Minerals Beneficiation - Basic Laboratory Studies in the Unit Operation of Crushing

CRUSHING has always been a major operation in the chemical and metallurgical industries, yet little is known about the theory of crushing, and today, the design of crushers is still based almost entirely on empirical knowledge and accumulated practical experience. In view of the increasing national need for the economic working of poorer grades of ores, the lack of a fundamental understanding of this unit operation hardly presents a satisfactory situation. Basic investigations of crushing have been concerned mainly with three phases of the problem, 1—the mechanism of the fracture process itself, 2— the particle size distribution of the crushed product, and 3—the relationship between the energy input and the amount of new surface produced. Probably adequate information on these phases will be required for a comprehensive understanding of the process of crushing. A bibliography covering these phases will be given as well as a review of the work done in recent years at the University of Minnesota on the relationship between the energy input for crushing and the amount of new surface produced. Fracture of Solids This phase of the crushing problem is the most fundamental because it is concerned with the actual mechanism of fracture. The main problems in a study of the fracture process are concerned with the questions of why and how fracture occurs and why there is such a discrepancy between the actual and theoretical energies needed in a fracture process. In considering the how of fracture, Poncelet40 carried Out experiments On the crushing of glass under compression. Actual photographs were taken of the glass plates in various stages of fracture-From these experiments Poncelet was able to postulate a probable mechanism of fracture. Probably because of the quantitative nature of the problem, considerable effort has been expended to find an explanation for the low tensile strength of materials and the conversely high energy for crushing. Tensile strengths are often only 1/500 of the theoretical while the energy for crushing is usually at least 500 times the theoretical. A review of the work to explain the low strength of glass is given by Weyl,52 in which the work of Griffith," Joffe,32 and Powell and Preston " are discussed. In a recent paper Seitz46 holds that the presence of flaws and fissures, as originally expounded by Griffith, is the most probable reason for the low strength of metals. Since a mass of data has been accumulated on the fracture strength of materials, several investigators have attempted to correlate this data in the form of an equation. Glathart and Preston," Taylor,40 Ponce-let,40 Machlin and Norwich," and Frederickson and Eyring,20 have all considered this problem, and the final relationship has always been that the stress for fracture is proportional to the logarithm of time. Murgatroyd30 arrived at a very similar relationship by a different method. The study of the fracture process has used many methods. Among some of these are the thermody-namic approach used by Furth21 which was based on the work of BornxL and later used by Saibel,43 and the statistical method applied by Fisher and Hollo-mon.10 In recent years metallurgists have concerned themselves with the problem of brittle .fracture as opposed to the usual plastic failure of metals. The great amount of interest shown is reflected by the number of contributors to the recent symposium on the fracture of metals.' Repeated failures of welded ships during World War II have accelerated these Studies.31,50,34 The shifting of thought from an emphasis on the