Understanding Ball Mill Sizing

L. G. Austin1
Department of Material Sciences, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, Pa. 16802

The implicit assumptions and interconnections between three methods of sizing ball mills are discussed. The
first method is the rate-of-production analysis in which the output of a test mill is described by the rate of
production of material of some desired percentage less than a set size per unit of mill volume; this rate is
scaled to the production mill by a function of mill diameter. The second method is the sizing-by-energy
method, in which it is assumed that the specific energy of grinding is identical between test and production
mill except for a scale factor which is a function of mill diameter. The third method is the mass-size balance,
a mill simulation method using specific rates of breakage. This is the most accurate and informative method,
but much of the data necessary for its application is not yet available. A brief comparative discussion of
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

mill power equations is also given.

Downloaded via HACETTEPE UNIV on February 16, 2024 at 08:13:32 (UTC).

The sizing of ball mills and ball milling circuits from labora-
tory grinding tests is largely a question of applying empirical
equations or factors based on accumulated experience. Dif-
ferent manufacturers use different methods, and it is difficult
to check the validity of the sizing estimates when estimates
from different sources are widely divergent. It is especially
difficult to teach mill sizing and circuit design to engineering
students because of the apparent lack of a logical engineering
foundation for the empirical equations. It is the purpose of
this communication to demonstrate this logical foundation
and to show' the inter-relations between treatments using the
concepts of specific rate-of-breakage/breakage distribution
parameters and the more empirical methods.
Definition of Problem
The problem as frequently posed is this: A feed material
of a known weight-size distribution is to be milled to a finer
product, at a desired rate of Q lb/hr; what mill size should
be used? A satisfactory product can be defined in several
ways; here we will use the simplest criteria that some weight
percentage must pass a specified size xv. As part of the
problem, the mill product may be classified into two streams,
with the coarse being returned to the feed. Is this desirable,
and if so what circulation ratio should be used?
Laboratory Tests
Grindability tests can be divided into two general cate-
gories: a standard grindability test and a scaled reproduc-
tion of actual plant conditions. The Hardgrove test used for
coal is an example of category one: Material of standard
size is ground for a standard time in a standard mill and the
fraction less than a standard size Í200 mesh) is measured and
used in a formula to give a Hardgrove grindability index
(HGI). For a given production mill, experience shows that
the tons-per-hour production of suitably fine product from a
given feed size is a rough function of the HGI. Empirical
correction factors are needed (Bogot, Andersen, 1966) to
allow for variation of feed size or desired product size. The
usefulness of this type of test obviously relies on prior accu-
1
Present address, Department of Chemical Engineering, Uni-
versity of Natal, Durban, Republic of South Africa.
mulation of empirical experience, and it is most valuable for
simple grinding applications.
In the second type of test, the material is not characterized
by a grindability index, but it is assumed that the large-scale
mill will behave in some sort of consistent relationship to the
behavior of the small mill. The effect of change of feed size,
or of return of a classified fraction, is obtained by direct
experiment. This is a more time-consuming method, and its
success still depends on the consistency of scale-up factors,
but it is inherently a more informative test and will be the
method considered here. Such tests usually try to obtain a close
duplication of conditions in the test mill to those in the pro-
duction mill, in everything except mill size. It is advanta-
geous to use as large a mill diameter as feasible considering the
expense of the test system and handling the larger quantities
of material involved for a larger mill. If the feed under in-
vestigation contains large material, a direct duplication test
requires a big enough mill diameter to handle the particle
and ball sizes involved.
Such tests can be batch, open-cycle continuous, or closed-
cycle continuous tests. Interpreted properly, all these tests
produce the same type of information. Batch tests are ex-
perimentally simpler, capable of more precise control, and
simpler to interpret than continuous tests, and the discussion
will be based principally on batch testing. For illustrative
purposes, a set of batch test data (for an 18-in. diameter mill)
are shown in Figure 1, on Rosin-Rammler coordinates, with
a starting feed less than 25 mesh in size.
Let us consider the problem of sizing a mill to produce
48,000 lb/hr of 80% less than 200 mesh, using this data.
Bulk ball filling is 40% of mill interior volume, rotation is at
70% of critical speed. The 18-in. test mill contains 25 lb/ft
length of mill, of material with a bulk density of 90.5 lb/ft3
(dry basis), giving 14.19 lb/ft3 mill volume and 15% bulk vol-
ume filling.
Method 1. Rate-of-Production Analysis
Although this type of simple, approximate analysis is quite
frequently used, it does not seem to have been formalized in
the literature or associated with a particular name. In
essence, the batch test mill can be considered as a “reactor”
which is transforming feed into product. It is assumed that

Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973 121
 proportional to mill diameter to the 0.6 power. However, the
more detailed analysis reported for the first time in this paper
(see discussion of Figure 5) is more specific: The next assump-
tion is that on going to a larger mill diameter, the specific rates
of breakage (see below) of all sizes in the mill are increased by a
constant factor above that in the test mill. It is readily
shown (Austin et al., 1967, 1971) that if this is true, the shape
of the size distributions of Figure 1 would remain unchanged
if determined for the larger mill, but the times of grinding to
reach a particular size distribution would be reduced by the
constant factor. Experimentally,

specific rate of breakage Oo e

(2)

and, hence,
r2 =
n(D2/.Di)0'6 (3)
where is the rate of production of minus xp material in the
r2
production mill. Performing a mass balance on the con-
tinuous production mill gives

(r2) (mill volume) =

(rate of <xp material out) —

(rate of <xp material in, in feed)

Figure 1. Example size distributions in batch grinding: (r2)(tZ)22L2) =
F(xp)]Q/100
-

Rosin-Rammler plots
where F{xp) is the weight percentage less than xP in the pro-
• Experimental, O Simulated duction mill feed, in the product, and Q is the output rate.
Hence, combining with Equations 1 and 3
U =
mi'P -

F(xv)](D,/D/)^ X
{ln/W/)/[P(xp,t) -

P(xP,0)] (4)
where ni taken as 0.6.
was
In the example given, Q 48,000/60 lb/min, P(xp,t)
= =

58 at t 10 min, and so on, giving L

= 8 ft for a 7-ft i.d.
=

mill. Apart from the assumptions already discussed, the

error in these calculations is that, in practice, the fraction of
mill product not used as final product is recycled to the feed.
In the calculation above, this fraction is 1 0.58 0.42,
—
=

giving a circulation ratio of 0.725. The residence time in the

production mill is W/F W/Q{1 + C); this gives 3.8 min,
=

Figure 2. Production of
—

200 mesh with grind time
the rate of production of suitable material does not vary much
with how the circuit is run, and that the test mill rate is con-
verted to production mill rate by a simple scale-up factor.
It is implicit, then, that end effects are negligible so that if
the mill length were doubled, say, the total mass in the mill
would be doubled but there would be no change in the results
of Figure 1 which are on a percentage basis. It is also im-
plicit that in a large continuous mill, the flow pattern in the
mill is near to that of plug flow. This means that feed enter-
ing the mill will flow along the mill and leave after some resi-
dence time , corresponding to batch grinding for a time .
If the mass of material being ground in a mill is W lb and the
feed rate F lb/min, =
W/F min.
The production of —200-mesh material in the test results
of Figure 1 is shown in Figure 2. The mass rate of production
of —200 mesh per unit of mill volume is
T\ =
Wl[P(xv>t) -
which is 10 min reduced by the factor (Z)/1.5)0'6. If this
returned material broke in the same manner as the original
feed, the new composite feed would produce the same rate of
<200-mesh production as before and the calculation would be
correct. However, this is obviously only a crude approxi-
mation to the truth. For this reason, it can be argued that
closed-cycle continuous tests duplicating the large-scale
plant are more valid. However, a small continuous mill
probably operates close to a fully mixed condition (Kelsall
et al., 1970), which gives a significantly different result from
a large mill operating near plug flow (see later). In addition,
it is not easy to duplicate the classification mechanisms be-
tween large- and small-scale tests.
Method 2. Sizing by Energy
The other widely used method of mill sizing is the sizing-
by-energy method, as developed and used by Gow et al.
(1934), Bond (1952, 1961), and many others. This method
assumes that the energy per ton to break a given feed to a
given product is independent of how the material is broken

P(z„,0)]/100 rZVL, (1)

where P(xp,t) is the percent less than control size, xp, at time,
t, of grinding, and Wi is the weight of material in the mill.
It has been empirically observed by many workers, in-
cluding Bond, that the rate of output per unit mill volume of
mills compared under otherwise identical conditions is roughly
except for a scale factor in mill diameter. The energy- is
measured in a test mill from power and grinding time, scaled
to the production mill diameter, and the production mill
length determined from an equation relating power to mill
length and diameter. The logical problem here is: Why-
should the energy per ton be a constant? One might well

122 Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973
 encounter milling conditions where the energy per ton is low
(thus being efficient milling on an energy basis), but the spe-
cific rate of output is also low, thus being inefficient on a capital
investment basis. Does it not matter whether the mass flow
in the mill is plug (large L/D) or fully mixed (small L/D), or
whether the classification in a closed cycle is efficient?
The several assumptions implicit in the above single as-
sumption can be demonstrated by showing that they must
include those of Method 1 discussed above, as follows. The
energy rate to rotate a tumbling ball mill can be derived from
a mechanical analysis (Rose and Sullivan, 1958), giving

m =
KpLD2·6
where p is ball density and £ is a constant for a given set of
mill conditions. Experimental confirmation (Bond, 1952,
1961) tends to give
m « (5)
KPLD2+n2
where is close to one half.
n2
In batch test such as that in the example used above, the
a
estimated time, t', to obtain a satisfactory product is

f„[ lP(xv,t) -

P(*„0)J
1

and the energy per unit weight (of suitable product produced
in £' min of grinding) is
size is concerned, there is no need to measure wii, correct it
-

F(xt) for drive losses, or any need to assume £2 Ei. The as-
=

Ei =
t'irm/Wi) =
t(mi/Wi) (6) sumptions which have to be satisfied for the “energy sizing”
£ P{xv,t) -

P(x »0)]
method to work are identical to those for the other analysis,
where mi is the energy-input rate of the test mill. For a con- and the errors and uncertainties inherent are also identical.
tinuous production mill, with an output rate of Q, going from
the same feed to the same product, Method 3. Mill Simulation by Mass-Size
Balance (MSB) Equations
E2 =
m2/Q (7)
To proceed further in a satisfying manner it is necessary
There are no valid physicochemical reasons why Ei and E2 to perform considerably more sophisticated analysis than that
should be the same (even after allowing for differences in above, and often to approach the laboratory tests from a
drive losses, etc.). However, combining Equations 5-7 different point of view. It is not possible here to detail the
gives us formulation of mill models, experimental techniques and
computational methods, nor to give historical credit to the
P(xp,t)
-

P(xv,0)1
E%/Ei (D2/D,)2+"2 (8) many people who have worked on mill simulation. The
-

F{xv) J reader is referred to reviews (Arbiter and Harris, 1965;

Substituting from the rate-of-production Equation 4, we get Luckie and Austin, 1972; Austin, 1971) and two recent
theses (Mika, 1971; Luckie, 1972) for source material. In
Ei/Ei =
(Di/D/)ni-n* (9) essence, the operation of grinding is considered in a manner
When n2 « n¡, then E2/Ei « 1. Thus the concept of a con- analogous to chemical reactors, leading to a mass-size balance
stant energy per ton (going from a set feed to a set product) for batch grinding:
arises from the facts that n2 is close to 0.5 and that the specific
rate of breakage of material is approximately proportional dWi(t)/dt
1
kJ(Bi.i ~

£i+uH(0 kiWi(t) (10)

1
to D112, giving ni n2. To obtain this result there is no i> i
need to invoke such laws as the Rittinger, Bond, or Charles.
where k} is the specific rate of breakage of size interval j;
Sizing by energy has the following steps:
Wj(t) is the fraction by weight of the material being ground
Ei =
t'imi/W) in size interval j at time t; Bit¡ is the fraction of material
broken out of size interval j which falls below the upper size
E2 =
Ei(Di/D2)”i-”2 of size interval i (size i smaller than size j), called the cumula-
m2/Q =
E2 tive breakage distribution. The size intervals are chosen in
rm/mi =
(Di/Di)2+n2(L2/Li) geometric progression (often a sieve progression), with 1
being the top size interval, 2 the second, and so forth (see
Hence Figure 1), and the nth interval covering the size range zero to
the bottom size of the n 1th interval.
—

Li =
t’Q(Di/Di)2+ni (Li/Wi) (4)
For i =
1, Equation 10 goes to
It is thus demonstrated that mi, n2 are only intermediates in
the calculation which cancel out, and the numerical result of log [itii(OM(0)] =
—kit (11)
the “energy sizing” method is identical to that of the “rate- Again, as an example of the techniques, consider the data of
of-production” analysis leading to Equation 4; as far as mill Figure 1. Figure 3 shows a plot according to Equation 11

I
(id. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973 123
 Table I. Simulation of Closed-Cycle Continuous Mill (Ideal Classification at 200 Mesh)
Mean
Circulation residence
ratio, Q/w, time, Product size distribution, % less than size
C min 1
r min Mesh—200 230 270 325 400
Feed 1 plug 4.36 0.093 2.0 100 75.9 57.2 42.8 31.9
2.74 0.089 3.0 100 79.7 62.9 49.2 38.2
1.935 0.085 4.0 100 82.7 67.6 54.7 43.9
1.13 0.078 6.0 100 87.0 74.8 63.7 53.7
0.33 0.063 12.0 100 93.7 87.0 80.2 73.3
Feed 1, fully mixed 4.85 0.085 2.0 100 80.5 64.6 51.8 41.4
3.24 0.079 3.0 100 84.0 70.5 59.0 49.3
2.43 0.073 4.0 100 86.5 74.6 64.3 55.3
1.62 0.064 6.0 100 89.7 80.3 71.7 64.0
0.81 0.046 12.0 100 93.9 88.2 82.6 77.4
Feed 2 plug 3.22 0.119 2.0 100 76.5 58.2 44.0 33.0
1.99 0.111 3.0 100 80.3 63.9 50.4 39.4
1.38 0.105 4.0 100 83.3 68.7 56.1 45.3
0.77 0.094 6.0 100 87.8 76.2 65.4 55.6
0.19 0.070 12.0 100 94.9 89.2 83.2 76.9
Feed 2, fully mixed 3.69 0.107 2.0 100 80.8 65.2 52.5 42.1
2.46 0.096 3.0 100 84.3 71.0 59.6 49.9
1.85 0.088 4.0 100 86.7 75.1 64.9 55.9
1.23 0.075 6.0 100 89.8 80.6 72.2 64.5
0.62 0.052 12.0 100 94.0 88.4 82.9 77.7

same breakage parameters as those determined from the test

results. In a real system the mill will not act as a perfect
plug flow reactor, so solution of Equation 10 for a residence
time of will not give the right answer. A somewhat more
complex equation containing residence time distributions
must be used (Meloy and Bergstrom, 1964; Luckie and
Austin, 1972). However, there is insufficient information
on residence time distributions in mills to enable them to be
predicted under varying conditions (Paulsen, 1969; Austin,
et al., 1967, 1971, 1972). In addition, solution of the circuit
equations requires that classifier parameters be known, and
again there is insufficient information on most types of classi-
fier to enable the parameters to be predicted. As an illus-
tration (Meloy and Bergstrom, 1964), however, we will
Figure 4. Output rates as a function of circulation ratio consider ideal classification at 200 mesh, and perform the
a. Plug, feed 1 c. Plug, feed 2 computations for the assumptions of either plug flow or
b. Fully mixed, feed d. Fully mixed, feed 2
1
full mixed mills. Results from a real residence time distribu-
tion will normally lie between these two extremes. Note
for the material greater than 35 mesh in size. This indicates that the computation automatically calculates and uses the
that the data follow the first-order law of breakage to a rea- real composite feed to the mill.
sonable degree. The form of the results in Figure 1 are those The computer program gives product size distributions for
reported (Austin et al., 1967, 1971) when Equation 10 is various circulation ratios, with output rates in the form of
solved using Q/W. Because it is assumed that the continuous mill will
run at the same filling conditions as the test mill, the specific
kt =
fcj_i(0.84)“ loading Wo is 14.19 lb/ft3 mill. Then mill volume is given by
Bu =
(0.84) (ttD2/4)L =
(}V/Q)Q/Wo (12)
where is the slope of the log k vs. log size plot, and ß the
a where W/Q is obtained from the computations. Table I
slope of log B vs. log size plot. Figure 1 shows the results gives the results and Figure 4 shows relative output, Q/W, as
obtained using a =
0.1, ß 2.5, ki = 0.5 min-1, and the feed
—
a function of circulation ratio C. To transform these re-
as given; simulation is reasonable with this set of parameters. sults to those expected in a larger mill, it is necessary to know
It is inherent in Equation 10 that all sizes break down at rates the variation of the specific rates of breakage of the various
irrespective of the other sizes present, so that values of k and sizes in a larger mill. It will be assumed as illustration that
B can be also used for other feeds and times. This is the they vary by a constant factor dependent on mill diameter
great advantage of this approach; once the values of the according to Equation 2, specific rates proportional to 0 .
descriptive parameters have been experimentally determined, Then Equation 12 goes to
one can simulate all other sets of conditions.
To go further requires additional information. Consider
U =
(W/Q) (Q/Wo) (4/tD22) (Di/D2)°
·6
(13)
a simple closed-cycle continuous milling system with the Alternatively, the experimental specific rates of breakage fed

124 Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973
Figure 5. Back-computed specific rates of breakage for dry
ball milling of anthracite (23.5%_ball filling; 3/4-in. steel
balls; charge filling 10.5%; \/2
size intervals; k values
plotted at top size intervals)
to the computer program can be increased by (Z)i/fl2)°·6, and
the computed values of Q/W will then be directly those for
the larger diameter, and Equation 12 used directly.
For example, a circulation ratio of 3 and a mill diameter of
7 ft would give
L =
6.5 ft, plug flow
= 7.5 ft, fully mixed
The effect of a change in feed size is precisely obtained by
recomputing with the new feed input. Table I and Figure 4
show the results obtained if the finer feed 2 shown in Figure 1
were used instead of the original feed size distribution. At
a circulation ratio of 3, the output rate of —200 mesh material
is increased by a factor of 1.31 by using the finer feed 2, and
the mill length is reduced by this factor.
Discussion
One of the major advantages of the mass-size balance tech-
nique of method 3 is that it becomes much easier to explain
the major features affecting mill output and sizing and the
assumptions made in going from laboratory tests to large-
scale predictions. The practical effects of changing mill
parameters have been known since the early work (Taggart,
1945), and the physical reasons for the effects have often been
deduced from common-sense reasoning. However, the
literature on grinding theory is exceptional in that it contains
many examples of ill-defined concepts, absurd mathematics
(Walker et ah, 1937), and physical laws which are patently7
improbable (Bond, 1952, 1961; von Rittinger, 1867) in a
ball-milling context. One difficulty, for example is that the
effect of altering mill parameters has been monitored by the
often complex sum effect on the final product, rather than the
direct effect on breakage of a given size in the mill. It is
only when the effects on rates of breakage are considered that
logical patterns become quite clear; then the results of effects
on the overall process can be readily deduced.
Figure 6. Cumulative breakage parameters for conditions of
Figure 5; plotted vs. upper size of %/ 2 intervals (difference
between the curves is not experimentally significant)
For example, Figures 5 and 6 show the values of specific
rates of breakage and breakage distribution parameters for
dry grinding of anthracite under identical filling conditions
in an 8-in. diameter mill and a 2-ft diameter mill. It is con-
cluded that the distribution of fragments from primary break-
age in the two mills is not greatly different; indeed, it is
frequently observed that these (5) values are insensitive to
mill conditions. On the other hand, the specific rates of
breakage vary with such items as particle size, ball size, mill
diameter, mill speed, and filling conditions. From the left-
hand region of Figure 5, the scale-up factor is
fc2 =
ki(D,/Di)0·6 (14)
However, it is immediately clear that the assumption of a
constant factor between the specific rates of breakage is not
correct over the whole range size; the large sizes in the small
mill do not break as rapidly as expected from the 2-ft mill
results. Scale-up from the 8-in. results using the approxi-
mate methods 1 and 2 would hence give errors. Thus, the
simple (D2/Di)0·6 scale-up factor can only be used if mill
diameters and ball diameters are such as to put all feed sizes
in the left-hand region of the plot. To our knowledge, this
is the first time the well-known D0·6 effect on mill output rate
has been traced to the effect of mill diameter on specific
rates of breakage. The maximum in the k values for a small
mill (Kelsall, et al., 1968-70) are quite logical; when the
particles are too big in relation to the force applied by the
dropping balls, they will not break properly. The same ball
diameter dropped from a greater height will produce normal
breakage. This explains why results from larger test mills
are more reliable for scaling. Figure 7 shows a first-order
plot for the 8 X 12-mesh fraction in the small ball mill; the
B values for this large size are also abnormal. This type of
result has been found consistently in small mills for many
materials. It has long been known (Coghill and Devaney,
1937), of course, that a feed containing large hard particles
needs large balls in the mill charge to give the best grinding
Ind. Eng, Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 1 2, No. 2, 1973 125

conditions. It is clear from the test results reported here
that optimum breakage of any given size depends on ball
size, mill diameter, and material. It has been shown by
Kelsall et al. (1968-70) that the specific rate of breakage of a
mixture of ball sizes is the weighted mean of the specific rates
of breakage of the individual ball sizes. Thus, if these re-
lationships were quantitatively known for given ball sizes,
it would be possible to formulate by simulation the optimum
ball charge to go from any given feed to a desired product at
the maximum rate and/or the minimum energy per ton.
This would be the answer to one of the most difficult ques-
tions of milling.
As another illustration of the ease with which data can be
interpreted, consider the set of Wk values (von Seebach,
1969, 1972) shown in Figure 8. Since A is a specific rate of
breakage, kW is the absolute rate of breakage of that size in
the mill. As first discussed by Austin and Klimpel (1964)
for a given ball loading, it is to be expected that at small values
of W, the absolute rate of breakage will increase as W is in-
creased. However, the geometrical region of collisions be-
tween balls is limited, and when this “grinding zone” is satu-
rated with material, additional material acts only as a “re-
servoir” feeding into the zone. At the saturation W, the
absolute rate of breakage will not increase and kW will be
nearly constant. Finally, at too high W the mill action be-
comes choked and kW decreases rapidly as W is further in-
creased. An interesting point emerges from the fact that
kW is constant over some range of mill filling condition. The
output rate of a mill is directly proportional to A and W, so
in the region where kW is constant the mill can operate with
different holdup weights, W, wdthout affecting the output
providing the circulation ratio remains constant. This means
126 Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973
Figure 8. Variation of absolute rate of breakage of 1 250-
1410 µ (sieve) particles with material volume and ball
density (6-in. diameter mill, 3/i-in. balls, 50% ball volume
filling): von Seebach
Figure 9. Effect of ball density on specific rate of breakage
(all other factors constant)
that a batch test at a given W0 will correctly simulate a con-
tinuous mill even when the actual Wo in the continuous mill
is somewhat different. It also means that a mill can have Wo
varying along its length, but it will behave exactly as if it
had a mean Wo evenly distributed.
The results of Figure 8 were obtained with hollow balls of
the same size and hardness, but different masses and, hence,
effective densities. Thus, geometrical factors are identical
and the only difference is the density of the ball. The result
is shown in Figure 9, indicating that specific rates of breakage
are directly proportional to ball density, all other factors
being kept constant. It is interesting to note that ball den-
sity occurs in the mill energy expression, Equation 5, as a
direct proportionality; the rate of breakage is proportional
to p, so that the time of grinding from specified feed to speci-
fied product is proportional to 1/p; the energy input is pro-
portional to p, so the energy per ton ground is independent of
p.
Rose and Sullivan (1958) analyzed the pow7er to drive a
ball mill by considering the displacement of the center of
gravity7 of the ball charge and friction between the outer balls
and the mill case. However, it seems more realistic to as-
 sume that the major power requirement of the mill is due to
the energy required to lift the balls against gravity; this
energy is converted primarily to heat when the ball drops.
From this point of view a simple analysis of mill power is as
follows. For set conditions in the mill it can be assumed that
a mean height of ball drop, h, can be defined by “mean energy

required to raise each ball « pd!h” where d is ball diameter,

p ball density. It can also be assumed that h D. For a
given percentage mill filling, the number of balls «
D2L/d3.
It can be assumed that the number of balls raised per minute
is proportional to the number present times the rpm. But
the rpm at a fraction of the critical speed is 76.6/ )1/2.
Therefore, the energy rate required to turn the mill is m
Kp(D2L/ds)(d*D)/Dli2 or
m « KpD2SL kw or hp (15)

This derivation is conceptually useful because it points out

that the energy rate to a given mill is directly proportional
to the mean number of balls raised per minute, whereas it is
to be expected that the specific rates of breakage will also Figure 10. Effect of ball filling on specific rate of breakage
be directly proportional to the number of tumbles per minute,
of anthracite (8-in. mill, -in. steel balls). U
1 1 is when =

static void space of balls is just filled by charge

and hence the rate of output is proportional to energy rate.
Thus, providing energy is being efficiently utilized in pro-
ducing free tumbling: (a) the energy per ton of output is
somewhat insensitive to changes in mill conditions, and (b) “efficiency” is defined in terms of the fraction by weight of
conditions of maximum energy input rate to a mill are close size i in feed to the classifier sent to tailings, ct, and, hence,
to the desired condition of maximum rate of production from the fraction sent to fines is 1 c4. The set of values of ct is
—

the mill. Again, these statements are empirically well known,
although they have not before been derived considering
specific breakage rates, as far as I know.
It is possible to estimate the actual effect in the mill of
dropping a given size ball from different heights. If the
specific rate of breakage of some particle size i is proportional
to the number of tumbles per unit volume per minute,
kt °c
j{D)/Din min-1
where the Z)1/2 term is due to the variation in critical speed,
and /(D) is the functional dependence of kt on mean height of
ball drop for each ball drop. Since experiment indicates
that kt is approximately proportional to D°·6, for normal
breakage,
the most valid classifier description but, unfortunately, the
manufacturers of classifiers (including such items as cy-
clones and screens) are not at the moment prepared to supply
, values as a function of throughput and size; hopefully
this information will become available in place of the usually
meaningless “classifier efficiencies” currently given.
The above discussion now puts us in a position to compare
the mass-size balance method with the Bond work index
approach (1952, 1961). The Bond method contains four
elements. First, if material of a natural size distribution is
batch ground in a test mill, it is found experimentally that
the 80% passing size in microns, xP, of the product after
grinding for time t is very approximately related to the 80%
passing size of the feed, xF, by

/(D) ce D11 (16) ,

c(4"7T,) 11,1
=

Again, for a given ball diameter, when the mass of charge

present is more than sufficient to saturate the grinding zone, where C is a constant. (A natural size distribution is defined
it is expected that the specific rates of breakage will be pro- as one resulting from crusher or mill breakage without removal
portional to the number of balls per unit mill volume, since of some portion or classification.) Equation 17 is an empiri-
the tumbles per minute are proportional to number. Figure cal observation. Since the mill power rate, m, is approxi-
10 shows this result. At high ball fillings, the material no
mately constant with time, Equation 17 can be put in terms
longer saturates the grinding zone and also the mill tumbling of an energy per unit weight , E,
action is impaired, so the values of k decrease. The similarity
between the variation of specific rates of breakage and the 10 X
mill energy rate (Rose and Sullivan, 1958; Blanc and Eck- E =
(Cmt/10 IV)
Vz,, V,Xp/
ardt, 1928; Manz, 1970) as a function of ball filling is quite
apparent. where the arbitrary value of 10 has units of µ112, or
Consider now the values of Q/W shown in Figure 4 and the
size distributions in Table I. As will always happen with 10 10
E = Wi (18)
reasonably efficient classification, the output goes up as the *\/ xp / x F.
circulation ratio is increased when the product criterion is
simply a fixed percentage below a fixed size. Note, however, where the Bond w'ork index, Wi, is thus defined as the hypo-
that the circuit product becomes coarser below 200 mesh as thetical mill energy per unit weight to go from an infinitely
C is increased. The output and the increase of output with large feed to a product of 80% passing 100 µ. Second, it is
increased circulation will be less for less efficient classifica- assumed that Equation 18 applies to continuous closed-cycle
tion. No accurate mill circuit prediction can be performed milling. Third, it is assumed that Wi « (1/D)0·2. Fourth,
without knowledge of the classifier behavior. Classifier a standard value of Wi for D 8 ft is determined from an
=

Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973 127
 for a large number of production units of different sizes
grinding the corresponding clinker to the same Blaine area.
A standard test result enables E for the large-scale units to
be immediately estimated, hence P QE, and the mill is sized =

via a power-size equation. This type of test, of course, gives

no indication of the correct milling conditions to be used.
It will be noted that every method eventually uses some
mill power-size relation. The relationship given by Rose
and Sullivan (1958) is

TEST MILL SPECIFIC ENERGY, m =

(2.8) (10-4) / )2·5 (1 + 0AaU/p)F(J) kw (19)
KWh/TON
where p is ball density in lb/ft3, and L and D
in ft, < 0.8. are

Figure 1 1. Production mill vs. test mill results for grinding of The numerical constant was determined by experiment with
cement clinkers to Blaine areas of 2700-4000 cm2/g: after a small laboratory mill and dry grinding. Expressed per ton
von Seebach (1 969) of balls at J =
0.4,

Power/ton balls =
(2.8)£>°· (1 + OAaU/p) kw/short ton
arbitrary standard test (Bond, 1952, 1961) using the empirical This can be compared with the results of Beeck (1970) from
formula production tube mills grinding cement clinker
44.5 // 10 10 \ Power/ton balls =
(4.0) )°·5 kw/short ton
vrj tw/t" (18)
Assuming U =
1,0.4 u/p =
0.1, the Rose-Sullivan equation
where Pi and Gbp are values set or measured in the test. gives
Hence, the E for a production mill of diameter D is determined Power/ton balls =
(3.1)£)°·
using Wi =
Wig(8/D ft). The production mill can then be
sized using some power-to-size relationship such as Equation Bond (1952,1961) gives, for dry grinding,
5, since m Q/E. As might be expected, there are so many Power/ton balls
—

assumptions made that a series of empirical corrections are

necessary (Bond, 1952, 1961) to cover many conditions.
(9.67) )0'4 (1 -

0.937 J)(l -

0.1/2(®-10^) kw/short ton

In the mass-size balance (MSB) method, a reasonably pre- (21)
cise simulation of the change of size distribution vs. breakage ~
J
0.7, =
0.4,
time is possible through the solution of Equation 10. This
replaces the crude approximation of Equation 17 in the Bond
Power/ton balls =
(5.9/ß01)ß°'5
method. The Bond method assumes that Equation 18 =
(4.8)£°·5 for D =
8 ft
applies irrespective of classifier efficiency, the classified and Smith (1961), on the other hand, quotes Bond’s results as
hence unnatural feed into the mill, the circulation ratio, and
the real RTD. The MSB method takes account of all these giving ( 0.7) ~

factors in the circuit solutions. The Bond method assumes Power/ton balls =
(6.16) [ °'4 (1 -

0.934 J) -

0.0324]
Wi is constant for a given mill diameter irrespective of ball kw/short ton (22)
or charge conditions. The MSB analysis shows that this is
true when the absolute rates of breakage Wk vary in exactly Smith’s own results, however, on limestone and clinker grind-
the same way as the mill energy rate, m, which is approxi- ing in production units indicate that the factor 6.16 should
be 6.9, giving for J 0.4; =

mately7 true when filling conditions are such that the mill is
in the horizontal regions in Figure 8, and the region where the
specific rate is roughly proportional to the power factor in
Figure 10. The assumption of Wi = 1/D0·2 implicitly as-
sumes that rii = 0.6 and m2 =
0.4; again, this is approxi-
mately true when the ball mill sizes are big enough to place
the mill in the left-hand region of Figure 5, but the MSB
analysis can replace the assumption with the correct scale-up
effect of ball mill diameter particle size for a given material.
Finally7, because of the nature of the Bond assumptions, the
design Equation 18 does not apply very well to the actual
Bond test, so that it is necessary to make the test a standard
test and determine Wig from an empirical equation. This
illogical position is not present in the MSB analysis.
As an example of another type of empirical sizing method,
we can consider the sizing of cement tube mills by von Seebach
(1969, 1972). This is a considerably simpler problem than
general mill sizing because the breakage properties and feed
product sizes of cement clinker are not widely variable;
therefore exceptions to an experimentally verified empirical
rule would be expected to be fewer. Figure 11 shows specific
energies of grinding of a standard size feed in a Hardgrove-
type machine fitted with a torquemeter vs. mill motor power
Power/ton balls «
(4.3) 0
for D ft
=
(3.5)D° > =
8
There appears to be agreement between the modified Smith-
Bond equation and Beeck’s results to within about 15%.
Conclusions
The major techniques for ball mill sizing have been reviewed
from the point of view of the implicit assumptions involved.
In practice, a single mill system would be designed with extra
capacity, or a large system would have an extra mill, thus
giving a margin of safety in the design calculation. The
concept that energy of grinding is determined in some logical
way by the energy of fresh surface produced or by some hypo-
thetical crack length is sterile because, besides being scien-
tifically invalid, it deflects attention from the importance of
such items as mass flow in mills, classifier efficiencies, choice
of correct ball mixtures, and ball and charge filling condi-
tions. Energy sizing methods work because mill energy is
related to the frequency and force of tumbling and rolling
actions in the mill and, hence, to rates of breakage caused by
these actions.

128 Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973
 An advantage of the mass-size balance methods of analyz-
ing milling is that the designer not only sizes the mill, but at
the same time he is forced to answer such questions concern-
ing the operating conditions as ball sizes, effect of classifier
efficiency and circulating load on output rates, and product
size distributions. The disadvantage, of course, is that at
the moment the scale-up factors for specific rates of breakage
as a function of ball, mill, and particle sizes have not
been determined for a range of materials; classifier parameters
are not available; and there is insufficient knowledge of resi-
dence time and mass transfer in mills. If one is to do the job
properly instead of lumping all effects into empirical correc-
tions factors, the appropriate experimental data must be ob-
tained.
On the other hand, the task of mill circuit simulation can
be made almost impossibly difficult by considering in ulti-
mate detail everything that affects the milling. For example,
the basic hypothesis of first-order breakage is only an approxi-
mation in many cases, and difficult nonlinear equations can
be obtained (Horst and Freeh, 1970; Mika and Fuerstenau,
1971) by considering speeds of movement and dispersion in
the mill to be different for different particle sizes. However,
if one bears in mind that current design and control methods
are based on the most simple assumptions possible, yet they
certainly work to a degree that milling circuits are built and
brought into operation as a matter of routine, then it should
be apparent that a mill circuit simulation can be useful even
if it is not exact. The next few years should see the develop-
ment of the data necessary for reasonably accurate steady-
arid unsteady-state circuit simulation. This should be aided
by the recently developed technique for computer back-
computation of k and B values for batch grinding test data
(Klimpeland Austin, 1972).
Nomenclature
Bij weight fraction of material of size j which is less
=
than the upper size of size interval i after primary breakage
d =
ball diameter
D mill internal diameter
=
E specific energy of grinding, energy per unit weight
=
f(D) functional dependence of kf on mill diameter for
=
each ball drop
F(xp) weight percentage less than size xp in production
=
mill feed
F(J) variation of mill power as a function of ball filling,
=
dimensionless (see Figure 10)
Gbp grams per revolution in Bond locked-cycle test
=
h =
mean height of ball drop
J =
fraction of mill volume filled by balls at rest
kj specific rate of breakage of material in size interval j,
= many, 1969.
time-'1
K constant for set conditions in Equations 5 and 15
=
L =
mill internal length
to energy input rate to mill
=
ni constant in “specific rate of breakage oc Z)V’
=
rig constant in “m oc Dni”
=
Pi classifying screen size in Bond locked-cycle test
= Comminution of Cement Clinker in Tube Mills,” Research
P(xp,t) weight percentage less than size xp in test mill
=
product at time t
Q =
mill circuit output rate, weight per unit time
r =
mass rate of production of material of less than size
xp per unit mill volume, e.g., lb/ft3 min
t =
grinding time
t' =
grinding time to produce desired product in test mill
U =
fraction of ball voidage filled by material being
ground
wt(t) weight fraction of material in size interval i at
=
grinding time t
W weight of material being ground
=
Wi Bond work index
=
Wig Bond work index for 8-ft diameter mill
=
Wo specific mill loading, W/mill volume
=
Xp 80% passing size of feed in Bond test, µ
=
xp 80% passing size of product, µ
=
Greek Letters
a =
slope of log k vs. log size
ß =
slope of log B vs. log size
=
mill speed as fraction of critical speed
=
desired weight percentage less than size xv
>p
p =
grinding ball density
=
mean residence time in mill, W/F
Literature Cited
Arbiter, N., Harris, C., Brit. Chem. Eng., 10, 240-7 (1965).
ASTM Designation: D 409-51, 19, 72 (1970).
Austin, L. G., Powder Technol., 5, 1-17 (1971).
Austin, L. G., Klimpel, R. R., Ind. Eng. Chem., 56, 18 (1964).
Austin, L. G., Klimpel, R. R., Beattie, A. N., Dechema Mono-
graph. Zerklein., ed. by H. Rumpf and W. Pietsch, 57, 281-
312 (1967).
Austin, L. G., Luckie, P. T., Ateya, B. G., Cem. Conor. Res., 1,
241-56 (1971).
Austin, L. G., Luckie, P. T. Klimpel, R. R., Trans. A.I.M.E.,
272 , 87-94 (1972).
Beeck, R., Zem.-Kalk-Gips, 23, 413-16 (1970).
Blanc, E. C., Eckardt, H., “Technologie der Brecher, Miihlen
und Siebvorrichtungen,” p 257, Springer Verlag, 1928.
Bogot, A., Andersen, L. G., “Combustion Engineering,” pp 16-18,
G. R. Fryling, Ed., 2nd ed., 1966.
Bond, F. C., Brit. Chem. Eng., 6, 378 (1961).
Bond, F. C., Trans. A.I.M.E., 193, 484 (1952).
Coghill, W. H., Devaney, F. D., U.S.B.M. Tech. Pub 581, pp
1-55, 1937.
Gow, A. M., Guggenheim, M., Campell, A. B., Coghill, W. H.,
Trans. A.I.M.E., 112, 24-78 (1934).
Horst, W., Freeh, E., A.I.M.E. preprint 70-3-27, 1970.
Kelsall, D., Reid, K., Restarick, C., Powder Technol., 1, 291
(1968); 2, 162 (1969); 3, 170 (1970).
Klimpel, R. R., Austin, L. G., unpublished computer program,
“Back Calculation of S and B Parameters from Batch Grind-
ing Data,” 1972.
Luckie, P. T., PhD Thesis, Pennsylvania State University, Uni-
versity Park, Pa., 1972.
Luckie, P. T., Austin, L. G., Minerals Sci Eng., 4, 24-51 (1972).
Manz, R., Zem.-Kalk-Gips, 23, 407-13 (1970).
Meloy, T. P., Bergstrom, . ., VII Intern. Mineral Proc. Con-
gress, New York, N.Y., N. Arbiter, Ed., pp 19-31, Gordon and
Breach, New York, N.Y., 1964.
Mika, T., PhD Thesis, University of California at Berkeley, 1971.
Mika, T., Fuerstenau, D., preprints 3rd European Symposium,
Zerklein., H. Rumpf and K. Schónert, Eds., 349-84, 1971.
Paulsen, H., Dr.-Ing. Thesis, Karlsruhe University, West Ger-
Rose, . E., Sullivan, R. M., “Ball, Tube and Rod Mills,” pp
69-108, Chemical Pub., New York, N.Y., 1958.
Smith, R. W., Mining Eng., 13, 390-2 (1961).
Taggart, A. F., “Handbook of Mineral Dressing,” 2nded., Wiley,
New York, N.Y., 1945.
Von Rittinger, P. R., “Lehrbuch der Aufbersitungskunde,” Ber-
lin, 1867.
Von Seebach, . M., “Effect of Vapors of Organic Liquids in the
Inst. Cement Industry, Dusseldorf, West Germany, 1969.
Von Seebach, . M., Zem.-Kalk-Gips, 25, 71-3 (1972).
Walker, W. H., Lewis, W. K., McAaams, W. H., Gilliland, E. K.,
“Principles of Chemical Engineering,” McGraw-Hill, New
York, N.Y., 1937.
Received for review December 13, 1971
Accepted August 9, 1972
Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Develop., Vol. 12, No. 2, 1973 129