Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Minerals Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mineng

Investigating grinding media differences in microstructure, hardness,

abrasion and fracture toughness
Amar Sabih a, Peter Radziszewski b,⇑, Ivan Mullany c
a
Mechanical Engineering, McGill University, 817 Sherbrooke St. W., Montreal H3A 0C3, Canada
b
Metso, 795 ave George-V, Lachine, Québec H8S 2R9, Canada
c
Hatch, 2800 Speakman Drive, Sheridan Science & Technology Park, Mississauga, Ontario L5K 2R7, Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: It is recognised that grinding media wear can represent up to 50% of the operating costs of a given tum-
Received 30 May 2016 bling mill. Over the years, a number of works have explored the development of different ways and
Revised 16 August 2016 means to both understand grinding media wear as well as model and predict it. The focus of the present
Accepted 19 August 2016
work is to examine the differences in microstructure, hardness, abrasion and impact toughness of grind-
Available online 26 August 2016
ing media from eight different manufacturing sources. Results will be presented for 125 mm diameter
media typically used for SAG mills. A discussion will address any issues highlighted by the results than
Keywords:
may contribute to predictive wear model development as well as indicate possible directions for future
Grinding media
Hardness
research.
Abrasion Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Toughness
Wear

1. Introduction discussion will explore any possible relationships as well as possi-

In mineral processing, the two main operating costs are related
to energy consumption and wear. Energy consumption in com-
minution processes especially as it related to efficiency has been
the focus of much research and application. Current efforts aim
at developing guidelines and potentially standards for energy
based grinding performance metrics (McIvor, 2015) and bench-
marks (Ballantyne and Powell, 2014; Nadolski et al., 2015). On
the other hand, with respect to wear and particularly grinding
media wear, there are still a few different schools of thought
(Bond, 1963; Benavente, 2007; Gates et al., 2008; Chenje et al.,
2009) all of which converge on the general notion that wear in
comminution processes is a function of three main components
which are the energy involved in wear, the chemical and mechan-
ical properties of the media as well as the chemical and mechanical
properties of the ore or slurry.
The focus of the present paper will be to examine the compo-
nents related to the mechanical properties of the media. Specifi-
cally, the focus will be on 125 mm diameter grinding media and
will investigate the differences in microstructure, impact tough-
ness, abrasion and hardness of grinding media from eight different
manufacturing sources. Following a presentation of the results, a
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: peter.radziszewski@metso.com (P. Radziszewski).
ble avenues for future research.
2. Sample preparation
Ten different SAG mill 125 mm diameter media samples from
eight different manufacturing sites was collected for this investiga-
tion. The different media sampled are randomly listed as illus-
trated in Table 1. With respect to chemical composition, it
should be noted that the standards ASTM E1479 (2011) and
ASTM E1019 (2011) were followed. The chemical analysis indi-
cated the percent weight results for aluminium, arsenic, carbon,
cobalt, chromium, copper, manganese, molybdenum, niobium,
nickel, phosphorus, silicon, sulfur, tin, tantalum, titanium, vana-
dium, zirconium and tungsten. Table 2 provides the percent weight
results for chemical components common to all media sampled,
while Table 3 indicates that number of media samples that con-
tained the chemical components not common to all samples tested
along with their range.
Subsequently, the media samples were then prepared in order
to accomplish the different tests for microstructure, impact frac-
ture toughness, abrasion testing and hardness. All samples were
cut under wet conditions such that a number of samples were
obtained without microstructure modification including three
from different radial positions in the ball as illustrated in Fig. 1.
In the case of impact toughness, samples were prepared according

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mineng.2016.08.014
0892-6875/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
44 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53

Table 1 Table 3
Selected grinding media with the corresponding codes (125 mm media). The chemical composition results common to all media samples (%wt).

Coded provider Coded provider No. of samples Range (wt.%)

A5 F5
B5 G5
C5 H5
D5 I5
E5 J5
to the requirements of the Charpy V-notch specifications defined
by the ASTM E23 (2002).
The hardness profile was achieved by conducting a series of
tests along the center line of the 125 mm media slice from which
Charpy test specimens were machined from. Samples for abrasion
wear test did not have any special preparation other than meeting
the required sample size and shape for use in steel wheel abrasion
test as described by the ASTM G65 (2015) and ASTM B611 (2013)
standards. Chemical analysis was completed on the fractured
halves produced by the Charpy impact test. Surfaces were prepared
in the typical fashion required for metallographic analysis. This
includes sample mounting in Bakelite, mechanical grinding, abra-
sion and polishing, etching followed by microscopic analysis
(Modin and Modin, 1973; ASM, 1985; Vander Voort, 2007).
3. Results
The results are presented in the following order: microstruc-
ture, impact toughness, abrasive wear and hardness.
3.1. Microstructure
The microstructures of all grinding media investigated in this
work are shown in Figs. 2–15. All appear to be quenched and tem-
pered martensite, with two exceptions: (i) C5, the high C and high
Cr alloys, which reveals a microstructure that is not readily identi-
fiable (Fig. 15); (ii) J5 sample reveals the cast structure of dendrites
with what appears to be a matrix of ledeburite i.e. the eutectic
formed at the final stage of liquid solidification, which should be
a mixture of white cementite and transformed austenite (Figs. 14
and 15). Apart from the white cementite matrix, the darker areas
could be tempered martensite. Higher magnifications are required
to clarify this.
At optical microscopy magnifications, it is extremely difficult to
differentiate between the characteristics of quenched and tem-
pered martensite. Only the martensite laths can really be resolved,
but it is still difficult to differentiate between martensite mor-
phologies. Carbides and retained austenite cannot be resolved.
These characteristics need to be defined by electron microscopy
and X-ray analysis, if necessary. A literature review is required to
ascertain whether the degree of tempering, or changes in marten-
site morphology, affect wear. Certainly the degree of tempering
affects toughness, and is well documented. There appears to be
inclusions (black particles) in all the grinding media samples.
% Aluminium 8 0.02
% Arsenic 0 <0.01
% Cobalt 1 0.01
%Molybdenum 6 0.01–0.06
% Niobium 1 0.08
% Tin 3 0.01–0.08
% Tantalum 1 0.08
% Titanium 2 0.01
% Vanadium 1 0.03
% Zirconium 0 <0.01
% Tungsten 0 <0.01
These need to be quantified at some point since these may affect
the toughness of the grinding media.
A5 media: The microstructure of A5 media consists of tempered
martensite but retained austenite was difficult to find in the
microstructure (Fig. 2). Although this is a hypo-eutectoid structure,
no pro-eutectoid ferrite was observed at grain boundaries. This
may explain the high toughness for this media sample as compared
to other samples tested. As the hardness is comparable with other,
this could be as a result of good heat treatment or performing forg-
ing treatment.
B5 media: The microstructure is composed of lath martensite
and small islands (5–10 lm) inclusions of irregular shape. With
regards to the ball application and measured hardness, the marten-
site seems to be slightly tempered in order to increase toughness
and decrease retained austenite. The brighter area in Figs. 3 and
4 could be tempered retained austenite.
C5 media: Based on the composition and in terms of the carbon
content it is a hyper-eutectoid structure. The microstructure shows
chromium carbides in a matrix of untempered martensite, which
should lower dramatically the toughness (Fig. 5). There should be
relatively high amount of retained austenite (not resolved with
Nital etchant).
D5 media: This grinding media sample is composed of tempered
martensite, retained austenite and inclusions. The martensite looks
to be a mixture of lath and needles due to the carbon content of
this structure. The lamellar style of microstructure implies
deformed structure due to forging treatment (Fig. 6). The inclu-
sions were also elongated as a proof of forging. Precipitated ferrite
was observed in this steel due to its pro-eutectoid characteristics.
The relatively good toughness can be attributed to the forging
treatment applied on this media sample despite of the presence
of detrimental ferrite at primary austenite grain boundaries
(Fig. 7).
E5 media: The composition is almost the same as D5 media
(Fig. 8), however, this sample showed lower hardness and higher
toughness. Ferrite at the grain boundaries was observed in limited
areas as compared to D5. The presence of this ferrite may
contribute to lowering the impact toughness as compared to the
D5 sample.

Table 2
The chemical composition results common to all media samples (wt.%).

A5 B5 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 H5 I5 J5
% Carbon 0.551 0.623 2.10 0.577 0.524 0.669 0.764 0.572 0.608 1.97
% Chromium 0.78 0.98 18.61 0.64 0.63 0.33 0.75 0.68 0.96 12.68
% Copper 0.10 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.25 0.21 0.02 0.15 0.06
% Manganese 0.69 0.72 0.31 0.97 0.96 0.85 0.85 0.99 0.72 1.04
% Nickel 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.02 0.13 0.14
% Phosphorus 0.012 0.011 0.020 0.016 0.015 0.012 0.016 0.015 0.013 0.036
% Silicon 1.75 0.73 0.38 0.42 0.43 0.19 0.16 0.42 0.77 0.72
% Sulfur 0.003 0.025 0.041 0.010 0.004 0.028 0.027 0.005 0.021 0.031
 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53 45

Fig. 1. Schematics drawings of a slice of the 125 mm media showing the locations where Charpy test specimens were cut from using EDM wire cutting and subsequent
grinding.

Fig. 4. The microstructure of B5 media (50
).

Fig. 2. Microstructure of A5 media (1000
).

Fig. 5. Microstructure of C5 media (500
).

Fig. 3. B5 media (1000
), the brighter area could be tempered retained austenite.

perature or for tempering for longer time. As explained in the

F5 media: The microstructure for F5 steel shows tempered
martensite and discontinued ferrite at the boundaries indicated
by arrows in Fig. 9. As compared to B5 media sample, the F5
sample has less Chromium, which results in lower hardness, how-
ever this maybe elaborated as a result of tempering at higher tem-
above general notes, Chromium lowers eutectoid carbon, therefore
B5 media can be considered as eutectoid steel with no primary
ferrite but F5 has a pre-eutectic structure. During hardening,
austenitizing temperature has probably resulted in precipitation
of pro-eutectoid ferrite at grain boundaries.
46 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53

Fig. 6. D5 media (100
) is composed of tempered martensite, retained austenite Fig. 9. F5 media (500
) shows tempered martensite and discontinued ferrite at the
and inclusion. boundaries - see arrows.

Fig. 7. Arrows refer to the grain boundaries (100
). Fig. 10. The microstructure of F5 media (50
) shows the inclusions content.

inclusions or stringers was noticed. Such inclusions and stringers

can further contribute to lower toughness.
H5 media: Microstructure of H5 media sample is composed of
tempered lath martensite and precipitated ferrite at primary
austenite grain boundaries. This is a hypo-eutectoid steel in which
uncontrolled austenitizing treatment can result in precipitation of
ferrite at grain boundaries (Fig. 12). Furthermore, generally as tem-

Fig. 8. Microstructure of E5 media (200
).

G5 media: This steel microstructure consists of lath martensite,

retained austenite (brighter area) and ‘‘possible” inclusion islands.
No ferrite was observed in the microstructure (Fig. 11). The
martensite seems to have a classical morphology which implies
insufficient tempering. This can possibly contribute to lower
impact toughness. Further, the presence of continuous, elongated Fig. 11. The microstructure of G5 media (500
) shows the inclusions content.
 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53 47

Fig. 12. Microstructure of H5 media (200
). The arrows refer to the precipitated Fig. 14. Microstructure of J5 media (50
).
ferrite at primary austenite grain boundaries.

Fig. 13. Microstructure of I5 media (200
). Fig. 15. Microstructure of J5 media (200
).

pering process performs at higher temperature, the resulting hard-

ness can be lower and associated impact toughness can be higher. 3.2. Impact toughness
For this media sample, it seems that it has been more tempered in
comparison to the some of the other media samples tested (G5, F5, The results of Charpy tests are presented in the form of impact
B5) as the martensite plates cannot be seen in the microstructure. energies or the toughness of three locations within the steel media
This might have overruled the detrimental effect of ferrite at grain (Fig. 16, Table 5). The three locations as indicated in Fig. 1.
boundaries on impact toughness. The photos of the halves of broken CVN specimens in Fig. 17
I5 media: Microstructure is composed of tempered lath marten- show that a V-shaped ‘‘chevron” is clearly present in almost all
site and retained austenite. No ferrite was observed at primary
austenite grain boundaries (Fig. 13).
J5 media: The microstructure of J5 media sample seems to be a
cast iron (Figs. 14 and 15). The microstructure seems to consist of
primary hard, brittle cementite network at grain boundaries and
tempered martensite in the middle of grains. Obviously, the brittle
network contributed in lowering the toughness of this material.
A summary of the microstructure results can be found in
Table 4.

Table 4
Microstructure summary.

A5 B5 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 H5 I5 J5
Tempered martensite X X X X X X X X X
Untampered martensite X
Retained austenite X X X X
Ferrite present X X X X
Fig. 16. The impact energies of the Charpy tests according to the specimen location
Cementite X
within the steel media.
48 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53

fracture surfaces of the tested Charpy specimens. This V-shaped all Charpy test specimen. According to the brittle fracture criteria,
chevron marks present on the fracture surface are well known all the tested specimen fracture in a brittle manner because the
characteristic of brittle fracture (Hertzberg, 1989). The impact impact energies (toughness) of all specimens are below the brittle
energies of all the steel media (excluding A5) are independent of fracture impact energy of 20 J. It is important to note that the
location. These results reveal that the toughness is the same all Charpy impact energy is very sensitive to the carbon content (%
over the steel media. In the case of A5 toughness, the results C) in steels and carbon content above approximately 0.2% would
showed that the toughness is higher close to the media center result in a brittle fracture at room temperature (Rinebolt and
and decreases when getting closer to the surface. Harris, 1951).
In general, the study of the fracture surface of the halves of the It is interesting to note that for the two high carbon/high chro-
broken Charpy V-Notch impact specimens showed clearly that no mium content media, the fracture toughness is the lowest.
ductile fracture evidence was found on the fracture surfaces of
3.3. Abrasive wear
Table 5
Average impact toughness results. Abrasive wear was determined using a steel wheel abrasion test
A5 B5 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 H5 I5 J5 (SWAT) as described in the ASTM-G65 Standard (2015). Ottawa
Charpy [J] 8.29 4.07 1.53 4.09 5.56 3.62 2.6 4.54 4.68 1.58
foundry sand was used as the abrasive medium in all SWAT tests
to provide similar testing conditions for better comparison of the

A5 B5 C5

D5 E5 F5

G5 H5 I5

J5
Fig. 17. Halves of broken Charpy V-Notch impact specimens.
 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53 49

abrasion wear characterization of all materials under study. The
range of applied forces on the wheel in the tests was between
100.86 N to 504.3 N and the abrasion wheel rotation speed tested
was 155 rpm. The abrasion wheel speed variations were deter-
mined to be negligible under the different load conditions met in
the abrasion test. These results can be found in Figs. 18 and 19.
As is typically the case with SWAT dry abrasion results
(Radziszewski, 2009), wear increased with the increase of the
applied force (Fig. 19) until some maximum at which point the
wear tended to be independent of the applied forces. The applied
force at which this maximum occurs tends to be around 200 N
although as illustrated in Fig. 18 exceptionally the maximum wear
rate can also be found at higher applied forces. On the other hand,
the wear per unit energy results illustrated in Fig. 19 is typical for
dry testing of steel media with the SWAT (Radziszewski, 2009). It
tends to start high and decreases to some constant value as is typ-
ical of this test. Table 6 illustrates the tabulated average abrasion
mass loss values at 200 N applied force.
3.4. Hardness profile
Hardness tests for all the media included in this study were
conducted using Rockwell Hardness type C test to draw the hard-
ness profile from the center to the surface of all the media selected
for this study. The hardness profile was achieved by conducting
series tests along the center line of the steel slice used to machine
Charpy test specimens (Fig. 1). Fig. 20 presents the HRC hardness
profile of 125 mm media while Table 7 provides the average hard-
ness of each media tested.
Despite that at the surface all media have approximately the
same hardness, there appears to be 2 general populations of steels.
Population #1 defined by media D5, E5, F5, H5 show a hardness
increase from center to surface and a lower average hardness. On
the other hand, population #2 defined by media A5, B5, C5, G5,
I5, and J5 which shows little variation from center to surface.
In general, the population #1 behaviour indicates a reduced
hardenability (i.e. ability of the steel to form martensite across
the section of the steel media by quenching). Hardenability is a
result mainly of the Cr addition, although C can be influential as
well. However, it is notable that the Cr levels of population #2
are all higher than those of population #1. In population #1, the
highest Cr is 0.68 in H5 while in population #2, the lowest Cr is
0.75 in G5. Note that the lowest hardenability, as indicated by
the lowest center hardness, is E5, which has the next to the lowest
Cr level (0.63). The lowest Cr level is in F5 (0.33) but, within pop-
ulation #1; F5 has the highest C level, which may be offsetting the
low Cr level.
Based on the chemical composition it may be expected that the
media with the highest C and Cr content (C5) has the potential to
have the highest hardness and abrasive resistance values. How-
ever, as mentioned earlier, it does not belong to the same compo-
sitional family as the other steels, and the properties cannot really
be compared to the other steels. However, C5 does not have the
highest hardness.

4. Analysis

The following analysis will explore possible relationships

between:

(i) Hardness and abrasion.

(ii) Hardness and impact toughness.

Fig. 18. Dry wear versus applied force.

Fig. 20. Hardness profile for all the steel media.

Table 7
Average hardness results.

A5 B5 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 H5 I5 J5
HRC 55 57 55 50 40 47 55 45 55 55
Fig. 19. Dry wear per unit energy versus energy.

Table 6
Abrasion wear loss at 200 N load.

A5 B5 C5 D5 E5 F5 G5 H5 I5 J5
Mass loss [mg/s] 8.59 6.81 3.86 3.76 7.49 4.85 6.12 6.26 10.10 7.56
50 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53

(iii) Abrasion and impact toughness. Table 6 against media average hardness as found in Table 7,
(iv) Hardness and Cr, Mo, Ni content. indicates that this is only true for a portion of the samples
(v) Impact toughness and C content. tested as illustrated in Fig. 21. Essentially, the previously
(vi) Chemical composition and performance. mentioned population #1 shows a clear relationship
between increasing average hardness and decreasing abra-
(i) Hardness and abrasion sive wear while the remaining population #2 indicates no
According to Archard (1953), abrasion wear is inversely pro- such relationship.
portional to hardness. Based on these results and assuming that these grinding
As a result, one would expect that abrasion wear would media would not break in impact, one could expect to
decrease with increasing hardness. see most of this grinding media will show good abrasive
However, plotting the abrasion wear results as found in resistance over the diameter of the balls. However, for
D5, E5, F5, and H5 media samples, one might expect abra-
sive wear to increase as the media wears down. The corre-
lation between hardness and abrasive wear has already
Population #2 been investigated by a number researchers (Archard,
1953; Rabinowicz, 1983; Gates et al., 2008; Radziszewski,
2009). In abrasive wear, it is generally considered that
Population #1 the hardest material resists abrasion best (Sundström
et al., 2001). However some research has drawn contradict-
ing conclusions and shown that the correlation between
hardness and abrasive wear is not so clear. This contradic-
tion is due to the different operating conditions, configura-
tion parameters and types of test used (Subramanian,
1992). Moreover, this contradiction can be attributed to
the methods of hardening the material. Khrushchov and
Babichev (1964) found that the type of hardening (heat
treatment or work hardening) governs any improvement
Fig. 21. Abrasion versus average hardness. of abrasive wear resistance.
(ii) Hardness and impact toughness
It is commonly accepted that hardness is generally inversely
proportional to impact toughness; an assertion which is sup-
ported by some literature (El Fawkhry et al., 2014). Essen-
Population #2 tially, increasing hardness increases brittleness of a
material which reduces impact toughness.
However, plotting the impact toughness as illustrated by the
Population #1
Charpy V notch test results found in Table 5 against media
average hardness as found in Table 7, indicates that this is
somewhat true for a portion of the samples tested as illus-
trated in Fig. 22 while for the remainder impact toughness
seems to be independent of media hardness.
(iii) Abrasive wear and impact toughness
Generally, impact toughness should decrease with decreas-
ing abrasion wear as in the work illustrated by Emamian
(2012). In the present case, the results found in Fig. 23 indi-
cate that this is in general true for the media samples found
Fig. 22. Charpy impact energy versus average hardness. in population #1 and somewhat less apparent for the sam-
ples found in population #2.

Population #2

Population #1

Fig. 23. Abrasion wear vs Charpy impact energy.

 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53 51

(iv) Hardness and Cr, Mo, Ni content

From the literature (Bell, 2016), chemical additives such as
chromium, molybdenum, nickel can be used to increase
metal hardness. The results presented in Fig. 24 tend to
reflect the expected impact of these additives on metal hard-
ness. However, the correlations as illustrated by the R2 val-
ues are quite weak.
(v) Impact toughness and C content
It is understood that impact toughness tends to reduce as
carbon content increases (Johnson and Storey, 2008). This
tendency is confirmed by the results found for these 10
media samples as illustrated in Fig. 25.
(vi) Chemical composition and performance
Examining how one chemical component at a time affects
media toughness, hardness or abrasion values does not pro-
vide an understanding as to how the different steel media Fig. 26. Toughness versus chemical composition.
components work together to affect media performance. In
order to underline this point, consider the noise in the data
presented in Figs. 26–28 where toughness, hardness and
abrasion is plotted against the chemical composition of the
different media. These results indicate either that there is
no explicit relationship between media performance and
chemical composition or there is one but it is not a function
of one component over another but rather a function of a
number of components and their interactions and interde-
pendencies.
A review of the literature indicates that the use of chemical
composition to predict material behaviour has been
investigated in a few works (Steven and Haynes, 1956;
Andrews, 1965; Kung and Rayment, 1982; Vanderschueren
et al., 1990; Trzaska, 2013). In these works, the authors
demonstrate, how an empirical combination of chemical
composition can be used to predict some steel characteris-
tics such as hardness. Fig. 27. Average hardness versus chemical composition.
A similar model development for grinding media perfor-

Fig. 24. Abrasion wear vs Charpy impact energy.

Fig. 28. Abrasion wear versus chemical composition.

mance could be possible by leveraging the observation that

there seems to be a strong relationship between carbon con-
tent and impact toughness (Fig. 25) described in power func-
tion format such as:

Fig. 25. Charpy impact energy vs carbon content.
y ¼ Axb ð1Þ
In the case of impact toughness, ‘‘y” would be toughness in
joules, ‘‘x” would be the weight percent of carbon while A
and b would be constant determined from the trendline cor-
relation (2.8341 and 0.933 respectively).
52 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53

One could further propose that the carbon content (C) could
be corrected by the content of the other chemical compo-
nents (xi) present in a given grinding media sample. However,
as not all of the different media samples use the same chem-
ical components, the form of the correction factors would
include a reference value (xmaxi) as defined:

Y n  
xmaxi  xi ci
x¼C : ð2Þ
i¼1
xmaxi

In this proposed form of the carbon correction, zero chemical

content of a particular component would reduce to ‘‘1” (xmax/
xmax = 1). Fig. 30. Average hardness versus corrected carbon.
The reference value (xmaxi) for each chemical component was
approximated using data from the literature (Michael, 2006)
as well as the maximum values found in Tables 2 and 3.
These reference values can be found in Table 8.
Using the reference values and exponents found in Table 8
along with the chemical compositions illustrated in Tables
2 and 3, it was possible to produce the correlations found
in Figs. 29–31.
Using the resulting model, it was possible to compare the
model prediction with the measured media performance as
illustrated in Fig. 32.

Table 8
Reference values, constants and exponents used for carbon content correction. Fig. 31. Abrasion wear versus corrected carbon.

Charpy toughness Hardness Abrasion wear

A 1.0605 142.58 0.0454
b 2.194 0.672 -3.413
Chemical component Xmax i ci ci ci
Al 1.3 2.4949 0.9005 2.9986
C – – – –
Co 0.1 0.1000 0.6001 10.0098
Cr 30 0.6958 1.0061 4.9578
Cu 0.5 0.0500 0.1996 0.0100
Mn 14 0.7015 15.4788 0.5001
Mo 0.11 0.0100 0.0400 0.1999
Nb 0.1 0.0100 0.1802 1.0015
Ni 3.5 2.6908 7.5502 4.9940
P 0.05 0.0998 0.0500 0.1000
Si 2 0.0300 0.1496 0.0100
S 0.15 0.2993 0.0200 0.0300
Sn 0.1 0.0200 0.2001 0.1000
Ta 0.1 0.0500 0.0300 1.0018
Ti 0.1 1.8962 2.0030 0.3000
V 0.1 0.2001 0.8008 2.8026

Fig. 32. Comparing measured with predicted media performance.

5. Discussion

Notwithstanding these interesting results, it is important to

Fig. 29. Charpy impact toughness versus corrected carbon.
take a moment to consider the use of hardness, abrasion and
toughness as adequate metrics to predict the wear performance
of media in an industrial context.
With respect to hardness, it is a metric frequently used to com-
pare one media type to another. However, the results presented in
Fig. 21, indicate that care should be taken as two different media
may have different composition and hardness yet provide similar
wear rates at least at the lab scale.
With respect to wear by abrasion, the SWAT is one of many
abrasion type tests that could be used to quantify abrasive wear.
In addition, the SWAT has also been used to quantify abrasive wear
in steel media prediction (Chenje et al., 2009). As a result, it is an
 A. Sabih et al. / Minerals Engineering 103–104 (2017) 43–53
appropriate test to use to determine the abrasive wear characteris-
tics of steel media. On the other hand, it would be interesting to see
the correlation for abrasion as described by mass worn per unit of
energy. Furthermore, it should be noted that abrasion wear charac-
teristics do not include corrosion which in many cases has a very
important effect on wear in an industrial system.
With respect to impact toughness, the use of the Charpy test may
be controversial in the context where all samples are brittle. How-
ever, the results and associated analysis indicates that maybe there
is value in the results a Charpy V-notch test produces. Further anal-
ysis would be required especially in comparison with drop ball test
results coupled to results from industrial applications.
It is important to underline that Eqs. (1) and (2) coupled with
the constants and exponents in Table 8 are empirical relationships
and really only valid for the media used and the conditions under
which the tests were executed. Furthermore, these relationships do
not include factors that describe heat treatment which may or may
not explain some of the scatter around the trend lines. On the other
hand, these equations and particularly the correlation with media
performance metrics indicate that there may indeed be a relation-
ship between initial chemical composition and the subsequent
media performance.
6. Conclusions
The focus of this paper was to examine 125 mm diameter grind-
ing media and investigate the differences in microstructure, hard-
ness, abrasion and impact toughness of steel media from eight
different manufacturing sources. Tests results were produced for
chemical composition, microstructure, impact toughness, abrasive
wear and hardness along with some explanations related to the
results.
The main observations based on the test results and associated
analysis indicate that:
(i) Abrasive wear tends to be a function of media hardness for
media with an chromium content of less than 0.7% and inde-
pendent of hardness for media with chromium content
greater than 0.75%.
(ii) Charpy impact toughness results are strongly correlated to
carbon content that can be corrected with the chemical com-
position of the media.
(iii) Hardness and abrasion wear are somewhat correlated to the
chemical composition.
It is important to underline that heat treatment was not consid-
ered in this analysis.
Furthermore, it is well understood that these empirical models
are only valid for the media used and the testing conditions used.
And despite the shortcomings associated with empiricism, the
media performance models do indicate how such performance is a
function of the interaction and interdependencies between chemi-
cal components.
Lastly, it is important to underline that lab scale abrasion test-
ing and impact toughness testing provide some insight into the
wear performance of grinding media. However, corrosion was
not included and no effort was made to correlate the results
presented here with industrial results.
Acknowledgements
This project was initiated and completed between the years
2007 and 2012. It was supported by an undisclosed company inter-
ested in understanding better the factors affecting steel media
wear. Consequently, the authors would like to thank this company
for the support of this work.
53
Furthermore, the authors would like to thank both Metso and
Hatch for allowing us to publish and present this paper.
References
Andrews, K.W., 1965. Empirical formula for the calculation of some transformation
temperatures. J. Iron Steel Inst. 203, 721–727.
Archard, J.F., 1953. Contact and rubbing of flat surface. J. Appl. Phys. 24 (8), 981–
988.
ASM, 1985. Metals Handbook: Metallography and Microstructures, vol. 9. Matal
Park, Ohio.
ASTM B611, 2013. Standard Test Method for Determining the High Stress Abrasion
Resistance of Hard Materials. ASTM Int’l, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM E1019, 2011. Standard Test Methods for Determination of Carbon, Sulfur,
Nitrogen, and Oxygen in Steel and in Iron, Nickel, and Cobalt Alloys. ASTM Int’l,
West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM E1479, 2011. Standard Practice for Describing and Specifying Inductively-
Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectrometers. ASTM Int’l, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM E23, 2002. Standard Test Method for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic
Materials. ASTM Int’l, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM G65, 2015. Standard Test Method for Measuring Abrasion Using Dry Sand/
Rubber Wheel Apparatus. ASTM Int’l, West Conshohocken, PA.
Ballantyne, G.R., Powell, M.S., 2014. Benchmarking comminution energy
consumption for the processing of copper and gold ores. Miner. Eng. 65, 109–114.
Bell, T., 2016. Common stell alloying agents, properties and effects <http://metals.
about.com/od/metallurgy/a/The-Effect-Of-Alloying-Agents-On-Steel-
Properties.htm> (accessed July 18 2016).
Benavente, H., 2007. Correlacion empirica para estimar consumos de medios
demolienda, X Simposium de Molienda Moly-Cop.
Bond, F.C., 1963. Metal Wear in Crushing and Grinding. Allis-Chalmers Publication
07P1701.
Chenje, T., Radziszewski, P., Hewitt, D., 2009. Steel media wear: experimentation,
simulation and validation. CMP Conf., 557–572
El Fawkhry, M.K., Fathy, A.M., Eissa, M.M., 2014. New energy saving technology for
producing Hadfield steel to high gouging applications. Steel Res. Int. 85 (9999), 1–8.
Emamian, A., 2012. A study on wear resistance, hardness and impact behaviour of
carburised Fe-based powder metallurgy part for automotive applications.
Mater. Sci. Appl. 3, 519–522.
Gates, J., Dargusch, M.S., Walsh, J.J., Saad, J.R., 2008. Effect of abrasive mineral on
alloy performance in the ball mill abrasion test. Wear 5–6, 865–870.
Hertzberg, W., 1989. Deformation and Fracture Mechanics of Engineering Materials,
third ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Johnson, A.A., Storey, R.J., 2008. The effect of carbon on the Charpy V-notch ductile-
brittle transition curve. Metall. Anal. 28 (2), 1552-16.
Khrushchov, M.M., Babichev, M.A., 1964. The effect of heat treatment and work
hardening on the abrasive wear of some alloys steel, friction and wear in
machinery. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. 19, 1–15.
Kung, C.Y., Rayment, J.J., 1982. An examination of the validity of existing empirical
formulae for the calculation of Ms temperature. Metall. Trans. A Phys. Metall.
Mater. Sci. 13A, 328–331.
McIvor, R., 2015. Efficiency Metrics for Identifying and Remediating Plant Grinding
Performance Issues, SAG2015, Vancouver, 12 pages.
Michael, R.J., 2006. Chapter 14 Carbon and alloy steels. <http://engr.bd.psu.edu/
rxm61/METBD470/Lectures/CH_14_CarbonandAlloySteels.ppt> (accessed
August 7 2016).
Modin, H., Modin, S., 1973. Metallurgical Microscopy. Butterworth & Co Ltd.,
London, UK.
Nadolski, S., Klein, B., Gong, D., Davaanyam, Z., Cooper, A., 2015. Development and
application of an energy benchmarking model for mineral comminution,
SAG2015, Vancouver, 15 pages.
Rabinowicz, E., 1983. The Wear of Hard Surfaces by Soft Abrasive, Wear of
Materials. ASME, pp. 12–18.
Radziszewski, P., 2009. The steel wheel abrasion test (SWAT): a tool to study wear,
friction and ore breakage in the mining industry. In: Int’l J. on Wear, Friction and
Lub. 17th International Conference on Wear of Materials, 267, 1–4, 15 June
2009, 92–98.
Rinebolt, J.A., Harris, W.J., 1951. Effect of alloying elements on notch toughnessof
pearlitic steels. Trans. ASM 43, 1175–1214.
Steven, W., Haynes, A.G., 1956. The temperature of formation of martensite and
bainite in low-alloy steels. J. Iron Steel Inst. 183, 349–359.
Subramanian, C., 1992. Some considerations towards the design of a wear resistant
aluminum alloy. Wear 155, 193–205.
Sundström, A., Rendón, J., Olsson, M., 2001. Wear behaviour of some low alloyed
steels under combined impact/abrasion contact conditions. Wear 250 (1–12),
744–754.
Trzaska, J., 2013. Calculation of steel hardness after continuous cooling. Arch. Mater.
Sci. Eng. 61 (2), 87–92.
Vanderschueren, D., Kestens, L., Van Houtte, P., Aernoudt, E., Dilewijns, J., Meers, U.,
1990. Influence of transformation induced recrystallization on hot rolling
textures of low carbon steel sheet. Mater. Sci. Technol. 6, 1247–1259.
Vander Voort, G.F., 2007. Metallography, principles and practice. In: Material
Science and Engineering Series. ASM Int’l, McGraw-Hill, New York, 752 pages.