->m_Liners->GetHeight()+2*m_Mill->m_dMediaRadius;
26 if(lm_BallPos)
H m_BallPos=new FloatCoord[m_BallTbl.GetSize()];
28 if (1 m_LinerCollision)
29 m_LinerCollision= new FloatCoord[m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint];
30 if(lm_BallPosition)
31 m_BallPosi t i on =new FloatCoord [m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPo in t] ;
32 if ( 1 m_LinerRgnAftd)
33 m_LinerRgnAftd=new FloatCoord[m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint];
M if(lm_BallLoe)
35 m_BallLoe=new FloatCoord[(m_Mill->m_iLifterDise-1)*m_Mill->m_iLifterDise
/2] ;
~ float m_newposition=O;
37 int a=O,z=O;
38 int Liner=O;
~ m_Mill->m_ddimpwear=O;
119
~ m_impactwear=O.O;
41 for(int j=O; j<m_BallTbl.GetSizeO; ++j)
42 {
43 IIChanging the position from 0 to 2PI
« if(m_Mill->m_newBallTbl[jJ.phi <0)
45 m_newposition=PI2+m_Mill->m_newBallTbl[jJ.phi;
46 else
47 m_newposi tion=m_Mill->m_newBallTbl [j J . phi;
~ float newm_FootAngle=O;
49 i f (m_FootAngle <0)
w newm_FootAngle=m_FootAngle+PI2;
51 else
~ newm_FootAngle=m_FootAngle;
53 BOOL BALLPOSITION=FALSE;
54 Il For the di r e c t ion of cha r 9 e rot a t ion
55 i f (m_Mill->m_iRotation==1)
56 {
57 if «m_newposition>=newm_FootAngle && m_newposition<PI2) Il (m_newposition
>=0 && m_newposition<=0.333*PI))
58 {
59 BALLPOSITION=TRUE;
60 }
61 }
62 else
63 {
M if(m_newposition>=0.666*PI && m_newposition<=newm_FootAngle)
65 {
M BALLPOSITION=TRUE;
67 }
68 }
~ if(BALLPOSITION)
70 {
71 BOOL LINERLOCATED=FALSE;
72 BOOL BALLLOCATED=FALSE;
73 Il Fin d i n 9 0 u t wh i ch lin e r i s a f f e c t e d e a ch bal l
74 int u=O;
75 for (int m=O; m<m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iNum; ++m)
76 {
77 int I=m* (m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint -1) ;
78 1 1 If the bal l i s
l yin 9 b e t w e en the lin e r end po in t s
79 if(m_newposition>=m_LinerPos[mJ.ang1 && m_newposition<=m_LinerPos[mJ.ang2
)
80 {
81 BALLINLAYER=FALSE;
82 for(i=O; i<m_iNumLayers; i++)
83 {
M if(m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl[jJ.r==BaIIRadius[iJ .r)
g BALLINLAYER=TRUE;
86 }
87 i f (BALLINLAYER==FALSE)
88 {
~ BOOL LASTBALLIMPACT=FALSE;
00 BOOL REPEATBALL=FALSE;
91 IIIf the same ball is not causing repeated impacts
92 i f (m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [jJ. r>=m_Mill->m_dMiIIRadius -2. 5*m_Mill->m_Liners
->GetHeight 0)
93 {
94 for(int y=O; y<m_BaIITbl.GetSizeO/2; ++y)
95 {
96 i f (int (m_ImpactBall [yJ . x) == j)
97 {
~ REPEATBALL=TRUE;
99 }
120
100 }
101 i f (!REPEATBALL)
102 {
1œ m_ImpactBall[z].x=j;
lM LASTBALLIMPACT=TRUE;
105 z+=l;
106 }
107 if (REPEATBALL)
108 {
lœ LASTBALLIMPACT=FALSE;
110 }
III }
112 if (LASTBALLIMPACT)
113 {
114 i f (m_Mill->m_iFrame ==509 && j ==299)
115 {
116 float interval=O;
117 for (int h=24; h>=O; --h)
118 {
119 m_BallCoord [h]. velx=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [j]. veIx;
120 m_BallCoord [hl . vely=m_Mill->m_newBall Tbl [j] . vely -G* interval;
121 m_BallCoord [h]. x=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [j]. x+m_BaIICoord [h]. velx* interval;
122 m_B all Coord [hl . y=m_Mill - >m_newB aIl Tbl [j] . y -0.5 * G* pow (in terval ,2) +
m_BaIICoord[h].vely*interval;
123 interval-=O. 001;
124 }
125 interval=O.OOl;
126 for (h=25; h<125; ++h)
127 {
128 m_BallCoord [h]. velx=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [j]. veIx;
129 m_BallCoord [hl . vely=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [j] . vely -G* interval;
130 m_BallCoord [hl . x=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [j] . x+m_BaIICoord [hl . velx* interval;
131 m_BallCoord [hl . y=m_Mill->m_newBall Tbl [j] . y -O. 5*G*pow (interval ,2) +
m_BallCoord[h].vely*interval;
132 interval+=O.OOl;
133 }
lM for(int n=O; n<=m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint-l; n++)
135 {
lM float xll=m_RadLinerCoord[n+I].r*cos(m_RadLinerCoord[n+I].phi);
137 float yll=m_RadLinerCoord [n+l] . r*sin (m_RadLinerCoord [n+l] . phi) ;
138 float x22=m_RadLinerCoord [n+l+l]. r*cos (m_RadLinerCoord [n+l+l]. phi);
139 float y22=m_RadLinerCoord [n+l+l] . r*sin (m_RadLinerCoord [n+l+l] . phi) ;
140 i f (n==5)
141 }
142 }
143 ballnum+=l;
1" float interval=O.OOl;
145 float sqrinterval=O.OOl*O.OOl;
146 if (m_pSlurry) IIDverFZow type of discharge
147 {
148 i f (m_Mill->m_newBall Tbl [j] . y <= m_pSlurry ->m_dDverFlowY)
149 {
1W m_BaIICoord[O] .velx=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl[j].velx;
151 m_BallCoord [0] . vely=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl [j]. vely;
152 m_BallCoord [0] . x=m_Mill->m_newBall Tbl [j] . x;
153 m_BallCoord [0] . y=m_Mill->m_newBall Tbl [j] . y;
154 for (int h=l; h<125; ++h)
155 {
156 float Rex = fabs (m_BaIICoord [h-l] . veIx) * m_Mill->m_dMediaDiameter *
m_pSlurry->m_dMassElement / 0.00278;
157 float exponent = 4.7297 / pow«double)Rex, 0.2101);
158 float Cdx = 0.2021 * exp(exponent);
121
159 float axel_x = 0.75 * Cdx * m_pSlurry ->m_dMassElement * Sqr (m_BaIICoord [h
-1] .velx) / (m_pSlurry->m_dMassMetal * m_Mill->m_dMediaDiameter);
160 if (m_BaIICoord [h-1] . veIx >=0)
161 {
lm m_BaIICoord[h].x=m_BaIICoord[h-l] .x+m_BaIICoord[h-l] .velx*interval-0.5*
axel_x*sqrinterval;
163 m_BallCoord [h]. velx=m_BaIICoord [h-l]. velx-axel_x*interval;
164 }
165 el se
166 {
167 m_BallCoord Ch] . x=m_BaIICoord [h-l] . x+m_BaIICoord [h-l] . velx* interval +0.5*
axel_x*sqrinterval;
1~ m_BaIICoord[h].velx=m_BaIICoord[h-l].velx+axel_x*interval;
169 }
lm float Rey = fabs(m_BaIICoord[h-l] .vely) * m_Mill->m_dMediaDiameter *
m_pSlurry->m_dMassElement / 0.00278;
171 exponent = 4.7297 * pov((double)Rey, -0.2101);
ln float Cdy = 0.2021 * exp(exponent);
ln float axel_y = 0.75 * Cdy * m_pSlurry->m_dMassElement * Sqr(m_BaIICoord[h
-1] .vely) / (m_pSlurry->m_dMassMetal * m_Mill->m_dMediaDiameter);
174 i f (m_BallCoord [h-1] . vely >=0)
175 {
1ro m_BaIICoord[h].y=m_BaIICoord[h-l].y+m_BaIICoord[h-l] .vely*interval-0.5*G*
sqrinterval-0.5*(axel_y+G*m_pSlurry->m_dMassElement/m_pSlurry->
m_dMassMetal)*sqrinterval;
ln m_BaIICoord[h].vely=m_BaIICoord[h-l] .vely-(G*interval+(axel_y+G*m_pSlurry
->m_dMassElement/m_pSlurry->m_dMassMetal)*interval);
178 }
179 else
180 {
181 m_BallCoord [h]. y=m_BaIICoord [h-1] . y+m_BaIICoord [h-l] . vely*interval-O. 5*G*
sqrinterval+0.5*(axel_y+G*m_pSlurry->m_dMassElement/m_pSlurry->
m_dMassMetal)*sqrinterval;
1~ m_BaIICoord[h].vely=m_BaIICoord[h-l].vely-G*interval+(axel_y+G*m_pSlurry
->m_dMassElement/m_pSlurry->m_dMassMetal)*interval;
183 }
lM interval+=O.OOI;
185 }
186 }
187 }
188 //Eœtacting the motion of ball using equation of motion
189 if (! m_pSlurry) //Grate Discharge
190 {
191 float interval=O;
192 for (int h=24; h>=O; --h)
193 {
194 m_BallCoord Ch] . velx=m_Mill->m_nevBall Tbl [j] . veIx;
195 m_BallCoord Ch] . vely=m_Mill->m_nevBall Tbl [j] . vely -G* interval;
196 m_BaIICoord[h].x=m_Mill->m_nevBaIITbl[j].x+m_BaIICoord[h].velx*interval;
197 m_Ball Coord Ch] . y=m_Mill - >m_nevB aIl Tbl [j] . y -0.5 * G* pOOl (in terval ,2) +
1% interval-=O.OOI;
199 }
WO interval=O.OOI;
201 for (h=25; h<125; ++h)
202 {
W3 m_BaIICoord[h].velx=m_Mill->m_nevBaIITbl[j].velx;
204 m_BallCoord Ch] . vely=m_Mill->m_nevBall Tbl [j] . vely -G* interval;
205 m_BaIICoord[h].x=m_Mill->m_nevBaIITbl[j].x+m_BaIICoord[h].velx*interval;
W6 m_BaIICoord[h].y=m_Mill->m_nevBaIITbl[j].y-0.5*G*povCinterval ,2)+
207 interval+=O.OOI;
208 }
122
209 }
210 IIFinding where the ban path interestects the liner points
211 IISort of Conision Detection
212
213 for (int n=O; n<=m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint -2; ++n)
214 {
215 float x11=m_RadLinerCoord [n+l] . r* cos (m_RadLinerCoord [n+l] . phi) ;
216 float y11=m_RadLinerCoord [n+l] . r*sin (m_RadLinerCoord [n+l] . phi) ;
217 float x22=m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1] . r*cos (m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1] . phi) ;
218 float y22=m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1] . r*sin (m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1] . phi) ;
219 float slope=(x22-x11) /(y22-y11);
220 float checkdist =5;
221 float dist =0;
222 int posball=O, posliner=O;
223 BOOL MINDISTFOUND=FALSE;
224 for(int h=O; h<125; ++h)
225 {
226 dist= m_BallCoord rh] .x-x11-slope*(m_BaIICoord rh] .y-y11);
227 if(dist>O)
228 if(dist<checkdist)
229 {
~o checkdist=dist;
231 posball=h;
232 posliner=n+l;
233 }
234 }
235 m_BallPosi tion ru] . x=m_BaIICoord [posball] . x;
~6 m_BaIIPosition[u].y=m_BaIICoord[posball].y;
237 m_BallPosi tion ru] . velx=m_BaIICoord [posball] . veIx;
~8 m_BaIIPosition[u].vely=m_BaIICoord[posbaIIJ.vely;
239 m_BallPosi tion [uJ . ht=posball;
uo m_BaIIPosition[uJ.wt=posliner;
241 u+=l;
242 }
243 Il Fin d i n 9 o'U. t wh i ch po in t i s e:x c a t l Y a f f e c tin 9 the lin e r
244 int ball=O;
245 for(int posball=O; posball<u; ++posball)
246 {
247 i f (m_BaIIPosi tion [posball] . ht >=0 && m_BallPosi tion [posball] . wt >=0)
248 {
U9 float anglepoint=O;
2W anglepoint=atan(m_BaIIPosition[posbaIIJ.x/m_BaIIPosition[posball].y);
251 i f (m_BaIIPosition [posball]. x>O && m_BallPosition [posball]. y<O)
252 anglepoint =3*PIDIV2 -anglepoint;
253 if (m_BaIIPosi tion [posballJ . x<O && m_BallPosi tion [posball] . y<O)
254 anglepoint =3*PIDIV2 - anglepoint;
255 if (m_BaIIPosi tion [posball] . x<O && m_BallPosi tion [posball] . y>O)
256 anglepoint =PIDIV2 -anglepoint ;
257 int posliner=m_BaIIPosi tion [posballJ . wt;
258 if (anglepoint >=m_RadLinerCoord [posliner] . phi && anglepoint <=
m_RadLinerCoord[posliner+1J .phi)
259 {
~o float radialballpos=sqrt(pow(m_BaIIPosition[posbaIIJ.x,2)+pow(
m_BaIIPosition[posbaIIJ.y,2»;
~1 if(radialballpos < m_Mill->m_dMiIIRadius-m_Mill->m_Liners->m_fThickNess)
262 {
~3 m_LinerCollision[baIIJ.x=m_BaIIPosition[posball].x;
~4 m_LinerCollision[ball].y=m_BaIIPosition[posbaIIJ.y;
265 m_LinerCollision [ballJ . velx=m_BaIIPosi tion [posballJ . veIx;
~6 m_LinerCollision[baIIJ.vely=m_BaIIPosition[posbaIIJ.vely;
267 m_LinerCollision [baIl] . ht=m_BaIIPosi tion [posball] . ht;
~8 m_LinerCollision[baIIJ.wt=m_BaIIPosition[posbaIIJ.wt;
269 ball++;
123
~o BALLLOCATED=TRUE;
2n LINERLOCATED=TRUE;
272 }
273 }
274 }
275 }
276 if(ball>1)
277 {
~8 int ballselected=O;
279 for(int z=O; z<ball-1; z++)
280 {
281 if (m_LinerCollision [z]. ht>m_LinerCollision [z+1]. ht)
282 ballselected=z+1;
283 }
284 m_LinerCollision [0] . x=m_LinerCollision [ballselected]. x;
~5 m_LinerCollision[O] .y=m_LinerCollision[ballselected].y;
286 m_LinerCollision [0] . velx=m_LinerCollision [ballselected] . veIx;
~7 m_LinerCollision[O] .vely=m_LinerCollision[ballselected].vely;
~8 m_LinerCollision[O] .ht=m_LinerCollision[ballselected].ht;
289 m_LinerCollision [0] . wt=m_LinerCollision [ballselected] .wt;
290 }
291 I l If the ban is stin not located there is a possibility that
292 I I I in e r ha s s t rai 9 h t e d 9 es, soc h e clef 0 r th a t
293 if ( ! BALLLO CA TED)
294 {
295 i f (m_Mill->m_Liners -> NOLINERSTEDGE ==TRUE)
296 {
297 for (int n=O; n<=m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint -2; ++n)
298 {
299 if (m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_pPoint [n+1] . x-m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_pPoint [n] . x
<0.0001)
300 {
Wl float x11=m_RadLinerCoord[n+I].r*cos(m_RadLinerCoord[n+I].phi);
W2 float y11=m_RadLinerCoord[n+I].r*sin(m_RadLinerCoord[n+I].phi);
303 float x22=m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1]. r*cos (m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1]. phi);
304 float y22=m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1] . r* sin (m_RadLinerCoord [n+I+1] . phi) ;
305 for (posball =0; posball <u; ++posball)
306 {
W7 if(m_BaIIPosition[posball].x>x11 && m_BaIIPosition[posball].x<x22)
308 {
W9 m_LinerCollision[O] .x=m_BaIIPosition[posball].x;
310 m_LinerCollision [0] . y=m_BaIIPosi tion [posball] . y;
311 m_LinerCollision[O] .velx=m_BaIIPosition[posball].velx;
312 m_LinerCollision [0]. vely=m_BaIIPosition [posball]. vely;
313 m_LinerCollision [0] . ht=m_BaIIPosi tion [posball] . ht;
314 m_LinerCollision [0] . wt=m_BaIIPosi tion [posball] . wt;
315 BALLLOCATED=TRUE;
316 LINERLOCATED=TRUE;
317 }
318 }
319 }
320 }
321 }
322 }
323 Liner=m;
324 }
325 }
326 }
327 if(LINERLOCATED)
328 break;
329 }
330 BOOL IMPACTWEARCALUCATED =FALSE;
~1 BOOL BALLLINERDETEC=FALSE;
124
332 if (! LINERLOCATED)
333 {
334 int nextIiner=Liner+1;
335 int prevIiner=Liner -1;
336 if (Liner==O)
337 prevIiner=m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iNum -1;
338 i f (Liner== (m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iNum-1))
339 next liner =0;
340 BOOL NEXTLINER = FALSE;
341 BOOL PREVLINER = FALSE;
342 int linermill=O;
343 }
~4 if(BALLLOCATED && LINERLOCATED)
345 {
346 i f (m_Mill->m_bOneLiner)
347 {
348 IIIf just one Ziner is required to be computed
349 i f (Liner==O)
350 {
351 ComplmpWear (Liner, j, BALLLOCATED, LINERLOCATED, IMPACTWEARCALUCATED ,
m_LinerCollision [0] . x, m_LinerCollision [0] . y, m_LinerCollision [0] . veIx,
m_LinerCollision [0] . vely ,m_LinerCollision [0] . ht, m_LinerCollision [0] .
wt) ;
352 }
353 }
354 IIIf more than one Ziner is required to be Zocated
355 else
356 {
357 ComplmpWear (Liner, j, BALLLOCATED ,LINERLOCATED ,IMPACTWEARCALUCATED ,
m_LinerCollision [0] . x, m_LinerCollision [0] . y, m_LinerCollision [0] . veIx,
m_LinerCollision [0] . vely ,m_LinerCollision [0] . ht, m_LinerCollision [0] .
wt) ;
358 }
359 }
360 }
361 }
362 m_Mill->m_ddimpwear=m_impactwear;
363 }
364
365 void CCharge:: ComputeForce ()
366 {
367 i f (! m_LinersIot)
368 m_LinersIot = new FIoatCoord [m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint];
369 if (! m_radtoxycoord)
~o m_radtoxycoord= new FIoatCoord[m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint];
371 if(!m_radtoxycoordnextLiner)
372 m_radtoxycoordnextLiner= new FIoatCoord[m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint];
~3 if(!m_baIIintersec)
3~ m_baIIintersec=new FIoatCoord[3000];
375 if(!m_baIIinterseccf)
3m m_baIIinterseccf=new FIoatCoord[3000];
377
378 IIObtainng the baZ Zs obtained after the direction of rotation has been
chosen
379 FIoatCoord * m_newBaIITbl=m_Mill->m_newBaIITbl;
380 m_count +=1;
381 int count=O;
382 int debug=O;
383 float m_Tforce = O. OF;
384 float m_Nforce =0. OF;
~5 m_dTanForce=O.OF;
386 m_dNorForce =0. OF;
~7 m_iCFWear=O.O;
125
M8 m_iGFWear=O.O;
389 m_Mill->m_ddabrorearcf =0.0;
390 m_Mill->m_ddabroreargf =0.0;
391 for(int j=O; j<m_BallTbl.GetSizeO; ++j)
392 {
393
394 / /Th i s i s j v. s t for d e b v. 9 gin 9
395 if (m_Mill->m_iFrame ==365 && j ==132)
396 {
397 debug+=1;
398 }
399 / /End Of de bv.gg i ng
400 BOOL BALLINLAYER=FALSE;
401 int BaIIIayer=O;
402 //Detecting if the ban is in layer
403 for(int i=O; i<m_iNumLayers; i++)
404 {
405 if (m_neorBallTbl [j]. r==BallRadius [i]. r)
406 {
407 Balllayer=i;
408 BALL INLA YER = TRUE ;
409 break;
410 }
411 }
412 if (BALLINLAYER)
413 {
414 //Calcv.lating the effect of Centrifv.gal Force First
415 BOOL CFWEARCALC=FALSE;
416 int CFFORCE =0;
417 int GFFORCE=1;
418 float neorposi tion=O;
419 //Change the position of the balls from 0 to 2PI
GO neorposition=atan2(m_neorBaI1Tbl[j].y,m_neorBaIITbl[j].x);
421 if (m_neorBall Tbl [j] . x >0 && m_neorBall Tbl [j] . y>O)
422 neorposi tion=neorposi tion;
423 if(m_neorBallTbl[j].x<O && m_neorBallTbl[j].y>O)
424 neorposition=PI-neorposition;
425 if(m_neorBallTbl[j].x<O && m_neorBallTbl[j].y<O)
G6 neorposition=PI+neorposition;
427 if(m_neorBallTbl[j].x>O && m_neorBallTbl[j].y<O)
428 neorposi tion=PI2+neorposi tion;
429 for (int m=O; m<m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iNum; ++m)
430 {
~1 if(neorposition>=m_LinerPos[m].ang1 && neorposition<=m_LinerPos[m].ang2)
432 {
433 if (m_Mill->m_bOneLiner)
434 {
435 / /If 0 n e lin e r i s r e q v. ire d t 0 bec ale v. lat e d
436 if (m==O)
437 {
438 CFWEARCALC=CompAbrCFWear(m,BaI1Iayer,m_LinerPos[m].ang1 ,j, neorposition,
CFWEARCALC,CFFORCE,&m_Nforce, &m_Tforce);
439 if (CFWEARCALC==TRUE)
440 break;
441 }
442 }
443 / / If a II lin ers are r e q v. ire d t 0 bec ale v. lat e d
444 else
445 {
446 CFWEARCALC=CompAbrCFWear(m,BaI1Iayer ,m_LinerPos [m].ang 1 ,j,neorposition,
CFWEARCALC,CFFORCE, &m_Nforce, &m_Tforce);
447 / / CFWEARCALC= TRUE;
448 if (CFWEARCALC==TRUE)
126
449 break j
450 }
451 }
452 }
453 IICalculating the Gravitational Force effect
454 float newm_FootAngle=Oj
455 i f (m_FootAngle <0)
456 newm_FootAngle=m_FootAngle+PI2 j
457 else
458 newm_FootAngle=m_FootAngle j
459 int nextliner=Oj
%0 for(int p=Oj p<m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iNumj++p)
461 {
462 IIChanges for considering the direction of rotation of charge
463 BOOL GFWEARCALC=FALSE j
%4 float UpperLimit=O,LowerLimit=Oj
465 i f (m_Mill->m_iRotation==1)
466 {
%7 UpperLimit=PIDIV2j
468 LowerLimi t =newm_FootAngle +0.17453 j
469 }
470 else
471 {
4n UpperLimit=newm_FootAngle-0.17453j
U3 LowerLimit=PIDIV2j
474 }
475 IIChanges end here
U6 if(m_LinerPos[p].ang1>UpperLimit Il m_LinerPos[p].ang1 <LowerLimit)
477 {
478 int a=O j
U9 int 1=p*(m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint-1) j
480 IITo check this for anticlockwise rotation
481 i f (p==m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iNum)
482 nextliner=Oj
483 nextliner=(p+1) *m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint -1 j
484 Il Ends here
485 for (int g=O j g<m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint j ++g)
486 {
487 m_radtoxycoord[g].x=m_RadLinerCoord[g+l].r*cos(m_RadLinerCoord[g+l].phi)j
488 m_radtoxycoord[g].y=m_RadLinerCoord[g+l].r*sin(m_RadLinerCoord[g+l].phi)j
489 m_radtoxycoordnextLiner[g].x=m_RadLinerCoord[g+nextliner].r*cos(
m_RadLinerCoord[g+nextliner].phi)j
490 m_radtoxycoordnextLiner[g].y=m_RadLinerCoord[g+nextliner].r*sin(
m_RadLinerCoord[g+nextliner].phi)j
491 }
492 float xminnextliner=m_radtoxycoordnextLiner [0] . x j
493 float yminnextliner=m_radtoxycoordnextLiner [0] . y j
494 for (g=O j g<m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint -1 j ++g)
495 {
~6 if(xminnextliner>m_radtoxycoordnextLiner[g+1] .x)
497 {
~8 xminnextliner=m_radtoxycoordnextLiner[g+1] .Xj
~9 yminnextliner=m_radtoxycoordnextLiner[g+1] .yj
500 }
501 }
502 int b=1 j
503 IIForming slots of liner for detecting the balls
W4 float xmin=m_Linerslot [0].x11=m_radtoxycoord[O] .Xj
505 do
506 {
507 if (xmin<m_radtoxycoord [b]. x)
508 {
W9 xmin=m_radtoxycoord[b].xj
127
510 }
511 if(xmin>m_radtoxycoord[b].x)
512 {
513 m_Linerslot [a]. x22=m_radtoxycoord [(b-1)]. x;
514 m_Linerslot[a+i] .xii=m_radtoxycoord[b].x;
515 xmin=m_radtoxycoord [b] . x;
516 a+=i;
517 }
518 b+=i;
519 }while (b<m_Mill->m_Liners ->m_iLinerPoint) ;
5W m_Linerslot[a].x22=m_radtoxycoord[m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint-i] .x;
521 a+=i;
522 int LinerAffected=O;
523 BOOL LINERGF=FALSE;
524
525 for(int z=O; z<a; ++z)
526 {
527 if (m_newBallTbl [j]. x >m_Linerslot [z]. xii && m_newBallTbl [j]. x <
m_Linerslot[z].x22)
528 {
529 LINERGF=TRUE;
~o LinerAffected=p;
531 }
~2 if(m_newBallTbl[j].x <m_Linerslot[z].xii && m_newBallTbl[j].x >
m_Linerslot[z].x22)
533 {
~4 LINERGF=TRUE;
535 Liner Af f e ct ed =p;
536 }
537 }
538 //Formation of slots and detetion of bans end here
539 / /If bal l s lie ab 0'11 eth e lin e r
"0 BOOL LINERSHIELDED=FALSE;
541 i f (LINERGF)
542 {
"3 BOOL LINERUNDERBALL=FALSE;
"4 for(int z=O; z<m_Mill->m_Liners->m_iLinerPoint-i; ++z)
545 {
"6 if(m_newBallTbl[j].y>m_radtoxycoord[z].y)
547 {
"8 LINERUNDERBALL=TRUE;
549 }
550 }
551 if (xminnextliner < m_newBallTbl [j]. x )
552 if (yminnextliner < m_newBallTbl[j].y)
553 LINERSHIELDED = TRUE;
554 if (LINERUNDERBALL && ! LINERSHIELDED)
555 {
556 if (m_Mill->m_bOneLiner)
557 {
558 //Calculate for single liner
559 if (p ==0)
560 {
561 GFWEARCALC=CompAbrGFWear (p, Balllayer ,m_LinerPos Cp] . angi ,j, newposi tion,
GFWEARCALC,GFFORCE,&m_Tforce ,&m_Nforce);
562 }
563 }
564 el s e / / Cal cul a t e for an lin ers
565 {
566 GFWEARCALC=CompAbrGFWear(p,Balllayer,m_LinerPos[p].angi,j, newposition,
GFWEARCALC,GFFORCE,&m_Tforce ,&m_Nforce);
567 }
568 }
128
569 }
570 }
571 i f (GFWEARCALC=TRUE)
572 break;
573 }
574 }
575 }
~6 m_dTanForce=m_Tforce;
~7 m_dNorForce=m_Nforce;
5" m_Mill->m_ddabrwearcf=m_iCFWear;
5N m_Mill->m_ddabrweargf=m_iGFWear;
580
581 }
129

Thesis File 81524

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Thesis File 81524

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

REAL TIME ANALYSIS WITH

DEVELOPMENT, SIMULATION AND VALIDATION OF

Department of Mechanical Engineering

A thesis submitted to Mc Gill University

© Chaitanya Arekar 2004

Published Heritage Direction du

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington

Your file Votre référence

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur

ln compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires

Les broyeurs, qui consomment environ 6% de la puissance électrique du monde, quoique

Dr. P. Radziszewski, my academic supervisor, for his general guidance, encouragement

Lastly, though by no means least, 1 would like to thank GOD.

2.3 Review on Liner Wear Simulators for tumbling mills 18

3 Real time analysis of the Charge Motion Simulator 22

4 Validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 31

5 Simulation of Liner wear 66

5.4 Wear Models . . . . . . . . . . . 70

6 Conclusion and recommendations 96

A Visual validation of the Charge Motion Simulator 107

B Additional features of the Liner Wear Simulator 113

C Source code for the Liner Wear Simulator 119

2-1 Snapshot of MILLSOFT simulator 8

2-4 Snapshot of Cleary's Charge Motion Simulator . 11

2-6 Snapshot of Charge Motion Simulator by HCItasca . 14

2-7 Snapshot of the Charge Motion Simulator reported by Kojovic 15

3-1 Variation in power predicted with change in the time step 24

3-2 Real time consumed with varying time step 25

3-3 Real time analysis for industrial mills 26

3-4 Real time analysis for pilot mills . . . 27

3-5 Integration of POP workstation in mill computing network 28

3-7 Snapshot of the Charge Motion Simulator integrated with POP . . . . . . . . 30

4-1 Strategy for validation of the CMS . . . . 32

4-4 Typical charge motion in tumbling mill 36

4-8 Identification of the Center of Charge . 42

4-9 Movement of computed Center of Mass 43

4-12 Schematic of Forces on a Liner 46

4-13 Measuring the Charge Volume 47

4-16 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Toe Angle: Predicted vs Observed 51

4-18 Validation of CMS on the Basis of CoM /CoC: Predicted vs Observed. . . 52

4-20 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Number of Trajectories: Predicted vs Observed 53

4-21 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Normal Forces on the Liner 53

4-23 Validation of CMS on the Basis of Charge Volume: Predicted vs Observed 54

4-25 Development of the CMS: Shoulder Clipping (V-l.I) . 57

4-27 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Power Prediction 59

4-30 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of CoM/CoC Prediction . . . 61

4-32 Validation of CMS Versions on the Basis of Number of Trajectories Prediction 62

5-1 Strategy for the development of the Liner Wear Simulator . 68

5-6 Coefficient of Friction: Measured vs Computed 77

5-8 Algorithm of the Charge Motion Simulator 80

5-9 Algorithms for Wear Computation 81

5-10 Liner discretization . . . . . . . . 83

5-11 Algorithm to compute liner wear profile 84

5-12 Geometry of the liner in simulated mill for wear validation 86

5-13 Validation of Simulated Liner Wear (V-l.Ü): Simulated vs Measured 87

5-14 Validation of Simulated Liner Wear (V-l.2): Simulated vs Measured 88

5-15 Validation of smoothed Liner Wear: Simulated vs Measured . . . 89

5-16 Contribution of Impact wear to total wear: No impact vs Impact 90

5-17 Simulated Impact Liner Wear with no Abrasion Wear 90

5-18 Selection of smoothing technique. . . . . . . 92

5-21 Real time analysis of CMS with Abrasive Wear Algorithm. . 94

B-1 Change in the direction of mill rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

B-3 Effect of Liner Wear on the CMS. . . . . . . . . . 116