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

net/publication/323218741

Comminution Circuit Design Considerations

Conference Paper · January 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 116

6 authors, including:

Greg Lane Bianca Foggiatto

Ausenco The University of Queensland
29 PUBLICATIONS   83 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Marcos Bueno
University of Oulu
15 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Ausgrind View project

AMIRA P9O View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bianca Foggiatto on 22 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 COMMINUTION CIRCUIT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

*G. Lane1, B. Foggiatto1, R. Braun1,M. P. Bueno1, P. Staples2 and S. Rivard2

1
Ausenco Services
144 Montague Road
Brisbane, Australia QLD 4101
(*Corresponding author: greg.lane@ausenco.com)
2
Ausenco Engineering Canada
555 Boulevard René-Lévesque Ouest
Montréal, Canada QC H2Z

ABSTRACT

This paper demonstrates the selection of grinding circuit technology for a number of recent projects
including discussion of the key drivers and the role of energy efficiency. Decreasing head grades combined
with a strong and sustained increase in operating costs has forced miners to examine increased project size,
increased equipment capacity and efficiency improvements in order to reduce their unit operating costs and
improve overall project economics. Comminution energy consumption, safety and capital cost
considerations play a critical role in the success of projects. This paper presents some key guidelines for a
successful and cost effective comminution circuit design and includes a case study on three projects,
outlining the issues and the drivers which led to the ultimate circuit selection and the critical role that
energy efficiency played.

KEYWORDS

Comminution, SAG Mill, Cost Effective Design, Energy Efficiency

1|P a g e
 INTRODUCTION

Comminution circuits for minerals processing are selected based on their suitability and efficiency
in reducing run-of-mine ore to the desired feed size for the downstream process. The input material (ore)
properties and downstream process requirements are the key determinants and there are standard
approaches for each circumstance.

The minerals processing industry has been a fast adaptor of efficiency improvements based on
increasing capacity of equipment (e.g. trucks, crushers, mills, pumps) but less successful in adapting
radically new technologies that disrupt incumbent flowsheets or processes.

The installed power of grinding mills has increased linearly over the past 25 years (Meka & Lane,
2010) and pumps and classification equipment have kept pace. The autogenous grinding (AG) and semi-
autogenous grinding (SAG) mills displaced stage crushing as a dominant method of coarse rock breakage
in many applications causing crusher manufactures to increase the capacity of cone crushers to meet the
competitive demand.

Examples of new comminution technology in the 20th and 21st centuries are the development and
adoption of cyclone classification in the 1940s (Newtech, 2016), AG milling in the late 1950s, vertical
grinding mills in the 1980s, high pressure grinding rolls (HPGRs) also in the 1980s and ultrafine milling
technology in the 1990s (Meka & Lane, 2010).

These technologies each took decades to become generally accepted to be able to reliably improve
process efficiency and the geographical pattern of acceptance has corresponded with the commercial
realities driven by the technical requirement. An example is the slow adoption of SAG milling in Brazil
where a combination of technical and cultural issues have led to lingering reticence to accept SAG milling
to the same degree as the remainder of the Americas, Africa and Australia (Fountain, Libanio & Lane,
2011). However, the dominant evolutionary improvement in the last 30 years is in automation, process
measurement, reliability monitoring and process control. Whilst the potential of this area is yet to be fully
exploited, we are measuring and collecting data that allows better forward planning and prediction.

The role of efficiency in the above is comprised of two parts that come together in one measure;
operating cost. The two parts are material inputs (the cost of liners, grinding media and energy) and people
inputs (the cost of labour, including the key consideration of safe work practices). Machine capacity
increases have led to simpler circuits (fewer parallel process lines) that are easier and safer to maintain.
Automation and process control have reduced the degree of manual intervention in circuit operations and
lead to lower labour requirements and less physical labour.

Technology improvements, such as AG/SAG milling, have reduced the complexity of the process
and resulted in fewer items of equipment to maintain. AG milling, where applicable, has led to reductions
in operating cost of, for example $2/t, due to the elimination of steel grinding media from the process.

AG and SAG milling, in their early development stages, claimed improvements in energy
efficiency and improved product quality (narrower size distribution). There are indications that in some
applications, in particular single stage AG milling, these circuits can be very energy efficient in a pilot
plant setting (Bueno & Lane, 2012). However, in the main and particularly for competent ore, SAG
milling is less energy efficient than multi- stage crushing and particularly HPGR circuits (Bailey, Lane,
Morrell, & Staples, 2009). The use of HPGR in the comminution of competent ores provides a process
with materially higher energy efficiency even though some of this benefit is lost due to the increased power
required for screen classification and associated materials handling and maintenance.

The dominant requirement of good plant design is personal safety, followed by capital intensity
and efficiency. Efficiency improvement is achieved by a mix of reliability, simplicity, maintenance cost
and operating materials and labour cost. There is recognition that energy efficiency in comminution is a

2|P a g e
desirable outcome from community and environmental perspective. The CEEC (Coalition for Energy
Efficient Comminution) initiative demonstrates corporate support from mining houses,
designers/engineers, equipment vendors and consumables suppliers for these outcomes.

Most process selection processes include consideration of energy efficiency as one of the criteria
for selection of a flowsheet. However, energy efficiency remains a modest determinant of flowsheet
selection unless energy costs are extreme and principally associated with power production from diesel
generation (was greater $0.30/kWh in some locations compared with less than $0.10/kWh for the majority
of operating plants on grid power).

This paper discusses three case studies. The first is the Constancia Project where energy efficiency
was not a major consideration in equipment selection. The other two are the Boddington Project and Cadia
East Project where energy efficiency played a key role in the selection of HPGR technology. These case
studies are based on data in the public domain.

COMMINUTION CIRCUIT SELECTION

The determination of grinding efficiency is discussed in papers by Siddall (1999), Lane and
Siddall (2002), Morrell (2008), Lane, Foggiatto, Bueno and McLean (2013) and numerous other
practitioners. Grinding efficiency plays an important role in selecting the most appropriate circuit and
associated equipment, particularly in determining the transfer sizes between stages in AG/SAG and ball
milling circuits. However, energy efficiency per se is then rolled up into the operating and capital cost
outcomes for an overall quantitative financial analysis. Qualitative measures (preferences and perceptions)
play an important role within the flowsheet selection and design processes and are also important in
parallel assessment of the financial analysis.

Project size and business drivers also impact on selection criteria. Large project operating costs
are dominated by consumables and maintenance costs, with labour costs being a lesser input. The reverse is
true of smaller projects. Major mining houses are better able to fund large capital intensive, low operating
cost projects, whereas junior resource companies are generally capital constrained and more strongly
influenced by the need for cost-effective design (Lane & Dickie, 2009 and Lane, Dakin & Elwin, 2011).

Projects treating competent ores, such as Boddington selected a multi-stage crushing circuit
incorporating HPGR on the basis of energy efficiency, even though the capital cost was higher than for a
more conventional SAG mill based circuit (Parker, Rowe, Lane & Morrell, 2001). The Cadia East Project
used HPGR to improve the energy efficiency of an existing SAG mill based circuit when moving from the
treatment of open pit ore to a much more competent and potentially coarser, block cave ore source
(Engelhardt, Robertson, Lane, Powell & Griffin, 2011; Engelhardt et al., 2015).

Projects treating less competent ores, such as Constancia (Lane, Dakin, Stephenson, Johnston &
Granados, 2015) are able to achieve reasonable energy efficiency with primary crusher and SAG mill-
based circuits. Staples, Lane, Braun, Foggiatto and Bueno (2015) pointed to the use of secondary crushing
to improve SAG mill throughput and energy efficiency when SAG mill circuits are constrained by ore
competency, as an intermediate option between the HPGR-based flowsheet and the primary crusher to
SAG mill-based flowsheet. In Ausenco’s general experience, secondary crushing prior to SAG milling
leads to improved energy efficiency when processing competent ores, supporting Putland, Siddal and
Gunstone’s (2004) assessment of Mt Rawdon’s SAG and ball mill circuit and the observations, shown in
Figure 1, of Lane and Siddal (2002).

3|P a g e
 Figure 1 – Relationship between %HPGR in feed and SABC grinding circuit efficiency (from Lane &
Siddal, 2002)

Many papers have been written on comminution circuit selection. Appendix 1 contains a selection
of references. To exemplify the key considerations three case studies are provided in summary form from
the Constancia (from Lane et al., 2015), Cadia East (from Engelhardt et al., 2011, 2015) and Boddington
(from Hart, Parker, Rees, Manesh & Mcgaffin, 2011; Veillette & Parker, 2005) projects.

A summary of ore characteristics is provided in Table 1. The energy efficiency factor was
determined using the method described by Lane et al. (2013) and is based on the specific energy
requirement of a multistage crushing, rod and ball mill circuit as the benchmark energy efficient process.

Table 1 Ore and process characteristics for the Constancia, Cadia East and Boddington projects
Parameter Units Constancia Cadia East Boddington
DWI kWh/m3 7.3 10.0 10
BWI kWh/t 15.9 21.4 15.6
RWI kWh/t 14.3 31.1 23.4
P80 Microns 120 150 150
Design specific energy kWh/t 19 22 15
Design efficiency factor 1.30 1.30 1.07

CONSTANCIA PROJECT CASE STUDY

The flowsheet for the Constancia project was based on a conventional SABC circuit design (Lane
et al., 2015). As the ore to be treated in the initial years of production was less competent than the design
ore case, pebble crusher installation was deferred. A twin line geared mill system consisting of a total of
four 16 MW mills, illustrated in Figures 2 and 3, was selected on the following basis:
 De-risking of plant start-up issues using twin milling trains,
 The 32 MW of SAG mill power de-risked the plant for throughput limitations,
 Less complex systems for maintenance than other options,
 Lower capital cost than staged crushing or HPGR-based options.

4|P a g e
 Figure 2 – Constancia dual line grinding circuit of four 16 MW mills (from Lane et al., 2015)

Figure 3 – Constancia grinding circuit viewed from the primary crusher (from Lane et al., 2015)

The major design parameters and equipment specifications are summarized in Table 2.

5|P a g e
 Table 2 – Constancia grinding circuit major design parameters and equipment specifications summary
Parameter Units Parameter
Hypogene throughput t/h 3400
SAG mill F80 Mm 95
SAG mill no x diameter x length (feet) 2 x 36 x 24
SAG mill installed power kW nameplate 32000
Ball Mills no x diameter x length (feet) 2 x 26 x 40.5
Ball mill installed power kW nameplate 32000
Pebble crushers no x model 2 x MP1000

As shown in Table 1, the calculated energy consumption for the comminution circuit was about
130% of the theoretical energy calculated using Ausenco’s Ausgrind methodology (Lane et al., 2013)
based on laboratory test work. However, the high degree of fracture in the core and the lower ore
competency in the initial years of operation were expected to reduce this to between 115% and 120% for
the initial period of operation.

CADIA EAST PROJECT CASE STUDY

The expansion of the original Cadia Hill circuit was required to begin treating ore from the new
Cadia East underground mine (Engelhardt et al., 2011, 2015). Cadia East ore is extracted using panel
caving which is an underground mining method commonly used to allow high mining rates to be achieved
at a relatively low cost for hard rock mining. However, this method can result in coarser size distributions
than other mining methods and was therefore expected to produce a coarser and fines deficient feed for the
new comminution circuit. In addition, Cadia East ore is more competent than Cadia open pit ore, as shown
in survey results presented by Foggiatto, Hilden and Powell (2015).

The expansion was accomplished by installing screening and HPGR crushing equipment ahead of
the existing SAG mill, converting existing pebble crushers into secondary crushers and adding additional
ball milling capacity to the original circuit (as well as additional downstream equipment). This is the only
circuit of its type and the flowsheet is shown in Figure 4. A panoramic view of the crushing-HPGR circuit
is illustrated in Figure 5.

6|P a g e
Figure 4 – Cadia low-grade plant comminution circuit with survey sampling points (from Engelhardt et al,
2015)

7|P a g e
 (a) Looking towards the HPGR, far left and crushers front right

(b) Looking up the pebble recycle belt at the many conveyors

Figure 5 – Panoramic view of the new crushing-HPGR section (from Engelhardt et al., 2015)

Engelhardt et al. (2011) describes the design, criteria and rationale for circuit selection. The
design energy consumption of this circuit was approximately 130% of the theoretically achievable
comminution energy consumption. However, without the inclusion of the secondary crushing and HPGR
this would have been closer to 145% of the theoretically achievable comminution energy consumption.

BODDINGTON CASE STUDY

The Boddington project was commissioned in 2009 after an extensive test work and design
process that commenced with initial SABC circuit pilot trials in 1994. The ore is extremely competent and
energy consumption in piloting with SAG milling was over 140% of the theoretically achievable
comminution energy consumption. Large scale piloting at 30 t/h confirmed that a HPGR based circuit
would achieve energy consumptions of less than 110% of the theoretically achievable comminution energy
consumption (Parker et al., 2001).

The selected HPGR-based flowsheet is presented schematically in Figure 6. This circuit was
substantially more capital intensive than the SABC option (Parker et al, 2001) but lower operating costs,
including energy cost savings, resulted in its selection after an extension series of pilot and plant trials
(Hart et al., 2011).

8|P a g e
 Figure 6 – Boddington Flowsheet (from Veillette & Parker, 2005)

CONCLUSION

Energy efficiency plays an important role in mill equipment selection, but ultimately capital and
operating costs will drive the plant design. Capital and operating costs for the various circuit options vary.
Generally, current HPGR-based circuits have a 20% capital cost premium but can reduce operating costs
by $0.50/t when treating very competent ores. The operating cost saving is contributed to by energy cost
savings, but media consumption cost reductions are also a major contributor.

Energy consumption in comminution can be 30% to 40% lower for HPGR-based circuits treating
very competent ore when compared to conventional SABC circuits. However, this is offset by a more
complex circuit with higher energy consumption by ancillary processes that approximately halve this
difference.

The use of secondary crushing prior to SAG milling is an intermediate energy efficiency solution
for processing competent ores that is being adopted for debottlenecking projects that are SAG mill
throughput constrained.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge Ausenco for supporting this development and allowing it
to be presented at the IMPC conference in Quebec.

REFERENCES

Bailey, C., Lane, G., Morrell, S. & Staples, P. (2009). What can go wrong in comminution circuit
design? In 11th Mill Operators Conference (pp. 143-149). Adelaide, AusIMM.

Bueno, M. & Lane, G. (2012). Key drivers of energy and cost efficiency in AG/SAG circuits. In
11th Mill Operators Conference (pp. 49-65). Hobart, AusIMM.

Burger, B., McCaffery, K., McGaffin, I., Jankovic, A., Valery, W. & La Rosa, D. (2006). Batu
Hijau model for throughput forecast, mining and milling optimisation, and expansion studies. In S.K.
Kawatra (Ed.), Advances in comminution (pp. 461-479). Littleton: SME.

9|P a g e
 Engelhardt, D., Robertson, J., Lane, G., Powell, M. & Griffin, P. (2011). Cadia expansion – from
open pit to block cave and beyond. In K. Major, B.C. Flintoff, B. Klein & K. McLeod (Eds.), International
Autogenous Grinding, Semiautogenous Grinding and High Pressure Grinding Rolls Technology.
Vancouver: UBC.

Engelhardt, D., Seppelt, J., Lane, G., Powell, M., Apfelt, A., Watters, T. & Yahyaei, M. (2015).
The Cadia HPGR-SAG circuit – from design to operation - the commissioning challenge. In B. Klein, K.
McLeod, R. Roufail & F. Wang (Eds.) Proceedings International Semi-autogenous Grinding and High
Pressure Grinding Roll Technology. Vancouver: UBC.

Foggiatto, B., Hilden, M.M. & Powell, M.S. (2015). Use of a novel multi-component approach for
simulating a comminution circuit featuring HPGR and SAG mill. In B. Klein, K. McLeod, R. Roufail & F.
Wang (Eds.) Proceedings International Semi-autogenous Grinding and High Pressure Grinding Roll
Technology. Vancouver: UBC.

Fountain, C., Libanio, P. & Lane, G. (2011). Differences between the engineering cultures of
Australia and Brazil. In Metallurgical Plant Design and Operating Strategies (pp. 49-65). Perth, AusIMM.

Hart, S., Parker, P., Rees, T., Manesh, A. & Mcgaffin, I. (2011). Commissioning and ramp up of
the HPGR circuit at Newmont Boddington Gold. In K. Major, B.C. Flintoff, B. Klein & K. McLeod (Eds.),
Proceedings of the International Autogenous and Semi-autogenous Grinding and High Pressure Grinding
Roll Technology. Vancouver: UBC.

Lane, G. & Siddall, B. (2002). SAG milling in Australia – Focus on the future. In Metallurgical
Plant Design and Operating Strategies (pp. 272-290). Carlton: AusIMM.

Lane, G. & Dickie, M. (2009). What is required for a low cost project? In Project Evaluation
Conference. Melbourne: AusIMM.

Lane, G., Dakin, P. & Elwin, D. (2011). Cost effective concentrator design. In Metallurgical Plant
Design and Operating Strategies (pp. 364-373).Perth: AusIMM.

Lane, G., Foggiatto, B. & Bueno, M.P. (2013). Power-based comminution calculations using
Ausgrind. In M. Alvarez, A. Doll, W. Kracht & R. Kuyvenhoven (Eds.), Proceedings of 10th International
Mineral Processing Conference (pp. 85-96). Santiago: Gecamin.

Lane, G., Dakin P., Stephenson, D., Johnston, A. & Granados, H. (2015). Comminution circuit
design for the Constancia project. In B. Klein, K. McLeod, R. Roufail & F. Wang (Eds.) International
Semi-autogenous Grinding and High Pressure Grinding Roll Technology. Vancouver: UBC.

Meka, Z. & Lane, G. (2010). Recent metallurgical developments and their impact on minerals
project execution. In XXV International Mineral Processing Congress (pp. 21-28). Brisbane, AusIMM.

Morrell, S. (2008). A method for predicting the specific energy requirement of comminution
circuits and assessing their energy utilisation efficiency. Minerals Engineering, 21(3):5-9.

Morell, S. & Morrison, R.D. (1996). AG and SAG mill circuit selection and design by simulation.
In A.L. Mular, D.J. Barratt & D.A. Knight (Eds.), International Conference on Autogenous and
Semiautogenous Grinding Technology (pp. 769-790). Vancouver: UBC.

Newtech (2016). History of hydrocyclones development. Retrieved January 2016 from

<http://newtech.dp.ua/articles/eng/hydrocyclone_history_eng.html>.

10 | P a g e
 Parker, P., Rowe, P., Lane, G. & Morrell, S. (2001). The decision to opt for high pressure grinding
rolls for the Boddington expansion. In D.J. Barratt, M.J. Allan & F. Mullar (Eds.) International Semi-
Autogenous Grinding and High Pressure Grinding Roll Technology (pp. III 93-106). Vancouver: UBC.

Putland, B., Siddal, B. & Gunstone, A. (2004). Taking control of the mill feed: case study – partial
secondary crushing Mt Rawdon. In Metallurgical Plant Design and Operating Strategies (pp. 79-94).
Perth: AusIMM.

Siddall, G. B. (1999). Analysing power efficiency. In Crushing and Grinding Conference.

Sydney: IIR Conferences.

Staples, P., Lane, G., Braun, R., Foggiatto, B. & Bueno, M.P. (2015). Are SAG mills losing
market confidence? In B. Klein, K. McLeod, R. Roufail & F. Wang (Eds.) International Semi-Autogenous
Grinding and High Pressure Grinding Roll Technology. Vancouver: UBC.

Veillete, G. & Parker, B. (2005). Boddington expansion project comminution circuit features and
testwork. In Randol Innovative Metallurgy Forum. Perth.

Wirfiyata, F. & McCaffery, K. (2011). Applied geo-metallurgical characterisation for life of mine
throughput prediction at Batu Hijau. In K. Major, B.C. Flintoff, B. Klein & K. McLeod (Eds.),
International Autogenous and Semi-autogenous Grinding and High Pressure Grinding Roll Technology.
Vancouver: UBC.

Appendix 1 Papers on Comminution Circuit Selection

Barratt, D.J. & Sherman, M. (2002). Factors which influence the selection of comminution
circuits. In A.L. Mular, D.N. Halbe & D.J. Barratt (Eds.), Mineral Processing Plant Design, Practice and
Control Proceedings (pp. 539-565). Vancouver: SME.

Daniel, M. & Lane, G. (2008). Energy efficiency processes and measurement: Ausenco’s
perspective. Paper presented at Energy Efficiency in Mining & Minerals, Increasing Energy Efficiency:
Measure, Assess & Audit. IQPC.

Dunne, R., Maxton, D., Morrell, S. & Lane, G. (2004). HPGR – the Australian experience. Paper
presented at the SME Annual Conference. Denver: SME.

Foggiatto, B., Bueno, M., McLean, E., Lane, G. & Morley, C. (2015). Circuit design. In A.J.
Lynch (Ed.) The AusIMM Comminution Handbook (pp. 265-301). Carlton: AusIMM.

Lane, G. & Dunne, R. (1998). Ore competency and the design of FAG/SAG circuits. In
Comminution 98. Perth: Minerals Engineering.

Lane, G., Fleay, J. & La Brooy, S. (2002). Selection of comminution circuits for improved
efficiency. In Crushing and Grinding Conference. Sydney: IIR Conferences.

Lane, G. (2006). How do you choose between a SAG mill and HPGR based comminution circuit?
In Crushing and Grinding Conference. Sydney: IIR Conferences.

Lane, G. (2007). Some observations on SAG milling. Keynote presented at the 9th Mill
Operations’ Conference. Perth: AusIMM.

Lane, G. (2012, October). Comminution and energy efficiency. Mining Magazine, 61-63.
Retrieved from <www.miningmagazine.com>.

11 | P a g e
View publication stats

Morrison, R. & Morrell, S. (1998). Comparison of comminution circuit energy efficiency using
simulation. Minerals and Metallurgical Processing, 15(4): 22-25.

Pokrajcic, Z. and Lewis-Gray, E. (2010, August). Advanced comminution circuit design –

Essential for industry. The AusIMM Bulletin, 38-42. Retrieved January 2016 from
<http://www.ceecthefuture.org>.

Reeves, S., Starkey, J. & Abergel, K. (2015). An Investor’s Perspective on Best Practices in SAG
Mill Sizing. In Kuyvenhoven, R. & Velasques C. (Eds.), 11th International Mineral Processing
Conference. Santiago: Gecamin.

Ritchie, I., Lane, G. & Lunt, D. (1999). Tailoring SAG mill circuit design to a project’s
requirements. In SAG 99 Conference. Santiago.

Siddall, G.B. & White, M. (1989). The growth of SAG milling in Australia. In A. L. Mular & G.
E. Agar (Eds.), Advances in Autogenous and Semiautogenous Grinding Technology (pp. 169-185).
Vancouver: UBC.

Siddall, G.B., Henderson, G.K. & Putland, B.G. (1996). Factors influencing sizing of SAG mills
from drill core samples. In A.L. Mular, D.J. Barratt & D.A. Knight (Eds.), Proceedings International
Autogenous and Semiautogenous Grinding Technology (pp. 463-480). Vancouver: UBC.

Siddall, G.B. (1997). Recent developments in SAG Milling. In Conference on Crushing and
Grinding in the Mining Industry. Sydney: IIR Conferences.

Starkey, J. (2003). Accurate, economical grinding circuit design using SPI and Bond. In Lorenzen
L. (Ed.), XXII International Mineral Processing Congress. Cape Town: SAIMM.

12 | P a g e