See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/248475701

Impact work index prediction from continuum damage model of particle

fracture

Article  in  Minerals Engineering · December 2007

DOI: 10.1016/j.mineng.2007.08.021

CITATIONS READS

9 271

2 authors:

Luis Marcelo Tavares Rodrigo Carvalho

Federal University of Rio de Janeiro Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
118 PUBLICATIONS   1,601 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   316 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Breakage testing for advance comminution models View project

Mechanistic mill modelling View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Luis Marcelo Tavares on 09 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy
is furnished to the author for non-commercial research and
education use, including for instruction at the author’s institution,
sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375

This article is also available online at:
www.elsevier.com/locate/mineng

Impact work index prediction from continuum damage model

of particle fracture
L.M. Tavares *, R.M. Carvalho
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro – COPPE/UFRJ, Cx. Postal 68505,
CEP 21941-972, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Received 20 June 2007; accepted 29 August 2007

Abstract

The traditional Bond work index proposed by F.C. Bond over 60 years ago is still today a useful tool for characterizing material
crushability and grindability in the minerals industry. Although not as popular as the Bond ball mill or the Bond rod mill work indices,
the impact work index, also called Bond crushability index, continues to be much used for crusher selection. The present work shows the
application of a model that combines measurements of particle fracture energies and a parameter that characterizes material amenability
to breakage by repeated impacts in the prediction of the Bond crushability index. Results show that a reasonably good agreement exists
between measured and predicted results, as long as losses in the pendulum apparatus, used to determine the Bond crushability index, are
taken into account in the simulations.
 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Comminution; Crushing; Fracture energy; Crushability work index

1. Introduction adhering very strictly to them. In the last few decades,

A number of methods have been used to characterize
rocks for crusher selection. Perhaps the most traditional
is the one proposed by F.C. Bond over 60 years ago (Bond,
1947; Bergstrom, 1985), which is still used today for char-
acterizing material crushability in the minerals industry.
The Bond crushing work index is a measure of material
strength and is determined using a simple twin pendulum
apparatus and a standard procedure. The Bond impact test
attempts to emulate the crushing action that occurs inside
the chamber of jaw, cone and gyratory crushers, where par-
ticles may not be broken in the first nipping cycle, but only
after repeated compression.
The test, such as a number of tests used in generating
empirical measures in engineering, is based on a standard
procedure and equipment and the result depends on
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +55 2125638538.
E-mail address: tavares@ufrj.br (L.M. Tavares).
there has been a growth in interest for direct
measurements of strain energy at fracture and the
strength of single particles, which are more fundamental
material properties (Tavares and King, 1998; Unland and
Szczelina, 2005). Still, the long experience in the use of
the Bond crushability index in the design of crushers
makes its prediction worthwhile from more fundamental
measurements. A model has been developed to
describe weakening that particles undergo as they are
subject to repeated loading cycles (Tavares and King,
2002). This model, based on continuum damage
mechanics, relates weakening from repeated impacts to
accrual in crack-like damage. The present paper shows
that the impact work index actually reflects two proper-
ties that characterize material fracture: the particle
fracture energy and the amenability to fracture by low-
loading cycles. It is demonstrated that the crushing work
index can be predicted using the continuum damage
model.

0892-6875/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2007.08.021
 Author's personal copy

L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375 1369

Nomenclature

A cross-sectional area of the impact load cell rod g acceleration due to gravity (m s2)
(m2) k stiffness of the particle prior to impact (GPa)
C wave propagation velocity in the ILC rod ~k stiffness of the damaged particle (GPa)
(m s1) mb weight of the striker used in the ILC (kg)
CB impact energy per unit particle thickness, also mp particle weight (kg)
called crushing resistance (J mm1) n number of impacts (–)
D damage variable, which corresponds to the frac- P 80% passing size in the crusher product (lm)
tion of any cross-section of the particle that is P(E) cumulative fracture energy distribution of parti-
not able to withstand load (–) cles in a sample or proportion of particle broken
d particle size (m) (–)
Dmax maximum value of the damage variable reached t time (s)
during loading the particle (–) tc time at primary fracture (s)
Dn amount of damage sustained by the particle in vo impact velocity (m s1)
the nth impact (–) W specific energy consumption (kWh t1)
E specific particle fracture energy (J kg1) w particle thickness – distance between loading
En specific particle fracture energy of a particle points (mm)
after the nth impact (J kg1) Wi Bond work index (kWh t1)
Ek specific input energy – kinetic energy of the drop Y modulus of elasticity of the particle (N m2)
weight per unit of particle weight (J kg1)
Ek,n specific input energy used in the nth impact on Greek letters
the particle on the Bond pendulum (J kg1) a local deformation of the system comprised by
E0k;n specific input energy used in the nth impact on particle and platens (m)
the particle for simulation of the Bond work in- ac local deformation of the system at primary frac-
dex, which takes into account losses in the pen- ture (m)
dulum (J kg1) c damage accumulation constant (–)
E50 median of the log-normal distribution of specific / release angle in the Bond pendulum (–)
particle fracture energies (J kg1) l Poisson’s ratio of the particle (–)
F 80% passing size in the crusher feed (lm) q rod specific gravity (kg m3)
F(t) load on the particle as a function of time (N) qs particle specific gravity (g cm3)

2. Experimental ticle occurs (here fracture is considered as the loss of at

2.1. Materials
Samples of 25 materials have been collected for testing,
which include several samples of limestones, bauxites, acid
and basic rocks, as well as coals. The samples have been
prepared for testing by sieving in the appropriate size frac-
tions and their specific gravity determined by pycnometry.
2.2. Bond impact pendulum
An impact pendulum that follows strictly Bond’s stan-
dard for crushability measurement (Bond, 1947; Berg-
strom, 1985; Tavares, 2007) has been used, which allows
calculating the crushing, or impact, work index. The test
consists of dropping two pendulum-mounted hammers
simultaneously against individual particles of size ranging
from 75 to 50 mm that are sitting on a pedestal (Fig. 1).
From a starting angle of 10, the angles used in positioning
the hammers increase 5 each time until fracture of the par-
least 10% in particle weight).
Bond (1947) defined the impact energy per unit of thick-
ness CB by dividing the impact energy by the thickness of
each particle w, so that
C B ¼ 117ð1  cos /Þ=w ð1Þ
where / is the angle, w is given in mm and CB in J/mm.
From this and the material specific gravity qs (in g/cm3)
Bond proposed to estimate the crushing work index using
the empirical relationship
53:49C B
Wi ¼ ð2Þ
qs
where Wi is given in kWh/t.
Samples of 20 particles are individually weighted and
their thickness measured, followed by testing by successive
increase of the impact angle of the pendulums, recording
the value of / responsible for fracture.
The Bond crushability index is given by the median of
the distribution (Bergstrom, 1985). It is used to calculate
 Author's personal copy

1370 L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375

Counterweight

Hammers

ho

Collection
box

Fig. 1. Schematics of the pendulum device.

crusher power consumption from Bond’s law of comminu- impacting individual particles with a free-falling drop
tion, given by (Bond, 1952) weight and recording the force-time profile. From the
  force-time profile different measures are calculated. The
1 1
W ¼ 10Wi pffiffiffi  pffiffiffiffi ð3Þ specific particle fracture energy E is calculated by
P F " Z
tc Z tc
1
where F and P are the 80% passing sizes in the feed and E¼ vo F ðtÞdt þ g F ðtÞtdt
product of the crusher (in lm) and W is the specific energy mp 0 0
Z tc 2 Z tc #
consumption (in kWh/t). 1 1 2
A detailed description of the experimental apparatus  F ðtÞdt  F ðtÞdt ð4Þ
2mb 0 qAC 0
and the analysis of the data can be found elsewhere (Berg-
strom, 1985; Tavares, 2007). where tc is the time of primary fracture of the particle, mp is
the particle weight, vo is the impact velocity, g is the accel-
2.3. Impact load cell eration due to gravity, q is the density, A is the cross-sec-
tional area and C is the wave propagation velocity in the
The impact load cell (Fig. 2) consists of a long rod onto rod.
which solid-state strain gauges are attached (Tavares and Experiments were conducted using the impact load cell
King, 1998; Tavares, 2007). The experiment consists of measuring 63 mm of diameter on particles of size fraction

Drop weight
release system
Data acquisition
board
Collection box
Laser
source
Photodiode

Strain gauges

Computer

Signal
conditioner

Fig. 2. Schematics of the impact load cell device.

 Author's personal copy

L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375 1371

63.0–53.0 mm. Impact velocities used in testing the differ-
ent materials ranged from 3.3 to 5.5 m/s, which are,
although higher, in the order of magnitude of those used
in the Bond pendulum (which range from 0.5 to about
3.5 m/s). Details of the equipment and apparatus can be
found elsewhere (Tavares, 2007).
The distribution of particle fracture energies can be
described well with the log-normal distribution, given by
  
1 ln E  ln E50
P ðEÞ ¼ 1 þ erf pffiffiffi ð5Þ
2 2r E
where E50 and rE are the median and the standard devia-
tion of the distribution, respectively.
Additional experiments were conducted to determine
the amenability of the various materials to fracture by
repeated impacts (Tavares and King, 2002). The response
of materials to repeated impacts is likely to play a role in
the sequential loading events that particles suffer while they
move through the crushing chamber of jaw, gyratory and
cone crushers. This, indeed, becomes evident from the pro-
cedure used to determine Bond’s crushability index
described previously. Thus, particles sieved in the range
from 22.4 to 19.6 mm have been subjected to repeated
low-energy impacts in order to estimate the parameter c
of the damage model (Tavares and King, 2002). In order
to do that, particle fracture energy distributions were deter-
mined for this size range as well.
3. Modeling and simulation procedure
The load–deformation response that results from impact
of a spherical particle can be described by a combination of
continuum damage mechanics (Kachanov, 1958) and Hertz
contact theory (Tavares and King, 2005),
d 1=2 ~ 3=2
F ¼ ka
3
where F is the load, a is the deformation and
~k ¼ kð1  DÞ
particle fracture energy) after each impact at a known
impact energy Ek is given by (Tavares and King, 2002)
En ¼ En1 ð1  Dn Þ ð9Þ
and
 2c5
2c Ek;n
Dn ¼ ð10Þ
ð2c  5Dn þ 5Þ En1
which must be solved iteratively, given that Dn appears
implicitly in Eq. (10).
A minimum of two experiments is required to determine
c, the only parameter in the model:
• a measurement of the distribution of particle fracture
energies from a test at a loading energy that is suffi-
ciently high for primary breakage of all particles in the
sample (parameters in Eq. (5));
• impacts at a constant low-energy level to determine the
cumulative fraction of broken particles. In these experi-
ments the impact energy is given by Ek;m ¼ mb v2o =ð2mp Þ,
where mb is the ball weight, mp is the particle weight and
vo is the velocity of the ball at the instant of collision.
Results of experiments used to determine the parameter
c are shown in Fig. 3, where the fraction of broken particles
is presented as a function of number of impacts, along with
model predictions.
In the case of Bond’s standard pendulum test, the spe-
cific impact energy varies according to
117
E0k;n ¼ ½1  cosð10 þ 5 ðn  1ÞÞ ð11Þ
mp
where n = 1 for the first impact (/ = 10), and so on, and
E0k;n is given in J/kg when mp is measured in kg. Eq. (11) as-
sumes free-fall conditions in the pendulum and that no
ð6Þ
100
ð7Þ
/kg
J

2
is the stiffness of the particle, with k = Y/(1  l ), where Y
.5

80
46

is the modulus of elasticity and l the Poisson ratio.

Cumulative broken (%)

g
J/k
The damage variable D may be described by the power .5
81
law relationship 60
 c
a
D¼ ð8Þ
ac 40

which is valid during compression of the particle. By defi-

nition, damage is irreversible (Kachanov, 1958), so that,
20
if during compression the particle does not fracture, then Coal 1
during restitution D = Dmax, where Dmax is the maximum Limestone 1
value that the damage variable assumed during the loading 0
part of the cycle. 0 5 10 15 20
Assuming that the parameters ac and c are material- Number of impacts n
dependent and remain constant, it can be shown that the Fig. 3. Experimental (symbols) and predicted (lines) cumulative percent
energy E required to fracture a particle (which represents broken after repeated impacts of selected materials with particle size in
the area below the force–deformation profile and is called 22.4–19.6 mm range.
 Author's personal copy

1372 L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375

99 where n50 is the number of impacts that was responsible for

fracture of 50% of the particles. The impact work index is
then calculated using Eq. (2).
Cumulative distribution (%)

95
90
4. Results and discussion
70
50
Typical experimental results from Bond crushability
30 tests are presented in Fig. 4, which shows the significant
10
variability of the measurements, which is primarily asso-
5 ciated with the variability found in the properties of indi-
Copper ore 1
Bauxite 1
vidual particles contained in each sample. A summary of
Limestone 4 the experimental results for all materials tested is pre-
1 sented in Table 1, which shows the different characteris-
1 10 100
tics of the materials tested, with values of (median)
Crushing Work Index - Wi (kWh/t)
impact Wi that varied from about 4–20 kWh/t. Fig. 5
Fig. 4. Distribution of impact (crushing) work index for selected materials shows typical experimental results from particle fracture
measured using the Bond pendulum (symbols: experimental data; lines: energy measurements which contain significant variability
log-normal fit).
as well.
Eq. (1) proposed by Fred Bond to calculate crushing
resistance in the crushability test assumes that no losses
momentum losses occur, an assumption that is later ana-
occur during impact. Simulation of the crushability test
lyzed in the paper.
using data measured using the impact load cell, where no
The simulation is carried out until all particles have bro-
losses during fall of the drop weight occur, requires that
ken. Ek,n (Eq. (11)) is then transformed in the crushing
any loss in momentum that might take place during the
resistance per unit thickness CB, given by
crushability test be taken into account.
117 Tests have been conducted in the Bond pendulum and
CB ¼ ½1  cosð10 þ 5 ðn50  1ÞÞ ð12Þ
w the impact load cell by impacting a 20-mm diameter

Table 1
Summary of results from Bond crushability and impact load cell tests
Rock types Sample Specific gravity Bond crushablity testa Impact load cell
qs (g/cm3)
Particle weight, mp Thickness d CB (J/mm) Wi E50 r2E b c
(kg) (mm) (kWh/t) (J/kg)b
Acid rocks 1 2.64 0.3784 51.0 0.605 12.25 59.0 1.605 3.06
2 2.79 0.3966 44.3 0.793 15.20 144.1 0.677 2.76
3 2.80 0.3430 43.0 0.361 6.90 54.8 0.614 4.34
4 2.69 0.1664 30.1 0.473 9.41 68.5 0.805 2.78
Copper 1 2.93 0.4371 48.3 1.081 19.73 194.3 0.635 5.25
ores 2 2.92 0.4839 45.5 0.736 13.48 149.7 0.509 5.46
3 3.39 0.5538 48.5 0.781 12.32 133.5 0.532 3.08
4 3.25 0.4812 50.5 0.770 12.67 177.3 0.491 2.04
5 3.25 0.2312 36.5 0.288 4.74 47.3 0.984 2.95
Iron ores 1 3.81 0.4759 34.2 0.512 7.19 25.1 0.759 3.06
2 3.84 0.3358 44.4 0.291 4.05 24.5 0.845 3.73
Limestones 1 2.71 0.2609 38.0 0.407 8.03 121.1 0.402 4.58
2 2.88 0.4047 49.0 0.434 8.07 80.3 1.314 4.83
3 2.63 0.3315 47.8 0.353 7.18 35.6 0.670 6.38
4 2.73 0.3884 45.0 0.253 4.95 15.7 0.506 5.41
5 2.73 0.4423 45.5 0.761 14.90 67.2 0.919 4.28
Bauxites 1 2.41 0.3135 50.5 0.470 10.44 67.6 0.591 5.76
2 2.42 0.2206 49.5 0.542 11.98 96.4 0.715 7.61
3 2.49 0.1751 47.0 0.227 4.88 68.7 0.462 2.98
4 2.41 0.1894 46.0 0.341 7.56 52.2 0.795 7.33
5 2.43 0.1885 46.7 0.445 9.80 66.1 0.766 6.40
6 2.45 0.1845 46.0 0.274 5.98 71.2 0.395 4.95
Coals 1 1.68 0.1688 26.0 0.221 7.04 25.7 0.585 1.49
2 1.55 0.2171 34.8 0.103 3.55 16.7 0.636 4.16
3 1.78 0.2043 38.6 0.191 5.72 18.7 0.707 4.68
a
Median values reported for the various measures.
b
Results for particle sizes in range 65–53 mm.
 Author's personal copy

L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375 1373

99
a 100
Copper ore 1
Bauxite 1
Cumulative distribution (%)

Limestone 4
95

P(E0)
90 50
n = 1 (φ = 10o)
70
50
30 0
10 100 600
E k, 1
10
5
b 100

P (E1)
1 10 100 1000
50
Specific particle fracture energy - E (J/kg)
n = 2 (φ = 15 o)
Fig. 5. Distribution of particle fracture energies of selected materials
tested in the impact load cell in size 63.0–53.0 mm (symbols: experimental
0
data; lines: log-normal fit). 10 100 600
Ek,2

c 100

15
P (E3)

50
Diameter of impression (mm)

n = 4 (φ = 25o)

10
0
10 100 600
Ek,4

5
d 100
P (E5)

Bond pendulum 50 n = 6 (φ = 35o)

Impact load cell

0
1 10 100
Impact energy Ek (J)
0
10 100 600
Fig. 6. Comparison of impression size in lead from impact of a 20-mm Ek,6
diameter tungsten carbide ball using the impact load cell and the Specific particle fracture energy (J/kg)
pendulum device. Error bars show the standard deviations of the
measurements. Fig. 7. Simulation of Bond pendulum test using the continuum damage
model of particle fracture and data from acid rock 3. Solid lines show how
the distributions of particle fracture energies change with each impact and
tungsten carbide ball positioned between the striker(s) and the dashed lines the impact energies and proportion broken after each
a lead plate. In the case of the Bond pendulum, one ham- impact. Hatched areas represent the fraction broken in previous impacts.
mer was kept at rest while the other was moved to different
angles. The mean diameter of the impression was then pre- 104:5
cisely measured and results are related to the energy Ek;n ¼ ½1  cosð10 þ 5 ðn  1ÞÞ ð13Þ
mp n0:13
applied in the test (Fig. 6). The figure shows that a loss
of momentum occurs in the pendulum test, which depends
directly on impact energy and, thus, on the release angle of This correction corresponds to a reduction in the calcu-
the pendulum /. An expression that can be used to correct lated energy that varies from about 15% at lower angles up
the impact energy in the Bond pendulum is 0.89/n0.13 to as high as 40% for the largest angles used in the test.
(where n is related to the release angle – in degrees – as A step-by-step description of the simulation procedure is
/ = 10 + 5(n  1)), so that in the simulations of weaken- presented as follows, along with a worked example that
ing by repeated impacts, the impact energy in each loading uses data from acid rock 3 (Table 1). It assumes that all
stage should be calculated from a modification of Eq. (11) material parameters (E50, rE and c) have been determined
given by previously.

1374
a. The first step is the transformation of the initial contin-
uous distribution of particle fracture energies (Eq. (5))
into a distribution of discrete values of E, say 1000,
spanning values of P(E) ranging from 0.0005 to
0.9995 with an increment of 0.001, for example, from
values of the material parameters E50 and rE that have
been determined before using the ILC. This is illus-
trated in Fig. 7a.
b. The specific energy used in the impact simulating the
pendulum is then computed using Eq. (13) with n = 1
(equal to Ek,1 = 4.6 J/kg for the example), and the pro-
portion of material broken P(E0) shown in Fig. 7a is
computed (=0.1% for the example).
c. After this first impact, particles that presented specific
particle fracture energies higher than Ek,1 and that did
not fracture, have their strength reduced due to weak-
ening, in the amount calculated using the damage
model Eqs. (9) and (10). Their distribution of strengths
is then given by Fig. 7b.
d. Steps b and c are then repeated successively for
n = 2,3,4 . . . up to a maximum of 25. In the case of
the example, the impact energies used in the simulations
are then given by Ek,2 = 9.5 J/kg, Ek,3 = 15.9 J/kg,
Ek,4 = 23.8 J/kg and so on.
e. The proportion of material broken at each impact (read
in the ordinate of Fig. 7 – P(E)) is then plotted as a
function of the impact number n. For instance, for
the worked example these are 1.9%, 9.5% and 24.2%
for n = 2, 3 and 4, respectively. The median value of
the impact number n50 responsible for breakage of
50% of the particles is then computed (Fig. 8).
f. From the value of n50 determined from interpolation,
CB is calculated from Eq. (12) and then the Wi is given
by Eq. (2).
100
80
Cumulative broken (%)
60
30o
40
25o
20
20o
o
10o
15
0 mathematical model of high-speed hammer milling.
0 5
Fig. 8. Results from simulation of Bond impact work index, using data
from acid rock 3. Angles corresponding to each impact shown in the
figure.
Author's personal copy
L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375
30
Simulated impact work index (kWh/t)
25
20
15
10 Acid rocks
Copper ores
Iron ores
5 Lime stones
Bauxites
Coals
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Measured impact work index (kWh/t)
Fig. 9. Comparison of measured and simulated impact work index. Filled
circles represent measurements in triplicate for acid rock 2.
Simulations have been conducted, the impact work
index calculated for the materials tested and results are
shown in Fig. 9. The agreement between measured values
of Wi and those calculated using the simulation procedure
is generally good, although the scatter in the data is signif-
icant. A number of reasons for this scatter can be identi-
fied, ranging from variations in particle weight, shape
and thickness, as well as the error that exists in the mea-
surements of impact work index. This last one is illustrated
in Fig. 9 as well, where the median values of measurements
conducted in triplicate for one particular sample are also
presented. These tests have been conducted with samples
of the same original lot of material, but by different techni-
cians so that the influence of material sampling and opera-
tor is evident. Indeed, the variability due to sampling is
particularly significant in this test given the small number
of specimens (20 or less) and the wide size range (75–
55o o 75o
65o 70 50 mm), which may results in lots of material with very dif-
50o 60o
45o ferent characteristics that are capable of matching the size
range required in the test.
40o
It is important to note that the simulated Wi is very sen-
sitive to the parameter that describes damage by repeated
35o
impacts. For example, for a sample of a granulite (acid
rock 2) from a simulated Wi of 15.6 kWh/t for c = 2.76
(Table 1), values of 19.7 and 23.2 kWh/t would result if c
were equal to 4.0 and 5.5, respectively. This demonstrates
the importance of the weakening by repeated impacts in
breakage by crushing and that detailed models of crushers
must account for this. Indeed, Austin (2004) already incor-
porated this model of breakage by repeated impacts in his
n50
10 15 Finally, the approach used in the present work is based
Impact number - n on measurements of material characteristics that contain
all the required material information to predict the
crushing resistance. It differs from another approach
also recently used to predict the Bond crushability index
 Author's personal copy
L.M. Tavares, R.M. Carvalho / Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 1368–1375
(Refahi et al., 2007) that was based on material mechanical
properties such as tensile strength, Young’s modulus and
Poisson’s ratio, and the simulation package FLAC3D.
In that investigation it was recognized that the Bond crush-
ability index is more sensible to the presence of structural
defects, irregular shape of particles and plastic behavior
of the rock that was not appropriately accounted for in
their simulations. Since these material characteristics cer-
tainly are found to affect particle breakage behavior in
the impact load cell, then the validity of the approach used
in the present work is demonstrated.
Rather than aiming to demonstrate that the Bond
impact work index should be determined using the present
procedure instead of Bond’s pendulum, the present work
shows that data measured in the impact load cell are con-
sistent with those obtained using standard technical mea-
sures, such as the impact work index. As a result, it
represents a sound basis for more advanced modeling
and scale-up procedures of crusher selection for use in
the future.
5. Conclusions
A simulation procedure based on the combination of the
damage mechanics model of particle fracture and measure-
ments of the distribution of particle fracture energies has
been successfully used to predict the Bond crushability
index and leads to results that agree reasonably well with
measurement results. The work demonstrates that energy
losses in the pendulum device must be taken into account
in the simulations and that the progressive weakening that
View publication stats
1375
particle undergo as a result of repeated impacts plays a sig-
nificant role in the value of the Bond crushing work index.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial
support from Brazilian Agencies CNPq and FAPERJ.
References
Austin, L.G., 2004. A preliminary simulation model for fine grinding in
high speed hammer mills. Powder Technol. 143–144 (25), 240–252.
Bergstrom, B.H., 1985. Crushability and grindability. In: Weiss, N.L.
(Ed.), . In: SME Mineral Processing Handbook, vol. 2. Littleton, pp.
30-65–30-68.
Bond, F.C., 1947. Crushing tests by pressure and impact. Trans. AIME
169, 58–66.
Bond, F.C., 1952. The third theory of comminution. Trans. AIME 193,
484–494.
Kachanov, L.M., 1958. Time of the rupture process under creep
conditions. Izv. Akad. Nauk AN SSSR 8, 26–31 (in Russian).
Refahi, A., Rezai, B., Mohandesi, J.A., 2007. Use of rock mechanical
properties to predict the Bond crushing index. Miner. Eng. 20 (7), 662–
669.
Tavares, L.M., 2007. Breakage of Single Particles: Quasi-static. In:
Salman, A.D., Ghadiri, M., Hounslow, M.J. (Eds.), . In: Handbook of
Particle Breakage, vol. 12. Elsevier, pp. 3–69.
Tavares, L.M., King, R.P., 1998. Single-particle fracture under impact
loading. Int. J. Miner. Process. 54, 1–28.
Tavares, L.M., King, R.P., 2002. Modeling of particle breakage by
repeated impacts using continuum damage mechanics. Powder Tech-
nol. 123, 138–146.
Tavares, L.M., King, R.P., 2005. Continuum damage modeling of particle
fracture. ZKG Int. 58, 49–58.
Unland, G., Szczelina, P., 2005. Coarse crushing of brittle rocks by
compression. Int. J. Miner. Process. 74S, S209–S217.