New York Paper February, 1918 - Recent Tests of Ball-mill Crushing (with Discussion)

The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Charles T. Van Winkle
Organization:
The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Pages:
22
File Size:
1055 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 1918

Abstract

Until the advent of the porphyry coppers and the introduction of flotation which soon followed, crushing and grinding for many years proceeded along somewhat stereotyped lines, without important alteration in type of machinery. For the finer crushing and grinding, stamps, rolls, and various patterns of Huntington and Chilean mills were in general use. Ball-mills were in use abroad, but owing to their small capacity and the high cost of screens and steel, they never obtained much footing in the United States. Tube-mills were first introduced into the crushing departments of cyanide plants when it was found that for crushing finer than 30-mesh other types of crushing machinery were not efficient. In order to crush with one pass, these mills were made 18 to 22 ft. (5.5 to 6.7 m.) in length. Pebbles were used as a grinding medium and the mills were lined with either silex blocks or fragments of quartz or flint pebbles set in cement. While the cylindrical tube pebble-mill had been used to some extent in small installations of concentration mills, the first instance of its use on a large scale was at the concentrating plant of the Miami Copper Co., where 8-ft. by 22-in. (2.5-m. by 55.9-cm.) Hardinge mills were tried out against Chileans. The results of these experiments led to the gradual replacement of the Chilean by the Hardinge mill. Robert Franke published an article' describing the work done, comparing the two types of mills. At the same time, according to Franke, a test was run using a 6-ft. (1.8-m.) Hardinge ball-mill as a substitute for rolls for intermediate crushing on 1/2-in. material. According to Franke, this mill was soon discarded, since it was found that to obtain the desired product the mill must be limited in capacity. The Miami Copper Co. made no test with other types of ball- or pebble-mills. Following this example, others installed the conical type; and when the Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co. decided to build a concentrator, it adopted the conical mill. As the requirements for mills would be very large, it purchased manufacturing rights in the State of Arizona from the
Citation

APA: Charles T. Van Winkle  (1918)  New York Paper February, 1918 - Recent Tests of Ball-mill Crushing (with Discussion)

MLA: Charles T. Van Winkle New York Paper February, 1918 - Recent Tests of Ball-mill Crushing (with Discussion). The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, 1918.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account