XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3 1397
SFH Test Evaluations using 2.0×1.7 mm
One of the key uncertainties was which size fraction to
use in the small fragment HIT (SFH) testing, given the
protocol was moving from single particle to bed impact
breakage, as per Whiten (2020). To this end three samples
were tested using 5g, 10g and 15g as noted previously. As
the HIT cup diameter was approximately 80 mm, these
masses nominally represented 1 layer, 1 to 2 layers and 2
to 3 layers, depending on the size fraction, as illustrated in
Figure 7.
Figure 8 shows the specifications of the HIT cup.
The 15g samples were prepared in two ways, 1) as
deposited in the cup, and 2) compacted by the weight of the
HIT drop hammer carefully lowered on top of the material
in the cup. There was no significant difference in the
breakage response, evident in the similar product size dis-
tributions observed for the 15g as-is and compacted results.
The aim of the initial experiment was to compare the
product size distributions (PSD) and correlations of the
PSD metrics with the HIT Axb for the three 3 different
masses tested. Two initial PSD metrics were selected,
1. the mass percent unbroken (%Unbroken), and
2. mass percent passing ½ of the initial mean particle
size (%passing 0.5 RS) of the broken material.
The two metrics (%Unbroken and %Passing 0.5 RS)were
plotted against the HIT Axb for each of the three samples
selected in the 2.0×1.7 mm size fraction. Figure 9 com-
pares the charts for 5g, 10g and 15g, suggesting that 10g
Table 5. Expected Number of Fragments in HIT Bed
Breakage Tests (10g, Ore SG 2.6 t/m3)
Size Fraction #Fragments
2.0×1.7 mm 815
1.7×1.4 mm 1400
1.4×1.18 mm 2415
1.18×1.0 mm 4000
Figure 7. Images of 1.7×1.4 mm sample 11202602 in HIT cup (5, 10, 15 and 15g compacted)
58.9
88.9
x 4.78mm WALL
49.3
25.4
82.3
Figure 8. HIT sample cup specifications
SFH Test Evaluations using 2.0×1.7 mm
One of the key uncertainties was which size fraction to
use in the small fragment HIT (SFH) testing, given the
protocol was moving from single particle to bed impact
breakage, as per Whiten (2020). To this end three samples
were tested using 5g, 10g and 15g as noted previously. As
the HIT cup diameter was approximately 80 mm, these
masses nominally represented 1 layer, 1 to 2 layers and 2
to 3 layers, depending on the size fraction, as illustrated in
Figure 7.
Figure 8 shows the specifications of the HIT cup.
The 15g samples were prepared in two ways, 1) as
deposited in the cup, and 2) compacted by the weight of the
HIT drop hammer carefully lowered on top of the material
in the cup. There was no significant difference in the
breakage response, evident in the similar product size dis-
tributions observed for the 15g as-is and compacted results.
The aim of the initial experiment was to compare the
product size distributions (PSD) and correlations of the
PSD metrics with the HIT Axb for the three 3 different
masses tested. Two initial PSD metrics were selected,
1. the mass percent unbroken (%Unbroken), and
2. mass percent passing ½ of the initial mean particle
size (%passing 0.5 RS) of the broken material.
The two metrics (%Unbroken and %Passing 0.5 RS)were
plotted against the HIT Axb for each of the three samples
selected in the 2.0×1.7 mm size fraction. Figure 9 com-
pares the charts for 5g, 10g and 15g, suggesting that 10g
Table 5. Expected Number of Fragments in HIT Bed
Breakage Tests (10g, Ore SG 2.6 t/m3)
Size Fraction #Fragments
2.0×1.7 mm 815
1.7×1.4 mm 1400
1.4×1.18 mm 2415
1.18×1.0 mm 4000
Figure 7. Images of 1.7×1.4 mm sample 11202602 in HIT cup (5, 10, 15 and 15g compacted)
58.9
88.9
x 4.78mm WALL
49.3
25.4
82.3
Figure 8. HIT sample cup specifications