USIM PAC 31 Unit Operation Model Guide

Unit Operation Model Guide
Version 3.1.1.0
Caspeo
3 avenue Claude Guillemin - BP 6009
45060 ORLEANS CEDEX 2 FRANCE
Tel: +33-238-643615
Fax: +33-238-259742
E-mail: info@caspeo.net
BRGM is the author of USIM PAC

Copyright BRGM 1986 2004, Caspeo 2004 2006
2 Unit Operation Model Guide
USIM PAC 3.1

Unit Operation Model Guide 3
TABLE OF CONTENT
Pages
1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................7
1.1 Model selection ......................................................................................................7
1.2 What is new in the model libraries?........................................................................8
New models ...........................................................................................................8
Updated models .....................................................................................................8
1 GENERAL MODELS ..............................................................................................10

1.1 Level 0 models .....................................................................................................11
Model 1 Mixer (0) ..............................................................................................11
Model 2 Solid/Liquid Separator (0) ...................................................................12
Model 3 Flow Split - % (0) .................................................................................13
Model 4 Flow Split - Flowrate (0) ......................................................................14
Model 11 Liquid Split (0) ...................................................................................15
Model 24 Splitter with a known output ..............................................................16
Model 25 Flow Split - global ..............................................................................17
Model 32 to 45 n-Output Split ...........................................................................18
Model 18 - 2-Output Split + Power.......................................................................19
Model 19 3-Output Split + Power ......................................................................20
Model 26 Flow split Cost and Energy.............................................................25
Model 5 Density Regulator (0) ..........................................................................27
Model 15 Addition Regulator for Density...........................................................28
Model 16 Feed Control .....................................................................................29
Model 6 Volumetric Regulator (0) .....................................................................30
Model 13 Reagent Concentration Regulator.....................................................31
Model 9 Density and reagent concentration regulator ......................................32
Model 14 Reagent Addition Regulator ..............................................................34
Model 22 Concentration Regulator ...................................................................36
Model 8 Feeder (0) ...........................................................................................37
Model 28 Flowrate feeder .................................................................................38
Model 27 Subpopulation to component ............................................................39
1.2 Level 1 models .....................................................................................................40
Model 12 Conveyor (1)......................................................................................40
Model 17 Pump (1)............................................................................................42
Model 23 Chemical Reactions ..........................................................................44
USIM PAC 3.1

2 COMMINUTION MODELS ......................................................................................46

2.1 Level 0 models .....................................................................................................48
Model 131 Crusher from database....................................................................48
Model 105 Gyratory crusher (0) ........................................................................52
Model 125 Symons cone crusher (0) ................................................................55
Model 101 Classifier (0A)..................................................................................57
Model 110 Classifier (0B)..................................................................................59
Model 136 Classifier (0C) .................................................................................61
Model 102 Partition curve per component ........................................................62
Model 108 Perfect classifier (0) ........................................................................63
Model 104 Mill (0A) ...........................................................................................64
Model 112 Mill (0B) ...........................................................................................65
Model 109 Perfect hydrocyclone (0) .................................................................66
Model 103 Hydrocyclone (0A)...........................................................................67
Model 111 Hydrocyclone (0B)...........................................................................69
Model 153 Screen (0) .......................................................................................71
2.2 Level 1 models .....................................................................................................72
Model 107 Jaw crusher (1) ...............................................................................72
Model 114 Screen (1A) .....................................................................................77
Model 115 Screen (1B) .....................................................................................81
Model 118 (1) Spiral classifier (1) .....................................................................85
Model 118 (2) Rake classifier (1) ......................................................................88
Model 117 Rod mill (1) ......................................................................................91
Model 116 Ball mill (1) ......................................................................................96
Model 113 Hydrocyclone (1) ...........................................................................101
Model 127 Air cyclone (1) ...............................................................................106
Model 126 Attrition cell (1) ..............................................................................111
2.3 Level 2 models ...................................................................................................113
Model 135 Crusher (2) ....................................................................................113
Model 106 (1) Cone crusher (2) ......................................................................116
Model 106 (2) Short head crusher (2) .............................................................120
Model 119 Ball mill (2) ....................................................................................121
Model 120 Rod mill (2) ....................................................................................126
Model 121 Hydrocyclone (2) ...........................................................................128
Model 129 SAG/AG mill (2).............................................................................134
Model 138 SAG/AG mill + Trommel (2) ..........................................................141
Model 128 Screen (2) .....................................................................................143
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 137 SALA Agitated Mill (2) ...................................................................146

2.4 Level 3 models ...................................................................................................151
Model 122 Ball mill (3) ....................................................................................151
Model 123 Rod mill (3) ....................................................................................156
Model 133 SAG/AG mill (3).............................................................................158
Model 132 SAG/AG mill + Trommel (3) ..........................................................163
Model 134 Pebble mill (3) ...............................................................................165
Model 130 Pebble mill + Trommel (3) .............................................................170
Model 140 Feed liberation (3) .........................................................................172
Model 139 Mill liberation (3) ............................................................................174
3 - SEPARATION MODELS .......................................................................................180

3.1 - Level 0 models ....................................................................................................181
Model 201 Gravity Separation (0) ...................................................................181
Model 202 Separator (0) .................................................................................182
Model 203 Flotation (0) ...................................................................................183
3.2 Level 1 models ...................................................................................................184
Model 204 Spiral Concentrator (1) ..................................................................184
Model 209 Jig (1) ............................................................................................191
Model 210 Shaking Table (1) ..........................................................................193
Model 205 Flotation (1) ...................................................................................195
Model 215 Thickener (1) .................................................................................197
3.3 Level 2 models ...................................................................................................200
Model 207 Conditioner (2) ..............................................................................200
Model 206 Flotation (2A).................................................................................202
Model 208 Flotation (2B).................................................................................207
Model 211 Flotation (2C) ................................................................................210
Model 216 WHIMS (2).....................................................................................214
3.3 Level 3 models ...................................................................................................216
Model 214 Column Flotation (3A) ...................................................................216
Model 213 - Column Flotation (3B) ....................................................................222
4 HYDROMETALLURGICAL MODELS ..................................................................224

Material transfer from one phase to another ...............................................................225
4.1 Level 0 models ...................................................................................................226
Model 303 Leaching (0) ..................................................................................226
Model 320 Leaching with Evaporation (0).......................................................227
Model 301 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (0A) ..........................................................228
Model 329 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (0B) ..........................................................229
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 302 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (0A) ............................................................230

Model 328 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (0B) ............................................................231
Model 307 CIC Carbon-In-Column (0) .........................................................232
Model 304 Elution (0) ......................................................................................233
Model 321 Evaporation (0)..............................................................................234
Model 308 Solvent Extraction (0) ....................................................................235
Model 309 Precipitation (0A)...........................................................................236
Model 314 Precipitation (0B)...........................................................................237
Model 325 Cementation (0).............................................................................239
Model 310 Filter-Washer (0) ...........................................................................240
Model 327 Electrolysis (0A) ............................................................................241
Model 326 Electrolysis (0B) with Cathode ......................................................242
4.2 Level 1 models ...................................................................................................243
Model 313 Leaching (1A) ................................................................................243
Model 305 Leaching (1B) ................................................................................246
Model 318 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (1A) ..........................................................248
Model 332 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (1B) ..........................................................251
Model 312 Belt Filter-Washer (1) ....................................................................267
Model 337 Solvent Extraction (1) ....................................................................271
4.3 Level 2 models ...................................................................................................276
USIM PAC 3.1

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Model selection

The selection of a model that is suited to the objectives is a key element in methodologies
based on simulation.
The basis of a simulator for a mineral processing plant consists of the process models, each
of which reproduces the behavior of the stream components within a unit operation. The
validity of the simulations or of the dimensioning depends on the accuracy with which each
model reproduces the operation of the unit it represents.
Unfortunately in mineral processing, there is no precise and universal model. The models
with the best performance are based on mathematical formulae, the parameters of which
must be estimated from experimental data.
Models of lower performance, however, have the advantage of being able to be used with
very little information.
One can therefore define several levels of models:
Level 0 models enable the user to directly specify the performance of the units. For
example the performance of a classification unit can be modeled by a partition curve
for which the user indicates the bypass, the imperfection and the d50 (cut-size). Such
models do not take into account any dimensional parameters. During the simulation,
the performance of the unit will be independent of its dimensions and the flowrate of
the material (ore, liquid, etc.) feeding it.
Level 1 models take dimensional parameters into account. They require very little
experimental data. A typical example is a ball mill model, which uses only the Bond
Work Index as experimental parameter. If no data is available, it is even possible to
estimate the Work Index. Obviously, the precision of such models is limited, but they
are easy to use.
Models of higher level are much more accurate, but they require the estimation of
some of their parameters. This estimation can be carried out:
either on the basis of experimental data obtained from the continuous
operation of the unit (level 2 models);
or from such data supplemented by information obtained from specific tests,
generally carried out in the laboratory (level 3 models).
In order to use these models most effectively, the following principal errors must be avoided:
selecting models which are unsuited to the accuracy of the available experimental
data, and/or the objectives of the simulation study;
estimating the parameters of the models on the basis of unreliable experimental data.
Each model description sheet shows:
the name of the icon;
the name of the model;
the names and default values of the visible parameters;
a brief theory of the model with relevant literature references;
the model calibration capabilities.
USIM PAC 3.1

1.2 What is new in the model libraries?
New models
Models 36 to 45 n-Output Split: new numbers of outputs from 6 to 15.

Model 26 Flow split Cost and Energy.
Model 27 Subpopulation to component.
Model 107 Jaw crusher (1): replaces the previous version of model 107 Jaw crusher (0)
merged with the model 124 Jaw crusher with fines (0), and integrates sizing capability.
Model 140 Feed liberation (3).
Model 139 Mill liberation (3).
Model 215 Thickener (1).
Model 216 WHIMS (2).
Updated models
Model 2 Solid/Liquid Separator (0): additional parameters for thickener capital cost
calculation.
Model 24 Splitter with a known output: the difference is now calculated for the whole
description, not only for the global flowrate, size distribution and composition.
Model 7 Feeder per component (0): is now obsolete and has been merged with model 8.
Model 8 Feeder (0): additional parameter for d80 per component (coming from model 7).
Model 12 Conveyor (1): capital cost calculation.
Model 107 Jaw crusher (0): replaced by the new version of model 107 Jaw crusher (1).
Model 124 Jaw crusher with fines (0): is now obsolete and has been merged with model
107 to produce a new model.
Model 125 Symons cone crusher (0): calculates power consumption.
Model 118 Spiral or Rake classifier (1): two variants are proposed: (1) devoted to Spiral
classifier and (2) devoted to Rake classifier.
Model 116 Ball mill (1): takes into account ball size factor.
Model 113 Hydrocyclone (1): displays pressure drop as output parameter and takes into
account the particle porosity.
Model 135 Crusher (2): calculates power consumption.
Model 106 Cone or Short head crusher (2): calculates power consumption and capital cost.
Two variants are proposed: (1) devoted to Cone crusher and (2) devoted to Short head
crusher.
Model 119 Ball mill (2): takes into account ball size factor.
Model 128 Screen (2): calculates capital cost.
Model 122 Ball mill (3): takes into account ball size factor and a given loading of pulp.
Model 123 Rod mill (3): takes into account a given loading of pulp.
Model 134 Pebble mill (3): calculates capital cost.
Model 130 Pebble mill + Trommel (3): calculates capital cost.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 204 Spiral Concentrator (1): capital cost calculation.

Model 209 Jig (1): capital cost calculation.
Model 210 Shaking Table (1): capital cost calculation.
Model 207 Conditioner (2): capital cost calculation.
Model 313 Leaching (1A): capital cost calculation.
Model 305 Leaching (1B): capital cost calculation.
Model 318 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (1A): capital cost calculation.
Model 332 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (1B): power consumption and capital cost calculation.
Model 306 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (1A): capital cost calculation.
Model 311 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (1B): power consumption and capital cost calculation.
Model 312 Belt Filter-Washer (1): capital cost calculation.
Model 316 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (2A): power consumption and capital cost calculation.
Model 317 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (2B): power consumption and capital cost calculation.
USIM PAC 3.1

1 GENERAL MODELS
General models allow the user to specify some setpoints (i.e. percent solids or pulp split) or
to represent some minor units on the flowsheet (tank, sump, pump...) without using a
sophisticated model.
The general models that already exist in your version of the USIM PAC software are:
mixer model: Mixer (0)
thickener and filter model: Solid/Liquid Separator (0)
splitter model: Flow Split - % (0)
Flow Split - Flowrate (0)
Liquid Split (0)
Splitter with a known output
Flow Split - Global
n-Output Split
n-Output Split + Power
Flow split Cost and Energy
regulator model: Density Regulator (0)
Addition Regulator for Density
Feed control
Volumetric Regulator (0)
Reagent Concentration Regulator
Density and reagent concentration regulator
Reagent Addition Regulator
Concentration Regulator
feeder model: Feeder (0)
Flowrate feeder
conveyor model: Conveyor (1)
pump model: Pump (1)
chemical reactor model: Chemical Reactions
Subpopulation to component
USIM PAC 3.1

1.1 Level 0 models
Model 1 Mixer (0)
Mixer No parameter One output stream
The model represents the transmission of the entry stream to the single exit stream of the
unit without any modification having been made to the flowrates or to the quality of the
different phases (particle size or composition). If there are many entry streams the sum of the
different partial flowrates is calculated and transmitted into the output stream.
This model is used to represent tanks, agitated mixing vessels, feeders, pumps, etc.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 2 Solid/Liquid Separator (0)
Two output streams:

Thickener and filter 4 parameters Output1: Pulp stream
Output 2: Water stream
# Parameter Default value

1 Percent solids of the slurry stream (mass %) 90
2 Number of thickeners in parallel 1
3 Thickener diameter (m) 10
4 Thickener drive (cable or Traction) Cable
Model focus example Model focus/Thickener/Solid-Liquid Separator 0
The model represents perfect solid/liquid separation: all the solids contained in the feed
report to the underflow (or the cake in the case of a filter), whose percent solids is specified
by the user (parameter #1). Supplementary water reports to the overflow (or filtrate in the
case of a filter).
If the percent solids of the feed is greater than that specified by the user then the flowrate of
the water stream leaving the unit will be null and the pulp stream in the underflow (or the
cake) will have the same percent solids as the feed.
Phase model requirement

The phase model must have at least one solid or ore phase and one liquid phase.
Capital cost
The capital cost calculation is made only for a thickener. The capital cost C (in Canadian
Dollar 1982) of one thickener depends on its diameter D (parameter #3) and drive
(parameter #4):
C = aD b
where:
Drive Diameter a b
Cable 4' D 46.72' 5050.7 0.7141
46.72' < D 300 2258.7 0.9235

Traction 20 D 100 3224.9 0.8060
This capital cost is updated and converted.
Ref: A.L. Mular, Mining and Mineral Processing Equipment Cost and Preliminary Capital
Cost Estimation", Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1982, vol. 25, p. 137.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 3 Flow Split - % (0)
Splitter 1 parameter Two output streams

1 Split of feed stream to output #1 (%) 50
This model represents a splitting of the feed stream into the two streams leaving the unit.
The partition is perfect: the two exit streams have the same descriptions (particle size,
composition or percent solids) but the feed flowrate is divided following the split % specified
in parameter #1.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 4 Flow Split - Flowrate (0)
Splitter 2 parameters Two output streams

1 Split of feed stream to the specified output (t/h) 200
2 Specified output number (1 or 2) 1
The value indicated in parameter #1 takes only into account the ore and solid phases. The
liquid phases are separated with the same ratio as the ore and solid phases.
The partition is perfect: the two exit streams have the same particle size and mineralogical
distributions and the same percent solids.
When the solid feedrate is smaller than the indicated flowrate (parameter #1) for the
specified output (parameter #2), all the material reports to this latter stream. When, on the
other hand, the solid feedrate is greater than the indicated flowrate, then only this flowrate
reports to the specified output, the excess reporting to the other output.
Remark
This model has been modified from the version 2.1 to be identical to the model number 10
which has been removed from the library. Files coming from previous versions are translated
to take these changes into account.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 11 Liquid Split (0)
Splitter 2 parameters Two output streams
# Parameters Default value

1 Maximum flowrate of liquid to the specified output (t/h) 0
2 Specified output number (1 or 2) 1
The value indicated in parameter #1 only takes into account the liquid phases. The other
phases all report to the stream that has not been specified in parameter #2.
The partition is perfect: the liquid in the two exit streams has the same composition.
When the liquid feedrate is smaller than the maximum flowrate specified, all the liquid reports
to the stream defined by parameter #2. When, on the opposite, the liquid feedrate is greater
than the flowrate specified, then only this flowrate reports to the output specified, the excess
reporting to the other output.

The phase model must have at least one liquid phase.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 24 Splitter with a known output

1 Number of the stream in which the data are given 0
Model focus example Model focus/Splitter/Splitter with a known output
This model represents a splitting of the feed stream into a stream with a known description
and a stream calculated as the difference between the feed and the known stream.
The number of the known stream is given by parameter #1 which is the stream number in the
flowsheet. This number must correspond to one of the two output streams.
Note
The difference is calculated for the whole description of the phase model.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 25 Flow Split - global

2 Type of data (%, t/h or m3/h) %
3 Phases concerned (All phases, Solids, Liquids or Gases) All phases
4 Split value 0
The calculated stream is identified by parameter #1, which is the stream number in the
flowsheet. This number must correspond to one of the two output streams.
The splitting is made for the desired phases as defined by parameter #3. The non-desired
phases all report to the non calculated output stream.
Parameter #4 gives the split factor according to the data type (parameter #2):
% - split factor gives the percentage of feedrate going to the calculated stream.
t/h - split factor gives the mass flowrate of the calculated stream, in metric tons per hour.
m3/h - split factor gives the volumetric flowrate of the calculated stream, in cubic meters
per hour.
For the last two data types, when the feedrate is smaller than the maximum flowrate
specified, all the phase reports to the calculated stream. When, on the opposite, the feedrate
is greater than the flowrate specified, only this flowrate reports to the calculated output
stream, the excess reporting to the other output.
Note
This model can replace the models of numbers 3, 4 and 11 by offering a more flexible use.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 32 to 45 n-Output Split
Split n-outputs 2 parameters n output streams

1 Number of outputs n
2 Split of feed (%) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Splitter/Multi Output Split
The number of outputs (parameter #1) is fixed for each model and cannot be modified. It is
available from 2 outputs (model 32) to 15 outputs (model 45).
The split factor is the percentage of each phase component of the input stream reporting to
the different outputs. The sum of the split factors of a given component may not be equal to
100 %.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 18 - 2-Output Split + Power
2-Output Splitter
5 parameters Two output streams
2-Output Plant

1 Percentage of feed in stream 1 0
2 Percentage of feed in stream 1 per component 0
3 Stream used for power calculation (Feed, Output 1 or Output 2) Feed
4 Energy consumption (GJ/t) 0
5 Calculated energy consumption (kW) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Splitter/Multi Output Split + Power
This model has two functions:

Splitting of the input stream into 2 output streams. Output #1 can be a percentage of the
different phases of the feed stream (parameter #1) or constructed from a percentage of
the different components of the different phases of the feed stream (parameter #2).
Output #2 is then the difference between the feed and the output #1.
Calculation of the energy consumption of the splitting stage. The energy consumption
(parameter #5) is calculated using the specific energy consumption (parameter #4) by
components of the different phases of the stream specified in parameter #3.
Notes
For a given phase, if the percentage of a component (parameter #2) is 0, the split
percentage used for this component is the percentage of the entire phase (parameter #1).
The calculated energy consumption is displayed as the output model parameter #5 in kW, in
the "Operating Parameters Display" in GJ/h and kW, and in the "Calculated Power
Consumption" in kW.
Use of the model

This model may be used for any type of application where a split operation can be defined by
such split percentages and where energy consumption has to be calculated. It has been
used for metal life cycle study where the different transformations (mining, metallurgy, use,
recycling and environmental return) can be modeled by this splitter and required global
energy consumption calculation (see M. Reuter).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 19 3-Output Split + Power
3-Output Splitter
7 parameters Three output streams
3-Output Plant

5 Stream used for power calculation (Feed, Out 1, Out 2 or Out 3) Feed

Splitting of the input stream into 3 output streams. Outputs #1 and #2 can be a
percentage of the different phases of the feed stream (parameter #1 and #3) or
constructed from a percentage of the different components of the different phases of the
feed stream (parameter #2 and #4). Output #3 is then the difference between the feed
and the outputs #1 and #2.
Notes
For a given phase, if the percentage of a component (parameter #2 or #4) is 0, the split
percentage used for this component is the percentage of the entire phase (parameter #1 or
#3).
Consumption" in kW.
Use of the model

USIM PAC 3.1

4-Output Splitter
9 parameters Four output streams
4-Output Plant

7 Stream used for power calculation (Feed, O 1, O 2, O 3 or O 4) Feed

Splitting of the input stream into 4 output streams. Outputs #1, #2 and #3 can be a
percentage of the different phases of the feed stream (parameter #1, #3 and #5) or
feed stream (parameter #2, #4 and #6). Output #4 is then the difference between the
feed and the outputs #1, #2 and #3.
Notes
For a given phase, if the percentage of a component (parameter #2, #4 or #6) is 0, the split
percentage used for this component is the percentage of the entire phase (parameter #1, #3
or #5).
Consumption" in kW.
Use of the model

USIM PAC 3.1

USIM PAC 3.1

5-Output Splitter
11 parameters Five output streams
5-Output Plant

9 Stream used for power calculation (Feed, O 1, O 2, O 3 or O 4) Feed

Splitting of the input stream into 5 output streams. Outputs #1, #2, #3 and #4 can be a
percentage of the different phases of the feed stream (parameter #1, #3, #5 and #7) or
feed stream (parameter #2, #4, #6 and #8). Output #5 is then the difference between the
feed and the outputs #1, #2, #3 and #4.
Notes
For a given phase, if the percentage of a component (parameter #2, #4, #6 or #8) is 0, the
split percentage used for this component is the percentage of the entire phase (parameter
#1, #3, #5 or #7).
The calculated energy consumption is displayed as the output model parameter #11 in kW,
in the "Operating Parameters Display" in GJ/h and kW, and in the "Calculated Power
Consumption" in kW.
USIM PAC 3.1

Use of the model

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 26 Flow split Cost and Energy
2-Output Splitter
2-Output Plant

2 Data type (Stream, Global, Phase, Size, Component or Size & Stream
Comp)
3 Global recovery to that stream expressed in % of feed 0
4 Recovery per phase 0
5 Recovery per size class 0
6 Recovery per component 0
7 Recovery per size class and component 0
8 Energy comsumption for feed (GJ/t) 0
9 Cost for feed (Euro/t) 0
10 Energy comsumption for output 1 (GJ/t) 0
11 Cost for output 1 (Euro/t) 0
12 Energy comsumption for output 2 (GJ/t) 0
13 Cost for output 2 (Euro/t) 0
This model has three functions:

Splitting of the input stream into 2 output streams. The stream output numbered with
parameter #1 can be, depending on the data type (parameter #2):
o Stream: no change for this output,
o Global: a percentage of the global feed stream (parameter #3),
o Phase: a percentage for each phase of the feed stream (parameter #4),
o Size: a percentage for each size class of the different phases of the feed stream
(parameter #5),
o Component: a percentage for each component of the different phases of the feed
stream (parameter #6),
o Size & Comp: a percentage for each size class and each component of the different
phases of the feed stream (parameter #7).
The other output is then the difference between the feed and the output #1.
Calculation of the energy consumption of the splitting stage. The energy consumption is
calculated using the specific energy consumption per components of the different phases
of the feed (parameter #8), the output #1 (parameter #10) and the output #2
(parameter #12).
USIM PAC 3.1

Calculation of the operating costs of the splitting stage. The operating cost are calculated
using the specific operating cost per components of the different phases of the feed
(parameter #9), the output #1 (parameter #11) and the output #2 (parameter #13).
Notes
The calculated energy consumption and operating costs are displayed in the "Operating
Parameters Display".
Use of the model

such split percentages and where energy consumption and operating costs have to be
calculated.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 5 Density Regulator (0)
Two output streams:

Regulator 1 parameter Output 1: pulp stream
Output 2: liquid stream

1 Percent solids at regulator output (%) 50
This model regulates the water flowrate leaving the regulator to adjust the percent solids of
the pulp stream leaving this unit to the value specified by the user.
Notes
If the feed density is lower than that specified by the user (pulp over-diluted in the feed
stream) then the flowrate of the water leaving the regulator will be negative, implying a
thickening of the pulp.
If the liquid phase used for regulation has been defined in the phase model with components,
the behavior of the model depends on the initial values in the water addition stream:
the water addition stream is not initialized: only the last component is added,
the water addition stream is initialized: the grades of each component remain.
Use of the model

The use of this model is recommended when, in a simulated circuit, there are models of units
which are sensitive to the feed percent solids or to the pulp flowrate, as for example the level
1 hydrocyclone model.
This model can either represent automated regulation existing in the plant or the influence of
the operator who, during his shift, modifies the settings of the water addition valves so as to
bring the water input to the required value.

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 15 Addition Regulator for Density
Three output streams:

Output 1: regulated stream
Sump-distributor-regulator 2 parameters Output 2: water addition
stream
Output 3: remaining water
stream

2 Stream number of distribution 0
Model focus example Model focus/Regulator/Addition Regulator for Density

Model focus/Distribution line/Percent solids regulation
This model regulates the percent solids of the pulp leaving the regulator (output #1) by
adding water from a distribution line.
Water distribution Output #3 Remaining water in
line the distribution line
Output #2 water added

for regulation
Pulp to be Output #1
regulated Regulated pulp
The necessary quantity of water to be added to reach the percent solids (parameter #1) is
calculated and reported to stream output #2. This quantity is picked from the water
distribution line with the same composition. The feed stream of the distribution line is given
by parameter #2. The remaining quantity is reported to output #3 and can be used by
another regulator.
Note
The water distribution line can carry solids such as remaining fines after clarification. These
solids are reported into the reactor. The percent solids of the distribution line has to be less
than the expected one.

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 16 Feed Control
Sump 11 parameters One output stream

1 Returned stream number 0
2-11 Calculated regulation flowrate (kg/h) for phase #1-10 0
Model focus example Model focus/Distribution line/Percent solids regulation
This model adjusts the quantity of utility (water, reagent, solids) to add into a distribution
line to avoid the remaining quantity in the returned stream.
In the following example, unit #3 uses the Feed Control model to calculate the minimum
quantity of fresh water to add to stream #2 to provide sufficient water for regulators #1 and
#2 and to avoid any remaining water in stream #6:
PERCENT SOLIDS REGULATION IN DISTRIBUTION LINE
Fresh water
DL return Cyclone UF
DL feeder 6
11
Feed DL
2 4
Pulp feed
Pick up 1 Pick up 2
3 5
7 8 9 10
Ball mill feed 4 Ball mill product Cyclone feed
1 2 5
12 Ball mill Cyclone

Mill regulator Cyclone regulator
Cyclone OF
The composition of the output stream is the same as the input stream.
Parameter #1 gives the number of the returned stream to be avoided.
Output parameters #2 to #11 contain the calculated phase flowrates of the output stream.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 6 Volumetric Regulator (0)
Two output streams:

Regulator 1 parameter Output 1: pulp stream

1 Pulp volumetric flowrate at regulator output (m3/h) 50
This model regulates the flowrate of the water leaving the regulator to adjust the volumetric
flowrate of the pulp stream leaving this unit to the value specified by the user.
Notes
If the volumetric flowrate of the feed is greater than that specified by the user, then the
flowrate of the water stream leaving the regulator will be negative, implying a thickening of
the pulp.
Use of the model

This model can represent the regulation of the water addition in a sump or in a tank,
according to a constant level set point. The effect of this model on the water addition is the
opposite of the effect of the density regulator: when the solids flowrate decreases, the water
addition increases, producing a dilution of the pulp.

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 13 Reagent Concentration Regulator
Two output streams:

Reagent addition 4 parameters Output 1: regulated stream
Output 2: reagent stream

1 Concentration setpoint at regulator output (g/l) 0
2 Density of the solution at regulator output 0
3 Concentrations in the regulation stream (g/l) 0
4 Density of the solution used for regulation 0
This model regulates the concentration of one component of the liquid phase leaving the
regulator by adding the reagent.
The reagent must contain the component that is to be regulated and the concentration of that
component in the regulation stream (parameter #3) must be greater than its concentration
set point at the regulator output (parameter #1).
Notes
If the densities are set to 0 in parameters #2 and #4, the model takes into account the
densities of the output and regulation streams respectively. If these densities are null, the
model takes into account the density of the sum of the input streams. If this density is null, 1
is taken. The model sends the obtained densities into their respective streams as calculated
stream density.
If the setpoints are specified for several components, only the first one is taken into account.

The phase model must have one liquid phase with components.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 9 Density and reagent concentration regulator

Output 1: pulp stream
Reagent and water addition 5 parameters

4 Concentrations in the regulation stream (g/l) 0
5 Density of the solution used for regulation 0
This model regulates the water and the reagent addition flowrates leaving the regulator to
adjust the percent solids of the pulp stream leaving this unit and the reagent concentration in
the liquid phases to the values specified by the user.
Feed stream Output stream
Reagent solution addition stream Water addition stream
Parameter #1 is used to determine the total addition of liquid that has to be done.
Parameter #2 allows the calculation of the flowrate of reagent solution. The difference
between the total flowrate to be added and the flowrate of the reagent is then provided by
pure water.
Notes
component in the regulation stream must be greater than its concentration set point at
regulator output.
If the total flowrate of liquid to be added is lower than the flowrate of reagent that should be
necessary to satisfy the concentration set point, only the percent solids set point is verified.
densities of the output and reagent regulation streams respectively. If these densities are
null, the model takes into account the density of the sum of the input streams. If this density
USIM PAC 3.1

is null, 1 is taken. The model sends the obtained densities into their respective streams as
calculated stream density.
As density of the water addition stream, the model takes into account the density of that
stream. If this density is null, the model takes into account the density of the last component
defined in the phase model. If this density is null, 1 is taken.
If a concentration setpoint is specified for several components, only the first one is taken into
account.

The phase model must have at least one solid or ore phase and one liquid phase with
components. Pure water has to be the last component in the liquid phase.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 14 Reagent Addition Regulator

Output 1: regulated stream
Sump-distributor-regulator 3 parameters Output 2: addition reagent
stream
Output 3: remaining reagent
stream

3 Stream number of reagent distribution 0
Model focus example Model focus/Regulator/Reagent addition regulator
This model regulates the concentration of one component of the liquid phase leaving the
regulator (output #1) by adding the reagent from a distribution line.
Reagent Output #3 Remaining reagent
distribution line in the distribution line
Output #2 Reagent
added for regulation
Solution to be Output #1
regulated Regulated solution
The necessary quantity of reagent to be added to reach the concentration setpoint

(parameter #1) is calculated and reported to stream output #2. This quantity is picked from
the reagent distribution line with the same composition. The feed stream of the distribution
line is given by parameter #3. The remaining quantity is reported to output #3 and can be
used by another regulator.
component in the regulation stream must be greater than its concentration set point at
regulator output (parameter #1).
Notes
If the density is set to 0 in parameter #2, the model takes into account the density of the
output stream. If this density is null, the model takes into account the density of the solution
to be regulated. If this density is null, 1 is taken. The model sends the obtained density into
the output stream as calculated stream density.
USIM PAC 3.1


The phase model must have one liquid phase with components.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 22 Concentration Regulator
Two output streams:

Reagent addition 5 parameters Output 1: regulated stream

1 Set point of component concentration (g/l) 0
2 Liquid density in output stream (kg/l) 0
3 Concentrations in addition stream (g/l) 0
4 Liquid density in addition stream (kg/l) 0
5 Negative flowrate (Unauthorized / Authorized) Unauthorized
Model focus example Model focus/Regulator/Concentration regulator
This model regulates the concentration of one critical component of the liquid phase leaving
the regulator by adding the reagent.
The reagent must contain the component that is to be regulated.
The model can be used as well to increase or to decrease the concentration of the critical
component. To increase the critical component concentration, its concentration in the
regulation stream (parameter #3) must be greater than its concentration set point at regulator
output (parameter #1). To decrease the critical component concentration, its concentration in
the regulation stream (parameter #3) must be less than its concentration set point at
regulator output (parameter #1).
Depending on the input condition, the reagent addition flowrate can be negative to reach the
objective. Parameter #5 authorizes or not negative flowrate. If it is unauthorized and the
solution needs a negative flowrate, the calculated flowrate is 0.
Notes
The model treats the liquid phases independently.
densities of the output and regulation streams respectively. If these densities are null, the
model takes into account the density of the sum of the input streams. If this density is null, 1
is taken. The model sends the obtained densities into their respective streams as calculated
stream density.

The phase model must have at least one liquid phase with components.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 8 Feeder (0)
Feeder for solids 3 parameters One output stream

1 Output d80 (m) 0
2 Output d80 per component (m) 0
3 Flowrate scaling factor 1
Model focus example Model focus/Feeder/ Feeder

the d80 specified in parameter #1 or #2 allows the user to shift the size distribution,
globally or for each component respectively, of the stream fed to the unit,
the scaling factor in parameter #3 multiplies the flowrate of all phases of the feed stream.
Note
If the parameter #1 is null, the model takes into account the d80s in the parameter #2.
If the size distribution has to remain identical to that of the feed stream, parameter #1 or #2
must be set to the real d80. The value of the d80 is easily obtained from the special points of
the size distribution curve.
Use of the model

This model may be used when the feed stream has to be changed often in the simulation
study. It is especially useful during a sensitivity analysis of a circuit by using the supervisor of
simulation.

The phase model must have at least one solid or ore phase with size classes. The model
treats also component grades per size class.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 28 Flowrate feeder
Feeder 2 parameters One output stream

1 Global flowrate (kg/s) 0
2 Phase flowrate (kg/s) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Feeder/Flowrate feeder
This model changes:

the global flowrate (sum of the different phase flowrates) using parameter #1 if it is not
null,
or the phase by phase flowrate using multiple parameter #2 if parameter #1 is null,
of the input stream and reports the change to the output stream.
The phase size distribution, composition, etc are kept.
Use of the model

This model may be used when the feed stream has to be changed often in the simulation
study. It is especially useful during a sensitivity analysis of a circuit by using the supervisor of
simulation.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 27 Subpopulation to component
Sump 1 parameter One output stream

1 Conversion matrix 0
This model allows converting the first user-defined subpopulations of any phase into
components of the same or another phase following the conversion matrix (parameter #1).
The elements of the conversion matrix are in the interval [0; 1].
Use of the model

The models dont process the user-defined subpopulations. So, if in a part of the flowsheet,
the subpopulations have to be treated as components, use this model to convert the sub-
populations into components in order to be processed by the model of a following unit
operation.
USIM PAC 3.1

1.2 Level 1 models
Model 12 Conveyor (1)
Belt conveyor 7 parameters One output stream

1 Maximum capacity (t/h) 150
2 Length of the conveyor (m) 100
3 Width of the belt (m) 0.65
4 Vertical lift (m) 10
5 Linear speed of the belt (m/s) 2
6 Friction coefficient 0.03
7 Calculated power (kW) 0
This model calculates the power consumed by the conveyor and writes a message in the
"Operating Parameters Display" if the flowrate is above the maximum capacity specified in
parameter #1.
The model does not change anything in the feed stream.
The power is calculated according to experimental formulae as the sum of three
components:
P = P1 + P2 + P3 (1)
This power (output parameter #7) is the power necessary at the headshaft. It does not take
into account the mechanical and electrical losses (generally around 20% of P).
1. power at headshaft for empty conveyor:
C f Wm (L + 50 )V
P1 = (2)
75
Wm = 0.587 l + 0.5
where:
P1 power in horsepower
Cf parameter #6, friction coefficient (typical value = 0.03)
Wm weight of the mobile parts (kg/m), linearly dependent on l

l parameter #3, belt width (cm)
L parameter #2, length of the conveyor between centers of the drums (m)
USIM PAC 3.1

V parameter #5, linear speed of the belt (m/s)
2. power at headshaft to move load horizontally:
C f (L + 50)Ft
P2 =
270
where:
Ft total flowrate of material (t/h)
3. power at headshaft to lift load vertically:

Ft H
P3 =
270
where:
H parameter #4, vertical lift (m)
Notes
This model is intended for the design and optimization of crushing circuits.
The linear speed of the belt generally varies between 1.5 and 2.5 m/s.
Equation 2 has been calculated from experimental data taken with belt widths ranging from
40 cm to 1.2 m.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a belt conveyor depends on its length L
(parameter #2) and width l (parameter #3):
C = a l3L ( ) b
where:
a b
l3L (ft4)
200 l 3 L 343000 1275.12 0.5225

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 17 Pump (1)
Pump 6 parameters One output stream

1 Number of pumps in parallel 1
2 Slurry pump factor 1
3 Head lost in piping (m) 2
4 Pump efficiency for water (%) 60
6 Total efficiency for pulp (%) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Utility/Pump
This model calculates the power consumed by the pump.

Power calculation
The power consumed by the pump is proportional to the head of slurry lost in piping
according to the formula (Kelly, E.G., Spottiswood, D.J., Introduction to mineral processing,
Ed. John Wiley and sons, 1982):
KH wQ
PW =
E
where:
Pw power consumption (W - output parameter #5)
K its value 977.1 N/m2 has been empirically established by Hicks and Edwards
(Hicks, T.G. and Edwards, T.W., Pump Application Engineering, Mc Graw-Hill,
1971)
Hw equivalent head of water (m)
Q inlet flowrate (m3/min)
E pump efficiency for slurry (% - output parameter #6)
Generally, manufacturers pump data are available for water, so they have to be adapted to
slurry. The pump efficiency is then expressed as:
E = Ew (1 K sp )
where:
Ew pump efficiency for water (parameter #4)
USIM PAC 3.1

K sp slurry pump factor (parameter #2), function of the average particle size and of the
solids specific gravity, obtained from a slurry pump factor chart (after McElvain
and Cave and issued from Kelly and Spottiswood book, p. 385)
volume fraction of solids in slurry
H
Hw =
1 K sp
where:
H total head (m) of slurry lost in piping (parameter #3)
The results of the power consumption calculation (power and total efficiency of the pump for
slurry) are also written in the "Calculated Power Consumption" and "Operating Parameters
Display" files.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 23 Chemical Reactions
Leaching tank 9 parameters One output stream

1 Number of reactions 0
2 Reaction numbers 0
3 Level of the reactions 1
4 Ratio of the reactions 100
5 Progress ratio (% of components) 100
6 Concentration of output per component (g/l) 0
7 Liquid density at the exit of the reactor (kg/dm3) 1
8 Convergence criterion 0.001
9 Maximum number of iterations 100
Model focus example Model focus/Chemical reaction
The chemical reaction model calculates the composition of the output stream after reaction
between the different components of the input stream(s).
The mathematical model takes into account the material balance for the list of the different
chemical reactions occurring. This list is described by the number of reactions (parameter
#1) and the reaction numbers (parameter #2) referring to the global list of chemical reactions
described during the phase model stage.
If there are many chemical reactions, they can be classified in different levels (parameter
#3). The level 1 reactions will first take place: their reactants (left hand side member of a
reaction) will be consumed and their products (right hand side member of a reaction) will
appear. Then the level 2 reactions will take place taking into account the remaining reactants
and appearing products from the previous level. And so on up to the last level.
The reactions can be limited following three ways:
The progress ratio (parameter #5) gives the proportion of reagent that can react.
The component concentration of output (parameter #6) gives the concentration (in g/l) of
a product after reaction. This limitation concerns components in liquid phases only.
The reaction ratio (parameter #4) gives the split factor of a reagent appearing in two (or
more) reactions of the same level.
The main parameter list box is as follows:
USIM PAC 3.1

Parameters #1 through #4 are grouped as Reactions into the same dialog box:
The reaction number is chosen through the reaction name list. To know the reaction
equation, select it and click with the right button on the name.
Notes
The global list of chemical reactions can be modified directly from the "unit of equipment"
interface through the menu item Tools / Chemical Reactions (see part B for more detailed).
The computation of the solution requires an iterative calculation, which can be controlled
using the maximum number of iterations (parameter #9) and the convergence criterion
(parameter #8). The smaller the convergence criterion, the higher the solution accuracy.
Use of the model

The chemical reaction model can be used as flash reactor where solids, liquids and gas can
coexist.

The model phase needs to contain chemical reactions. It is simpler to write chemical
reactions in molar form than in mass form. To do that, choose predefined phases as Solid
Chem or Liquid Chem that contain molecular mass properties.
USIM PAC 3.1

2 COMMINUTION MODELS
Comminution models allow the user to describe and simulate comminution circuit from
crushing to grinding to size classification..
The comminution models that already exist in your version of the USIM PAC software are:
crusher model: Crusher from database
Gyratory crusher (0)
Symons cone crusher (0)
Mill (0B)
Jaw crusher (1)
Crusher (2)
Cone crusher (2)
Short head crusher (2)
spiral and rake classifier model: Classifier (0A)
Classifier (0B)
Partition curve per component
Perfect classifier (0)
Spiral classifier (1)
Rake classifier (1)
screen model: Screen (0)
Screen (1A)
Screen (1B)
Screen (2)
air cyclone model: Classifier (0C)
Air cyclone (1)
dynamic separator model: Classifier (0C)
rod mill and ball mill model: Mill (0A)
Mill (0B)
Rod mill (1)
Ball mill (1)
Rod mill (2)
Ball mill (2)
Rod mill (3)
Ball mill (3)
Feed liberation (3)
Mill liberation (3)
autogenous mill model: Mill (0B)
USIM PAC 3.1

SAG/AG mill (2)

SAG/AG mill + trommel (2)
SAG/AG mill (3)
SAG/AG mill + trommel (3)
hydrocyclone model: Perfect hydrocyclone (0)
Hydrocyclone (0A)
Hydrocyclone (0B)
Hydrocyclone (1)
Hydrocyclone (2)
attrition cell model: Attrition cell (1)
vertical Mill model: SALA Agitated Mill (2)
pebble mill model: Pebble mill (3)
Pebble mill +trommel (3)
As in the case of the level 2 models, the level 3 models are more accurate than the
level 1 models, but they require the adjustment of some parameters of the model on the
basis of experimental data obtained from the continuous operation of the unit and from
specific tests, often carried out in the laboratory (e.g. determination of breakage matrix).
USIM PAC 3.1

2.1 Level 0 models
Model 131 Crusher from database
Crusher 20 parameters One output stream

1 Number of crushers in parallel 1
2 Closed side setting (mm) 10
3 Adjustment of capacity according to material properties 1
4 Database file name Crusher.dat
5 Order in database 1
6 Work index per component (kWh/st) 14
7 Work index for the adjustment of Bond formula (kWh/st) 0
8 Flowrate for the adjustment of Bond formula (t/h) 0
9 D80 of product for the adjustment of Bond formula (mm) 0
10 D80 of feed for the adjustment of Bond formula (mm) 0
11 Power consumed for the adjustment of Bond formula (kW) 0
12 Work index for the adjustment of Magdalinovic formula (kWh/st) 0
13 Flowrate for the adjustment of Magdalinovic formula (t/h) 0
14 D80 of product for the adjustment of Magdalinovic formula (mm) 0
15 D80 of feed for the adjustment of Magdalinovic formula (mm) 0
16 Power consumed for the adjustment of Magdalinovic formula (kW) 0
17 Calculated power - Bond - without adjustment (kW) 0
18 Calculated power - Magdalinovic - without adjustment (kW) 0
19 Calculated power - Bond - with adjustment (kW) 0
20 Calculated power - Magdalinovic - with adjustment (kW) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Crusher data base
This model allows the user to store in a database the typical output size distributions of the
crusher for each exit setting according to manufacturer's data or on-site information.
The size distribution for a given setting (parameter #2) is calculated by interpolation.
The crusher maximum capacity may also be stored in the database for each exit setting and
each feed size range. The model creates advisory messages, which can be seen in the
0perating Parameters Display especially if the crusher is not used in the proper conditions of
feed size, feed flowrate and crusher setting.
USIM PAC 3.1

Use of the model

Several sets of data may be stored in the database for several crushers. This gives an easy
way of selecting a crusher size, or type, for a specific production. To fill the database, a
specific dialog box is required:
Fields are similar and operate as those of the standard model box (see B.2.2.). The
database file name (parameter #4) is displayed and can be changed by clicking on the
associated Edit button.
The name of the selected crusher (parameter #5) is also displayed at this level. The
associated Edit button allows visualization of the crusher database:
USIM PAC 3.1

The first table gives the list of the different crushers available in the database. The selected
crusher is indicated by the check mark. The crusher names can be changed. To add new
crusher characteristics, select the menu item Crusher/Add (to add a line at the end of the
table) or Crusher/Insert (to insert a line at the active line location). The following dialog
box is displayed:
Enter the numbers of settings, %-passing and feed size classes and click on OK to display
the new crusher characteristics.
To remove a crusher, click on the corresponding name and select the menu item
Crusher/Remove.
The second table displays the characteristics of the activated crusher. To display
characteristics of one crusher, click on its name in the crusher list.
The first line gives the different settings for which there is typical output size distribution.
These size distributions are given as dX: size under which there are X% of material. The X
values are displayed in the %-passing column, the following columns giving the dX for
different settings. To add, insert or remove a setting column, select the menu item
Crusher/Exit Settings and to add, insert or remove a %-passing line, select the menu
item Crusher/%-Passing.
Data concerning maximum capacity are displayed in the last lines. Each line corresponds to
a feed size range between a minimum size (first column) and a maximum size (second
column). The other columns give the capacity, in t/h, for the corresponding feed size range
and exit setting. To add, insert or remove a feed size classes line, select the menu item
Crusher/Feed Size Classes.
Power calculation
The power consumption is calculated using the Bond formula:
1 1
P = 10 BWi Q
P F80
80
or the Magdalinovic formula:
A 1 1
P= 10W Q
P80n
i
P F80
80
Wi Bond work index of the material (parameter #6),
Q feed flowrate,
P80 d80 of the product,
F80 d80 of the feed,
B adjustment parameter of the Bond formula. Default value: 1.
USIM PAC 3.1

A adjustment parameter of the Magdalinovic formula. Default value: 105.

n adjustment parameter of the Magdalinovic formula. Default value: 0.5.
The power consumption values calculated from the previous formulas with default value for
adjustment parameters are displayed in parameters #17 and #18 and in the Calculated
Power Consumption file if it is generated during direct simulation.
It is also possible to calculate power consumption using adjusted formula. In that case the
adjustment parameters are calculated using data coming from a test: work index (parameter
#7 or #12), feed flowrate (parameter #8 or #13), product d80 (parameter #9 or #14), feed d80
(parameter #10 or #15) and the measured power consumption (parameter #11 or #16). The
adjusted Bond formula will use the first set of data and the adjusted Magdalinovic formula will
use both sets of data. The calculated values of the power consumption with adjustment are
displayed in parameters #19 and #20 and in the Calculated Power Consumption file if it is
generated during direct simulation.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 105 Gyratory crusher (0)
Cone crusher 2 parameters One output stream

2 Open side setting: OSS (mm) 0.2
3 Amount of particles larger than OSS that are broken (fraction) 0.99
4 Crusher type (Primary or Secondary) Primary
20 Capacity calculation (No, Taggart or Broman) No
21 Measured capacity for Taggart formula calibration (t/h) 0
22 Measured speed for Taggart formula calibration (rpm) 0
23 Open side setting for Taggart formula calibration (mm) 0
24 Feed opening (mm) 0
25 Pride (mm) 0
26 Crusher speed (rpm) 0
27 Discharge head diameter (mm) 0
28 Eccentric throw (mm) 0
29 Eccentric throw for Broman formula calibration (mm) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Gyratory crusher 0
USIM PAC 3.1

In this model, the shape of the particle size distribution at the output has been determined on
the basis of data taken from the reference manual of a crusher manufacturer. The particle
size distribution curve at the output is translated according to the open side setting
(parameter #3).
Power calculation
1 1
P = 10 BWi Q
P F80
80
A 1 1
P= 10W Q
P80n
i
P F80
80
Q feed flowrate,

Capacity calculation
The crusher capacity is calculated using the Taggart formula:
Q = 0.6K t Dm NOss (E G )
or the Broman formula:
Q = 3.6Dm NOss (D Oss )T cot (aK b )
Kt Adjustment parameter of the Taggart formula,
USIM PAC 3.1

Dm Real density of the ore (apparent density is 0.6 Dm ),

N Rotation speed (parameter #26),
Oss Open side setting (parameter #2),
E Feed opening (parameter #24)

G Pride (parameter #25),
D Discharge head diameter (parameter #27),
T Eccentric throw (parameter #28),
Kb Adjustment parameter of the Broman formula,
a = 25
The capacity calculation uses adjusted formula. The adjustment parameters are calculated
using measured data coming from a test: capacity (parameter #21), speed (parameter #22),
open side setting (parameter #23) and eccentric throw (parameter #29). The calculated
values of the capacity with adjustment are displayed in the Operating Parameter file if it is
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of one gyratory crusher depends on its
receiver area, i.e. its feed opening Oss (parameter #2), mantle diameter D (parameter #27)
and type (parameter #4):
C = a (Oss D )b
where:
Type Oss D (in2) a b
Primary 1650 Oss D 6540 8.971 1.414
Secondary 800 Oss D 2100 229.2 1.025
This capital cost is updated, converted, and then multiplied by the number of crushers
(parameter #1).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 125 Symons cone crusher (0)
Cone crusher 1 parameter One output stream

2 Exit setting (mm) 20
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Symons crusher 0
size distribution curve at the output is translated according to the exit setting value
(parameter #2).
Power calculation
1 1
P = 10 BWi Q
P F80
80
USIM PAC 3.1

A 1 1
P= 10Wi Q
n
P80 P F80
80
Q feed flowrate,

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 101 Classifier (0A)
Screen, spiral classifier and

rake classifier

1 Short circuit of fines (%) 10
2 Corrected cut size: d50c (mm) 0.3
3 Corrected partition curve imperfection 0.3
4 Liquid split (%) 0
5 Underflow %-solids 0
This classifier model uses Rosin-Rammler's function to represent the particle size partition
curve which expresses the proportion of each particle size class in the feed which reports to
the coarse product of the classifier, using the mean particle size in this class.
Rosin-Rammler's function is the following:
0.693* X
M
d
50 c
Y ( X ) = H + (100 H )1 e

where:
X mean size of the particles in one particle size class
Y ( X ) percentage of the class reporting to the coarse product
H short circuiting fraction (parameter #1)
d50c corrected d 50 (parameter #2), that is to say the particle size at which there is
an equal partition between the coarse and fine products, the effect of the short
circuiting fraction having been eliminated
M parameter called the "slope" which characterizes the sharpness of the
separation:
0.77
M
I
I imperfection of the corrected partition curve (parameter #3).
By definition:
(d 75c d 25c )
I=
2d 50c
USIM PAC 3.1

where d 25c and d 75c represent the particle sizes for which 25% and 75% respectively of the
particles report to the coarse product when the short circuiting fraction effect has been
eliminated.
By default, the percentage of water going to the coarse stream is the short circuit (parameter
#1). This percentage is given by the liquid split (parameter #4) if is not null. If it is null and
parameter #5 is not null, the percentage is calculated to reach the specified %-solids in
underflow.
This model can be used for vibrating screens, curved and flat screens and spiral or rake
classifiers.
Calibration of the model

The partition curve can be displayed, making it possible to estimate visually the short
circuiting fraction.
The corrected d 50c and the imperfection of Rosin-Rammler's equation can be calibrated at
the same time. Finally, the short circuiting fraction can be estimated.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 110 Classifier (0B)
Screen 3 parameters Two output streams

2 D80 of output fine stream (mm) 0.3
The corrected partition curve imperfection is given by:

(d 75c d 25c )
I=
2d 50c
As with the level 0A classifier, this model uses Rosin-Rammler's function to represent the
partition curve:
0.693* X
M
d
50 c

Y ( X ) = H + (100 H ) 1 e

The calculation of d50c is performed by an iterative method. As a first estimate, d50c is
equal to d80 given as the parameter #2. This value is used to calculate the partition
efficiency Y ( X ) for each size class. The calculation of the output streams is made, for each
class, with:
output coarse stream (X) = Y ( X ) x input stream (X)
output fine stream (X) = input stream (X) - output coarse stream (X).
The d80 of the fine stream is then calculated and the d50c is corrected proportionally to the
error:
(d80given d80calculated )

(d80given )
until the error is less than 0.1%.
The percentage of water going to the coarse stream is the short circuit (parameter #1).
This model is used for vibrating screens, curved and flat screens and spiral classifiers.
USIM PAC 3.1


The calibration is identical to level 0A classifier. The best way to calibrate the d80 of the fine
stream is, nevertheless, to plot the particle size distribution of the fine stream.
Notes
In preliminary grinding circuit design, the d80 of the fine stream defines the performance of
the circuit. Therefore, the use of this model makes such a design much easier.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 136 Classifier (0C)
Air cyclone, dynamic

classifier

1 Cut size: d50c (m) 25
2 Diameter of partition curve minimum (m) 10
3 Partition curve minimum (%) 5
4 Efficiency criteria 0.5
This classifier model uses the Lippek function (Lippek, E., & Espig, D.: Forschungsarbeiten
zur mathematischen, Modellierung von Trockenmahlangen, Freiberger Forschungsheft a
602, 1978, pp. 77-78.) to represent the partition curve. This function is typical of a partition
curve with a "fish-hook".
Lippek's function is the following:
X Dm

ln 2
d 50 c Dm
Y ( X ) = T0 + (100 T0 )1 e

where:
X geometric mean size of the particles in one particle size class
Y ( X ) percentage of the class reporting to the coarse product
T0 partition curve minimum (parameter #3)
d50c corrected cut size (parameter #1)
Dm particle size at partition curve minimum (parameter #2)
slope of the curve (parameter #4)
This model can be used for air classifiers (air cyclone, dynamic classifier, etc.)
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 102 Partition curve per component

2 Corrected cut size: d50c (mm) 0.3
The theory of this model is identical to that of classifier 0A (Model 101), except that the
parameters are defined for each component of the ore and solid phases.

For each component:
circuiting fraction (corresponding to the lowest point or to an asymptotic value to the null
size).
The corrected d 50 c and the slope of Rosin-Rammler's equation can be calibrated at the
same time. Finally, the short circuiting fraction can be estimated.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 108 Perfect classifier (0)
Screen, spiral classifier and

rake classifier

1 Separation cut-size (mm) 3
2 Percent solids in the coarse stream (%) 95
This model is used to simulate a perfect classification without any short circuit or
imperfection. All particles coarser than the cut size (parameter #1) report to the coarse
stream. All the finer particles report to the fine stream.
The water split is given by the percent solids in the coarse stream (parameter #2).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 104 Mill (0A)
Rod mill and Ball mill 3 parameters One output stream

1 Product particle size distribution slope (fixed or calculated) Calculated
2 Slope of the Rosin-Rammler distribution, if fixed 1.2
3 d80 at the mill discharge (mm) 1
This model represents the mill discharge particle size distribution by a Rosin-Rammler
straight line where the user specifies the d80 (parameter #3). The user may also specify the
slope of this line (parameter #2): he must then select "Fixed" for parameter #1 to indicate to
the model that the slope is fixed.
If not, that is to say if parameter #1 is "Calculated", the model will not take into account the
value of parameter #2 and will calculate the slope of the Rosin-Rammler line which, by
regression, is nearest to the feed particle size distribution.
Then the model will set the discharge slope at the value it has found for the feed.
A Rosin-Rammler straight line expresses the cumulative rejects of a particle size distribution
as a function of particle size using the following equation:
M
X

R( X ) = e X0
where:
R( X ) proportion of particles coarser than X
M coefficient called the Rosin-Rammler slope

X0 particle size such that: R(X0) = 0.3679

The parameters to be calibrated are the "Slope of the Rosin-Rammler distribution if fixed"
and "d80 at the mill discharge (mm)". You must fix the slope of the distribution at the
discharge (parameter #1 = Fixed) so that the adjustment of the distribution is taken into
account.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 112 Mill (0B)
Jaw crusher, cone crusher,

rod mill, ball mill, 2 parameters One output stream
autogenous mill

1 Size distribution (Cumulative passing, individual fractions or Individual
cumulative retained)
2 Percentage per size class and component (%) 0
This model can be used to define the size distribution at the output of a comminution unit
operation (crushers, grinding mills). It allows the description of the size distribution of each
particle type.
Notes
The model does not check if the size distribution of the output is coarser than the input.
If the size distribution is given as cumulative % passing, the passing at the first size must be
100%.
If the size distribution is given as cumulative % retained, there must be 0% retained at the
first size.
If the size distribution is given as individual fractions, the sum must be 100%.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 109 Perfect hydrocyclone (0)
Hydrocyclone 2 parameters Two output streams

1 Separation cut-size (mm) 0.1
2 Underflow percent solids (%) 40
This model is used to simulate a perfect cyclone classification without any short circuit or
imperfection. All particles coarser than the cut size (parameter #1) report to the underflow. All
the finer particles report to the overflow.
The water split is given by the percent solids in the underflow (parameter #2).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 103 Hydrocyclone (0A)

2 Corrected cut size: d50 c (mm) 0.07
This hydrocyclone model uses Rosin-Rammler's function to represent the particle size
partition curve which expresses the proportion of each particle size class in the feed which
reports to the underflow of the hydrocyclone, using the mean particle size in this class.
Rosin-Rammler's function is the following:
0.693* X
M
d
50 c

Y ( X ) = H + (100 H ) 1 e

where:
X mean size of the particles in one particle size class
Y ( X ) percentage of the class reporting to the underflow
H short circuiting fraction (parameter #1)
d50c corrected d 50 (parameter #2), that is to say the particle size at which there is
an equal partition between the underflow and the overflow, the effect of the
short circuiting fraction having been eliminated
M parameter called the "slope" which characterizes the sharpness of the
separation:
0.77
M
I
I imperfection of the corrected partition curve (parameter #3).
By definition:
(d 75c d 25c )
I=
2d 50c
USIM PAC 3.1

where d 25c and d 75c represent the particle sizes for which 25% and 75% respectively of the
particles report to the underflow when the short circuiting fraction effect has been eliminated.
By default, the percentage of water going to the coarse stream is the short circuit (parameter
#1). This percentage is given by the liquid split (parameter #4) if is not null. If it is null and
parameter #5 is not null, the percentage is calculated to reach the specified %-solids in
underflow.

circuiting fraction.
The corrected d 50c and the imperfection of Rosin-Rammler's equation can be calibrated at
the same time. Finally, the short circuiting fraction can be estimated.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 111 Hydrocyclone (0B)

2 d80 of output fine stream (mm) 0.07
The corrected partition curve imperfection is given by:

(d 75c d 25c )
I=
2d 50c
As with the level 0A hydrocyclone, this model uses Rosin-Rammler's function to represent
the partition curve:
0.693* X
M
d
50 c

Y ( X ) = H + (100 H ) 1 e

The calculation of d50c is performed by an iterative method. As a first estimate, d50c is
equal to d80 given as parameter #2. This value is used to calculate the partition efficiency
Y (X ) for each size class. The calculation of the output streams is made, for each class,
with:
output coarse stream (X) = Y ( X ) x input stream (X)
output fine stream (X) = input stream (X) - output coarse stream (X).
The d80 of the fine stream is then calculated and the d50c is corrected proportionally to the
error:
(d80given d80calculated )

(d80given )
until the error is less than 0.1%.
The percentage of water going to the underflow is the short circuit (parameter #1).
USIM PAC 3.1


The calibration is identical to level 0A screen. The best way to calibrate the d80 of the fine
stream is, nevertheless, to plot the particle size distribution of the fine stream.
Notes
In preliminary grinding circuit design, the d80 of the fine stream defines the performance of
the circuit. Therefore, the use of this model makes such a design much easier.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 153 Screen (0)

1 Screen openings (mm) 2
2 Efficiency (%) 90
Model focus example Model focus/Screen/Screen 0
The partition curve used for this model has the following shape:
Y(X)
100
0
dmin SO X
SO Screen opening (parameter #1).
S Short circuit of fines (parameter #3).
dmin Size under which particles are considered fines.
Y ( X ) = S for X d min
log X log d min
Y ( X ) = S + (100 S ) for d min < X < SO
log SO log d min
Y ( X ) = 100 for X SO
The value of dmin is chosen to reach the given efficiency (parameter #2).
The water split is calculated to obtain the desired percent solids in the coarse stream
(parameter #4).
USIM PAC 3.1

2.2 Level 1 models
Model 107 Jaw crusher (1)
Jaw crusher 1 parameter One output stream

2 Exit setting (mm) 50
3 Production of fines (No or Yes) No
19 Inner width (m) 1
20 Gape (m) 0.8
21 Jaw throw (mm) 26
22 Running speed (rpm) 240
23 Crusher type (Unknown, Single toggle or Double toggle) Unknown
24 Jaw surface type (Unknown, Smooth or Grooved) Unknown
25 Feed type (Unknown, Screened or Non screened) Unknown
26 Fine particle hymidity (%) 4
27 Calibration using test data (No or Yes) No
28 Measured capacity of test (t/h) 0
29 Exit setting of test (mm) 0
30 Jaw throw of test (mm) 0
USIM PAC 3.1

31 Running speed of test (rpm) 0

32 Feed type of test (Unknown, Screened or Non screened) Unknown
33 Fine particle humidity of test (%) 0
34 Maximum particle size of test feed (mm) 0
35 Percentage of use relatively to capacity 0
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Jaw crusher 1
size distribution curve at the output is translated according to the exit setting value
(parameter #2).
Two different shapes are proposed depending on parameter #3: without or with production of
fine particles.
Power calculation
1 1
P = 10 BWi Q
P F80
80
A 1 1
P= 10Wi Q
n
P80 P F80
80
Q feed flowrate,

USIM PAC 3.1

The Bond index Wi is an expression of grindability since the index is a measure of power
consumption by a material comminuted between two size ranges. A method of determining
this index for crushing is the Bond impact test (Lowrison, G.C., Crushing and Grinding,
Butterworth Ed., pp. 57-60):
Two equal hammers weighing m = 30 lb are arranged so that they can strike simultaneous
blows on opposite sides of a test piece. The pieces used are of minus 3 and plus 2. During
the test, a piece of thickness t and density is located with its smallest dimension (d)
between the hammers. The hammers are raised to a known height and dropped so that they
hit the piece. The hammer is raised to a greater height and a succession of tests is made
until the piece breaks (height H). Ten samples are tested and the results averaged. The
impact crushing strength and Bond work index are calculated:
2mH 2.59 I
I= Wi =
td
Capacity calculation
The crusher capacity is calculated using a formula derived by Ch. Bouch (BRGM report)
from the formulae proposed by K. Gauldie (Engineering, Lond., 176 (1953), 456; 177 (1954),
557), H.E. Rose & J.E. English (Theoretical analysis of jaw crushers, Trans. IMM C32,
London, 1967), P. Angelier (Concasseurs mchoires, Mines et Carrires, n de janvier et
fvrier 1985) and D.H. Gieskieng (Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Metall. Eng., 184 (1949), 239; 187
(1950), 568):
R T
Qc = 60 K 0 K1 K 2 K 3 K 4 K 5 K 6 K 7T LDm C ss + N C
R 1 2
K0 Adjustment parameter calculated using test data (1 if the parameter #27 is set to
No);
2

b
K1 = a + Gieskieng coefficient depending on feed coarse size dM ,
d
ln M
G
feed size distribution type (parameter #25), gape G and crusher type
(parameter #23);
K2 Gieskieng coefficient depending on the jaw type (parameter #24);
K3 Gieskieng coefficient depending on feed size distribution type (parameter #25);

T
90
K 4 = 1 + 10.9e G Rose & English coefficient relative to the ratio between throw
and gape;
USIM PAC 3.1

b
K5 = a + d
Rose & English coefficient relative to material
d d 05
1 + 95
cd 50
packing;
1
K6 = 1 ( 1) Angelier coefficient relative to the influence of %-humidity in
12
the fine particles (parameter #26);
N NC
K7 = if N Nc and K7 = if N > N c Rose & English coefficient
NC N
relative to the crusher speed N (parameter #22);
T Jaws throw in m (parameter #21); if this parameter is 0, the throw is calculated
from the gape value: T = 0.05G 0.85 ;
G
R= Reduction ratio;
C ss
C ss Exit setting in m (parameter #2);
G Gape in m (parameter #20);

L Inner width in m (parameter #19);
Dm Real density of the ore;
R 1
N C = 46.93 Critical rotation speed in rpm;
TR
N Rotation speed (parameter #22).
The capacity calculation uses adjusted formula. The adjustment parameters are calculated
using measured data coming from a test: capacity (parameter #28), speed (parameter #31),
exit setting (parameter #29), jaws throw (parameter #30), feed type (parameter #32), fine
particle humidity (parameter #33) and coarse particle size (parameter #34). The calculated
values of the capacity with adjustment are displayed in the Operating Parameter file if it is
The percentage of use (parameter #35) is then calculated as the ratio, expressed in %,
between the current flowrate per crusher and the calculated capacity.
Use of the model

Used in direct simulation, the model calculates the output size distribution and the power
consumption.
Used in unit sizing, the model calculate the percentage of use. The user can then choose the
desired number of crushers in parallel (parameter #1), their widths (parameter #19) and
speed (parameter #22) which give a percentage of use close to the desired one.
The gape (parameter #20) can be chosen such as G 0.9d M .
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a jaw crusher depends on its area of feed
opening, i.e. on its width L (parameter #19) and its gape G (parameter #20):
C = a (LG )b
where:
LG (in2) a b
12 LG 786 2863 0.4921
786 < LG 5544 36.72 1.145

Remark
This model has been modified from the version 3.0 to include features of the model number
124, which has been removed from the library, and power and capacity calculation
capabilities. Files coming from previous versions are translated to take these changes into
account.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 114 Screen (1A)

1 Number of screens in parallel 1
3 Wire width (mm) 1.5
4 Screen width (m) 2
5 Length / width ratio 1.5
6 Loading parameter 1
7 Efficiency parameter 6.8
9 Volumetric Flowrate (Solid or Pulp) Solid
10 Fine bypass (Splitted water, Retained water or Independent) Splitted water
11 Solid percent in retained stream 90
12 Screen type (DSM, Stationary or Vibrating) DSM
13 Radius (for DSM) (5 ft 1 inch or 2 ft 6 inch) 5 ft 1 inch
14 Steel (for stationary) (Stainless or Carbon) Stainless
15 Deck (for vibrating) (Single, Double or Triple) Single
Model focus example Model focus/Screen/Screen 1A
This model uses the computation of the elementary probability that a particle of a given size
will pass through the meshes of a screen.
The surface area of the screen may be considered as the juxtaposition of elementary
openings. If one considers that, when the length of an opening is greater than its width (Oc)
the effect of the length of the opening on the probability that a particle of size d will pass
through it may be neglected, this probability will be:
Oc d
when d < Oc,
Oc + I B
0 when d > Oc
Where:
Oc screen openings (parameter #2)
IB width of the wires (parameter #3)
d particle diameter.
USIM PAC 3.1

Consequently, the probability P that a particle will remain in the oversize after one contact
with the screen is given by:
Oc d
P =1 when d < Oc
Oc + I B
Then the probability for a particle not to pass through the screen after N attempts:
N
N O d
PN = P = 1 c
Oc + I B
As N is large:
O d NOc d
PN exp N c = exp
O
1
Oc + I B Oc + I B c
N Oc
The term is the separation strength considered by VALLIANT.
Oc + I B
N, mean number of contacts which the particles make with the screen whilst passing over it,
is computed with an empirical function:
E.L
N= 2
C.Q
1 +
l
c.O
where:
L screen length
l screen width (parameter #4)
Q volumetric solid feedrate if parameter #9 is Solid or volumetric pulp feedrate if
parameter #9 is Pulp.
E efficiency parameter, equivalent in the case of a very lightly loaded screen to the
mean number of contacts per unit length of the screen (N/L) (parameter #7)
C loading coefficient which can only be determined, for a given screen and level, on
the basis of knowledge of at least two different operating conditions of the screen
at different feed rates (parameter #6).
The mean number of contacts is assumed to be independent of the particle size.
The size partition function is then given by:

Y (d ) = S + (1 S )PN (d )
where S is the short circuit (or bypass) of fine particles.
USIM PAC 3.1

There are three methods to calculate the water split and the short circuit of fine particles
depending on the parameter #10:
1. Short circuit of fines is given by parameter #8 and water splitting is equal to the short
circuit.
2. Water splitting is calculated to achieve the solid percent in the retained stream given
by parameter #11. The short circuit of fines is equal to the water splitting.
3. Short circuit of fines is given by parameter #8 and water splitting is calculated
independanly to achieve the solid percent in the retained stream given by parameter
#11.
Structure and use of the model

This model does not account for the water flowrate when computing the performance
of the screen. It does not therefore reproduce the favorable or unfavorable effects of any
variations in the feed percent solids on the screen efficiency when carrying out wet
screening.
The adjustment parameters can vary considerably from one case to another during
calibration. This arises from major differences in the behavior of ores, depending on their
higher or lower clay contents, their 'stickiness' and so on, to which must also be added the
differences linked with operating under wet or dry conditions and the characteristics of the
plant, since neither the angle of inclination of the screen nor the frequency of vibration of a
vibratory screen are taken into account in the model. It is therefore recommended that
calibration be carried out on adjustment parameters 6 and 7 of the model whenever this is
possible or, failing this, to use the model with care, paying attention to the probability of the
simulated performance as a function of one's knowledge of the ore involved.
Parameters #12 to #15 are used for capital cost estimation.
Note
The initial hypothesis used in computing the elementary probability, according to which the
length of an opening must be larger than its width, practically does not exclude the use of the
model to represent a screen with square openings provided that calibration has been carried
out.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a screen depends on its type
(parameter #12):
DSM curved screen:
C depends on the screen radius (parameter #13) and width l (parameter #4):
C = al b
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
Radius Width (in) a b
5 ft 1 in 1 l 2.11 3079 0.1452
2.11 < l 8 1911.4 0.7826

2 ft 6 in 1 l 3.64 2329.8 0.2857
3.64 < l 8 1062.2 0.8931

Stationary screen:
C depends on the screen steel (parameter #14), length L (parameter #5) and width l
(parameter #4):
( )
C = a l2L
b
where:
Steel a b
l2L (in3)
Stainless
10 l 2 L 63.19 2822.7 0.2135
63.19 l 2 L 162 1374.5 0.3870
Carbon
10 l 2 L 65.77 2465.9 0.2035
65.77 l 2 L 162 689.33 0.5079
Vibrating screen:
C depends on the screen number of decks (parameter #15), length L (parameter #5) and
width l (parameter #4):
( )
C = a l2L
b
where:
Deck a b
l2L (in3)
Single
11 l 2 L 1536 2141.3 0.4069
Double
11 l 2 L 1536 2280.4 0.4256
Triple
54 l 2 L 1536 1862.4 0.4908
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 115 Screen (1B)

3 Length/width ratio 1.5
4 Minimum screen opening (mm) 2
5 Screen wire diameter (mm) or 0 for slotted or non-square openings 2
6 Angle of screen from horizontal (degree) 10
8 Position of screen in multiple deck screen Top
9 Adjustment of cut-size (d50) 1
10 Adjustment of imperfection 1
11 Adjustment of bypass fraction 1
12 To be calculated (Efficiency or Screen area) Efficiency
13 Efficiency (%) 0
14 Screen area (m2) 0
18 Deck (for vibrating) Single
Model focus example Model focus/Screen/Screen 1B
The model is based upon the work of Karra (V.K. Karra, "Development of a model for
predicting the screening performance of a vibrating screen", CIM Bulletin, April 1979, pp.
167-171).
The model basically relates the d50c empirically to the major equipment and feed stream
parameters. A partition curve is used to describe the solid-solid separation and parameter
# 7 is used for the water split.
The model has been slightly modified (water split, bypass of fines and calibration) by
L.R. Plitt at BRGM in 1990.
The d50c is expressed as follows:
USIM PAC 3.1

0.148
Tu
d 50c = ht S
A.B.C.D.E.F .G

where:
ht through fall aperture of a square mesh screen (m)
ht = (h + d ) cos d
angle of the screen with the horizontal (degree)
h opening of the screen (m)
d wire diameter (m)
Tu theoretical undersize tonnage (t/h)
S screening area (m2)
A nominal screen capacity per unit area of screen
B oversize correction factor
C half-size correction factor
D deck location factor
E wet screening factor
F density factor
G near-size factor

The water split is given by parameter #7 and, by default, the bypass of fine particles to the
coarse stream relates directly to this split. The third adjustment parameter (parameter #11)
allows the user to calibrate this bypass to a realistic value.
The two other adjustment parameters (parameters #9 and #10) allow the user to calibrate the
d50c (cut-size) and the imperfection of the partition curve.
By default, you know the screen width (parameter #2) and length/width ratio (parameter #3),
then area (output parameter #14), and the model generates the output size distributions
according to the partition curve characteristics. The efficiency is then calculated and
displayed in parameter #13 and in the Operating Parameters Display file.
Efficiency (%) = quantity of passing material / quantity of material finer than screen opening.
It is also possible to calculate the screen area for a given efficiency. In that case, choose
"Screen area" for parameter #12 and enter the expected efficiency in parameter #13. The
area will be calculated (parameter #14) as the screen width (parameter #2) keeping the
length/width ratio.
Parameters #15 to #18 are used for capital cost estimation.
Note
This model is valid only for a screen opening larger than 1mm.
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
(parameter #15):
DSM curved screen:
C = al b
where:
5 ft 1 in 1 l 2.11 3079 0.1452
2.11 < l 8 1911.4 0.7826

2 ft 6 in 1 l 3.64 2329.8 0.2857
3.64 < l 8 1062.2 0.8931

Stationary screen:
(parameter #2):
C = a l2L( ) b
where:
Steel a b
l2L (in3)
Stainless
10 l 2 L 63.19 2822.7 0.2135
63.19 l 2 L 162 1374.5 0.3870
Carbon
10 l 2 L 65.77 2465.9 0.2035
65.77 l 2 L 162 689.33 0.5079
Vibrating screen:
C = a l2L( ) b
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
Deck a b
l2L (in3)
Single
11 l 2 L 1536 2141.3 0.4069
Double
11 l 2 L 1536 2280.4 0.4256
Triple
54 l 2 L 1536 1862.4 0.4908
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 118 (1) Spiral classifier (1)
Spiral classifier 11 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of classifiers in parallel 1
2 Classifier length (m) 6
3 Classifier width/length ratio 0.2
4 Percent solids in coarse product stream 80
5 Adjustment of the corrected d50c 1
6 Adjustment of the corrected partition curve imperfection 1
7 Adjustment of the solids bypass to sand (coarse product) 1
8 Decanting efficiency: useful area/total area (0.35 or 0.5) 0.5
9 Classifier type (Rake or Spiral) Spiral
10 Calculated spiral diameter (m) if spiral classifier 0
11 Spiral type (Simplex or Duplex) Simplex
Model focus example Model focus/Spiral classifier/Spiral classifier 1
This model is based upon Stokes' law. It assumes that the diameter of a particle, with a
settling velocity equal to the mean rising fluid velocity, is equal to the d50c of the classifier.
Each particle type present in the ore will have a different d50 due to the particle density
differences. The model calculates a d50 at average feed density:
0.5
18VS
d50 =
980.66( s o )
where:
d50 cut size at average feed density (cm)
VS mean rising velocity (volumetric overflowrate / net classifier area)
apparent viscosity of the pulp in the overflow
s average feed density
o density of the pulp in the overflow.
The d50 is then corrected by the Masliyah coefficient (Chem. Eng. Sci., vol. 34, p. 1166,
1979) to extend the applicability beyond the laminar settling regime. The equation becomes:
d50 c = d50 1 + 0.15 Re0.687

where:
USIM PAC 3.1

Re Reynolds number = d50 VSo/
The Rosin-Rammler type equation first proposed by Plitt (CIM Bull. vol. 64, p. 42, 1971) is
used to represent the partition curve. The equation is:
D
m

Pi = 1 exp 0.693 i (1 a ) + a
d50 c

where:
Pi fraction of particles in size class i which report to the coarse stream
Di geometric mean of the particle size in class i
a bypass of feed solids to the coarse product
m parameter characterizing the sharpness of the classification, commonly termed
the "slope"; m is related to the imperfection as follows:
1 1
0.77
I = 0.5 2 0.415
m m
m

In the model, m is related to the d50c according to the equation:
m = 1.5 + 40d 50c

As the fluid properties used to calculate the d50c are based upon the properties of the
overflow slurry, which in turn is determined by partition curve parameters such as d50c, an
iterative solution is required. Reaching convergence usually requires less than 10 iterations.
The model can be used to simulate the performance of any gravity classifier in which a
settling pool area can be defined. Here is spiral classifier (see rake classifier in following
variant of the model).
The three adjustment parameters multiply the value of the d50c, the slope, and the solid
bypass to the coarse stream. The most difficult aspect is the choice of the real efficiency
(parameter #8). The simulator uses default value of 0.5 for the spiral classifier.
The spiral diameter is calculated using an equation derived from Table 1, p. 373, Mular &
Bhappu and Table 12, p. 3D-49, SME Mineral Processing Handbook.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a spiral classifier depends on its diameter
D (parameter #10) and its type (parameter #11):
C = aD b
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
Type D (in) a b
Simplex 24 D 49.82 1173.9 1.008
49.82 D 84 25.694 1.986

Duplex 24 D 51.52 1539.5 1.043
51.52 D 78 85.86 1.776

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 118 (2) Rake classifier (1)
Rake classifier 11 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of classifiers in parallel 1
2 Classifier length (m) 6
3 Classifier width/length ratio 0.2
4 Percent solids in coarse product stream 80
5 Adjustment of the corrected d50c 1
6 Adjustment of the corrected partition curve imperfection 1
7 Adjustment of the solids bypass to sand (coarse product) 1
8 Decanting efficiency: useful area/total area (0.35 or 0.5) 0.35
9 Classifier type (Rake or Spiral) Rake
10 Not used
11 Not used
Model focus example Model focus/Rake classifier/Rake classifier 1
This model is based upon Stokes' law. It assumes that the diameter of a particle, with a
settling velocity equal to the mean rising fluid velocity, is equal to the d50c of the classifier.
Each particle type present in the ore will have a different d50 due to the particle density
differences. The model calculates a d50 at average feed density:
0.5
18VS
d50 =
980.66( s o )
where:
d50 cut size at average feed density (cm)
VS mean rising velocity (volumetric overflowrate / net classifier area)
apparent viscosity of the pulp in the overflow
s average feed density
o density of the pulp in the overflow.
The d50 is then corrected by the Masliyah coefficient (Chem. Eng. Sci., vol. 34, p. 1166,
1979) to extend the applicability beyond the laminar settling regime. The equation becomes:
d50 c = d50 1 + 0.15 Re0.687

where:
USIM PAC 3.1

Re Reynolds number = d50 VSo/
The Rosin-Rammler type equation first proposed by Plitt (CIM Bull. vol. 64, p. 42, 1971) is
used to represent the partition curve. The equation is:
D
m

Pi = 1 exp 0.693 i (1 a ) + a
d50 c

where:
Pi fraction of particles in size class i which report to the coarse stream
Di geometric mean of the particle size in class i
a bypass of feed solids to the coarse product
m parameter characterizing the sharpness of the classification, commonly termed
the "slope"; m is related to the imperfection as follows:
1 1
0.77
I = 0.5 2 0.415
m m
m

In the model, m is related to the d50c according to the equation:
m = 1.5 + 40d 50c

As the fluid properties used to calculate the d50c are based upon the properties of the
overflow slurry, which in turn is determined by partition curve parameters such as d50c, an
iterative solution is required. Reaching convergence usually requires less than 10 iterations.
The model can be used to simulate the performance of any gravity classifier in which a
settling pool area can be defined. Here is rake classifier (see spiral classifier in previous
variant of the model).
The three adjustment parameters multiply the value of the d50c, the slope, and the solid
bypass to the coarse stream. The most difficult aspect is the choice of the real efficiency
(parameter #8). For rake classifiers, values between 0.2 and 0.7 depending upon rake speed
are recommended (Roberts & Fitch, section 3D-1, SME Mineral Processing Handbook). The
simulator uses default value of 0.35 for the rake classifier.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a rake classifier depends on its length L
(parameter #2) and its width (parameter #3):
C = aLb
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
Width (ft) L (ft) a b
3 12 L 23.3 8004 0.3098
4 20 L 36 18785 0.2703
5 22 L 36 12711 0.4503
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 117 Rod mill (1)
Rod mill 14 parameters One output stream

1 Number of mills in parallel 1
2 Inside mill diameter (m) 2.4
3 Length/diameter ratio 1.6
4 Percent volumetric loading of rods 35
5 Fraction of critical speed 0.7
6 Rod specific gravity 7.8
8 Adjustment of power 1
9 Adjustment of slope of the output Rosin-Rammler distribution 1
10 Size of the largest rods (mm) (Calculated if 0) 0
11 Calculated mill power (kW) 0
12 Calculated rod load (metric tons) 0
13 Calculated largest diameter of rods (mm) 0
14 Take into account EF4, EF5, EF6 (No or Yes) Yes
This model is based on the energetic theories of grinding and in particular on Bond's law and
the Allis Chalmers methods for dimensioning grinding mills. (Ref.: Rowland C.A. and Kjos
D.M., "Rod and Ball mills", chapter 12, in "Mineral Processing Plant design", A.L. Mular and
R.B. Bhappu ed., Society of Mining Engineers Publ., 1978, pp. 239, 278).
One of these empirical formulae makes it possible to determine the power consumed by a
mill as a function of its operational characteristics.
In the case of a rod mill the power consumed per metric ton of rods is given by:
1
Wst = 1.752.D 3 (6.3 5.4Tc )Vr
where:
Wst power consumed per metric ton of rods (kW)
D mill diameter (m)
Vr rotation speed expressed as a fraction of the critical speed
Tc loading fraction: fraction of mill volume occupied by the rod charge.
USIM PAC 3.1

Bond's formula links the total power consumed by milling to the d80 of the mill feed and the
mill discharge by using the Work Index of the ore:
10WI 10WI
E=
d80 P d80 F
where:
E energy consumed to grind one short-ton of material to the desired size (kWh/short
ton)
WI Work Index of the ore (kWh/short ton)
d80P d80 of the mill product
d80F d80 of the mill feed, where
d80 dimension of the screen mesh through which 80% of the product would pass (m).
The Allis Chalmers method for dimensioning mills also involves the use of correction factors
to the power available for milling before applying Bond's formula. These correction factors
are as follows:
EF1: for dry grinding: this factor has the value 1.3 (instead of 1) when grinding is carried
out dry.
EF2: open circuit: this parameter is not used for the rod mill model.
EF3: diameter correction: the value of this factor depends on the mill diameter, using the
following relationship
0.2
2.44
EF 3 = (where D is in meters)
D
EF4: oversize feed: when the particle size distribution of the feed is larger than the optimal
size, this factor is:
Rr + (WI 7 )
(d80 F d80r )
d80 r
EF 4 =
Rr
where:
Rr reduction ratio = d80F/d80P
13
d80r optimal d80 of feed, given by: d 80r = 16000.
Wi
EF5: fine product: this correction factor is not used in the rod mill model.
EF6: non-optimal reduction ratio: this is involved when the grinding reduction ratio is not
between Rro-2 and Rro+2, Rro being the optimal reduction ratio. One then has:
EF 6 = 1 +
( Rr Rro )
2
150
USIM PAC 3.1

5L
where: Rro = 8 + and Rr is the reduction ratio: d80F/d80P
D
L length of the rods
EF7: is used only for ball mills.
EF8: feed to rod mills: this correction factor depends on the preparation of the ore used to
feed the mill. It has not been taken into account in the Rod mill (1) model.
The methodology described above makes it possible to compute the d80P of the mill
discharge if one knows the d80F of the feed, the Work Index of the ore and the characteristics
of the mill. However, just knowing the d80P is not sufficient to describe the complete particle
size distribution of the mill discharge, which any simulation model must provide.
It is therefore necessary to develop hypotheses on the shape of this distribution in order to
be able to describe it. In this model, it is assumed that the particle size distribution of the mill
discharge follows a Rosin-Rammler straight line:
m
x

R( x ) = e x0
where:
R(x) mass proportion of particles coarser than x
m slope of the Rosin-Rammler straight line
xo particle size such that 36.79 percent of the particles in mass are coarser than xo.
Knowing one point of the Rosin-Rammler curve, that for d80P, it is only necessary to
characterize the 'slope' m of this curve for it to be fully defined. Furthermore, it has been
found that, when the particle size distribution of the mill feed is similar to a Rosin-Rammler
distribution, the particle size distribution of the mill discharge often has the same slope: a
regression is run on the feed particle size distribution to obtain an adjustment of the
Rosin-Rammler law; this gives the slope m of this law, and it is considered that the particle
size distribution of the mill discharge follows a Rosin-Rammler curve of the same slope,
passing through the d80P given by the Allis Chalmers methodology.

Since the computation is carried out by particle type, each of these being characterized by a
Work Index, the model makes it possible to predict the selectivity of grinding when the ore is
composed of minerals of different grindabilities.
Within the model, the computation is iterative: some correction factors such as EF4 and EF6
can only be computed when d80P of the milled product is known.
The convergence within the model is reached with a Newton method.
However, the EF6 factor leads to illogical results when the ratio of reduction Rr is lower than
Rr0. Then, the model is simplified by replacing Bond formula by a straight line for values of Rr
less than Rr0 - 2.
USIM PAC 3.1

In any case, the method employed in the model is clearly expressed in the Operating
Parameters Display.
The grindability index (kWh/short ton) for each mineral must be indicated:
fragile mineral: 6
resistant mineral: 15
For a simulation involving only a single mineral, use the Bond Work Index.
It is recommended to use a description of the ore, which includes a minimum of eight particle
size distribution classes, so as to obtain a good description of the grinding process.
Parameter #14, if set to "No", allows the user to avoid the iterative calculation that is
employed if the inefficiency factors EF4, EF5, EF6, which depend on the output d80, are
taken into account. Its default value is "Yes".

This model has two adjustment parameters:
the first is used in computing the power available for grinding by dividing it: default value
is 1,
the second is used in modifying the slope of the size distribution at the mill discharge. Its
default value is 1, which means that the slope of the mill feed (in terms of the Rosin-
Rammler distribution) is used to describe the mill discharge.
If you do not have any continuous operation data, no calibration of the model is possible. If
you have determined the Bond Work Index in the laboratory, then use this index for each
mineral.
If you have a continuous operation data set, but if you have not determined the Work Index in
the laboratory, you should adjust the Work Index for each mineral.
If you have a set of continuous operation data, once the power has been adjusted, you
should adjust the Work Index for each mineral to take into account the selectivity of grinding.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a rod mill depends on its external diameter
De (parameter #2 + shell thickness), its length/diameter ratio L D (parameter #3) and the
rod filling (t/m3 parameters #4 and #6):
L
C = aDe b 0.8 + c D 2 L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 5 4364.8 2.105 490
USIM PAC 3.1

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 116 Ball mill (1)
Ball mill 16 parameters One output stream

2 Inside mill diameter (m) 3
3 Length/diameter ratio 1
4 Percent volumetric loading of balls 40
6 Ball specific gravity 7.8
8 Mill discharge (Overflow or Grate discharge) Overflow
10 Adjustment of slope of the output Rosin-Rammler distribution 1
11 Size of the largest balls (mm) (calculated if 0) 0
13 Calculated ball load (metric tons) 0
14 Calculated largest diameter of balls (mm) 0
15 Take into account EF4, EF5, EF6 (No or Yes) Yes
16 Take into account ball size factor (No or Yes) No
Model focus example Model focus/Mill/Ball mill 1
This model is based on the energetic theories of grinding and in particular on Bond's law and
the Allis Chalmers methods for dimensioning grinding mills. (Ref.: Rowland C.A. and Kjos
D.M., "Rod and Ball mills", chapter 12, in "Mineral Processing Plant design", A.L. Mular and
R.B. Bhappu ed., Society of Mining Engineers Publ., 1978, pp. 239, 278).
One of these empirical formulae makes it possible to determine the power consumed by a
mill as a function of its operational characteristics. In the case of a ball mill, this is given by:

Wst = 4.879 D 0.3 (3.2 3Tc )Vr 1 910V
0.1 1.102
+ s (Db 12.5D )
2 r 50.8
where:
Wst power consumed per metric ton of balls (kW)
D mill diameter inside liners (m)
Tc loading fraction: fraction of the mill volume occupied by the ball charge
USIM PAC 3.1


s 1 to take into account ball mill factor (parameter #16), 0 else
Db largest ball size (mm parameter #11).
Bond's formula links the total power consumed by milling to the d80 of the mill feed and the
mill discharge by using the Work Index of the ore:
10WI 10WI
E=
d80 P d80 F
where:
E energy consumed to grind one short-ton of material to the desired size (kWh/short
ton)
WI Work Index of the ore (kWh/short ton)
d80P d80 of the mill product
d80F d80 of the mill feed, where
d80 dimension of the screen mesh through which 80% of the product would pass (m).
The Allis Chalmers method for dimensioning mills also involves the use of correction factors
to the power available for milling before applying Bond's formula. These correction factors
are as follows:
EF1: for dry grinding: this factor has the value 1.3 (instead of 1) when grinding is carried
out dry since the energy consumption is then 1.3 times greater than in the case of wet
grinding
EF2: open circuit: this parameter is always applied in simulation since, in the model, the
computation of the mill outlet is carried out as a function of that at the entry as if the
mill was in open circuit. A value of 1.2 for this factor has been chosen from the table
of values given for the Allis Chalmers method for use in the Ball mill (1) model
EF3: diameter correction: the value of this factor depends on the mill diameter, using the
following relationship
0.2
2.44
EF 3 = (where D is in meters)
D
EF4: oversize feed: when the particle size distribution of the feed is larger than the optimal
size, this factor is:
Rr + (WI 7 )
(d80 F d80r )
d80 r
EF 4 =
Rr
where:
Rr reduction ratio = d80F/d80P
13
d80r optimal d80 of feed, given by: d80 r = 4000.
Wi
USIM PAC 3.1

EF5: fine product: this correction factor is applied when d80P is smaller than 75 microns:
EF 5 =
(d80 P + 10.3)
(1.145.d80 P )
EF6: this factor, which relates to rod mills, is not used.
EF7: low reduction ratio: this correction factor is applied when the reduction ratio Rr is
less than 6.
2(Rr 1.35) + 0.26
EF 7 =
2(Rr 1.35)
EF8: like EF6, this only concerns rod mills.
The methodology described above makes it possible to compute the d80P of the mill
discharge if one knows the d80F of the feed, the Work Index of the ore and the characteristics
of the mill. However, just knowing the d80P is not sufficient to describe the complete particle
size distribution of the mill discharge, which any simulation model must provide.
It is therefore necessary to develop hypotheses on the shape of this distribution in order to
be able to describe it. In this model, it is assumed that the particle size distribution of the mill
discharge follows a Rosin-Rammler straight line:
m
x

R( x ) = e x0
where:
R(x) mass proportion of particles coarser than x
m slope of the Rosin-Rammler straight line
xo particle size such that 36.79 percent of the particles in mass are coarser than xo.
Knowing one point of the Rosin-Rammler curve, that for d80P, it is only necessary to
characterize the 'slope' m of this curve for it to be fully defined. Furthermore, it has been
found that, when the particle size distribution of the mill feed is similar to a Rosin-Rammler
distribution, the particle size distribution of the mill discharge often has the same slope: a
regression is run on the feed particle size distribution to obtain an adjustment of the
Rosin-Rammler law; this gives the slope m of this law, and it is considered that the particle
size distribution of the mill discharge follows a Rosin-Rammler curve of the same slope,
passing through the d80P given by the Allis Chalmers methodology.
If the parameter #11 is set to 0, the largest ball size is calculated using the formula:
1
d 80 F Wi 3
Db = 25.4
Xk 100V 3.281D
r
Xk 350 if overflow discharge (parameter #8), else 335 if dry grinding, else 330.
USIM PAC 3.1


Since the computation is carried out by particle type, each of these being characterized by a
Work Index, the model makes it possible to predict the selectivity of grinding when the ore is
composed of minerals of different grindabilities.
Within the model, the computation is iterative: some correction factors such as EF4, EF5 and
EF7 can only be computed when d80P of the milled product is known.
The convergence within the model is reached with a Newton method.
However, the EF7 factor leads to illogical results when the ratio of reduction Rr is low. It
becomes infinite when this ratio is close to 1.35. It is negative when the ratio is between 1.35
and 1.22.
Then, the model is simplified by replacing Bond formula by a straight line for low ratios of
reduction. This straight line is the tangent to Bond formula which passes through the point
(Rr = 1, E = 0).
In any case, the method employed in the model is clearly expressed in the Operating
Parameters Display.
The grindability index (kWh/short ton) for each mineral must be indicated:
fragile mineral: 6
resistant mineral: 15
For a simulation involving only a single mineral, use the Bond Work Index.
It is recommended to use a description of the ore, which includes a minimum of eight particle
size distribution classes, so as to obtain a good description of the grinding process.
Parameter #15, if set to "No", allows the user to avoid the iterative calculation that is
employed if the inefficiency factors EF4, EF5, EF7, which depend on the output d80, are
taken into account. Its default value is "Yes".

This model has two adjustment parameters:
the first is used in computing the power available for grinding by dividing it: default value
is 1,
the second is used in modifying the slope of the size distribution at the mill discharge. Its
default value is 1, which means that the slope of the mill feed (in terms of the Rosin-
Rammler distribution) is used to describe the mill discharge.
If you do not have any continuous operation data, no calibration of the model is possible. If
you have determined the Bond Work Index in the laboratory, then use this index for each
mineral.
If you have a continuous operation data set, but if you have not determined the Work Index in
the laboratory, you should adjust the Work Index for each mineral.
USIM PAC 3.1

If you have a set of continuous operation data, once the power has been adjusted, you
should adjust the Work Index for each mineral to take into account the selectivity of grinding.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a ball mill depends on its external diameter
ball filling (t/m3 parameters #4 and #6):
L
C = aD e b + c D 2 L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 20 3875.3 2.111 580

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 113 Hydrocyclone (1)

1 Number of hydrocyclones in parallel 1
2 Cyclone diameter: D (m) 0.3
3 Distance between the underflow and overflow nozzles/D 3
4 Diameter of the feed nozzle/D 0.25
5 Diameter of the overflow nozzle/D 0.3
6 Diameter of the underflow nozzle/D 0.18
7 Adjustment of the corrected d50 1
8 Adjustment of the partition curve imperfection 1
9 Adjustment of the flow split 1
10 Calculated pressure drop (kPa) 0
16 Particle porosity 0
Model focus example Model focus/Hydrocyclone/Hydrocyclone 1
This model is based on the empirical equations established as a result of experimental work
by L.R. Plitt (L.R. Plitt, "A mathematical model of the hydrocyclone classifier", CIM Bull., Dec.
1976). Plitt considered that the corrected partition curve of a hydrocyclone corresponds to a
Rosin-Rammler formula:
m
d
0.693
Yc (d ) = 1 e d 50 c
where:
d particle size
Yc proportion of the particle population of size d which reports to the cyclone overflow,
without accounting for the short circuiting fraction
d50c corrected d50
m parameter characterizing the sharpness of the classification commonly termed the
"slope". It is related to imperfection as follows:
USIM PAC 3.1

1 1
0.77
I = 0.5 x 2 0.415
m m
m

Four basic empirical equations characterize, directly or indirectly, the parameters of the
corrected partition curve and the short-circuiting fraction as a function of the geometrical
parameters of a cyclone and the characteristics of its feed:
52.5D 0.46 DA0.6 DO1.21 e0.063

d50i = 0.71 0.38 0.45
DU H QV ( mi )
0.5
1.88QV1.78 e0.0055
P=
(
D 0.37 DA0.94 H 0.28 DU2 + DO2 ) 0.87
0.15
-1.58R V D2H
m = 1.93 e
Q
v
3.31
D
1.9 u
D
(
H 0.54 Du2 + Do2 )
0.36 0.0054
e
S = o
Pm0.24 D1.11
where:
D internal diameter of the cyclone (cm)
DA diameter of the feed nozzle (cm)
DO diameter of the overflow nozzle (cm)
DU diameter of the underflow nozzle (cm)
H free vortex height or distance between the overflow and underflow nozzles (cm)
percent solids by volume in the feed pulp to the cyclone
QV volumetric flowrate of the feed pulp (l/min)
mi specific gravity of particle type i (t/m3)
specific gravity of liquid (equal to 1 in the model)
RV fraction of the volumetric feedrate passing to the underflow
P pressure drop in the cyclone (kPa)
Pm P expressed in pulp height (m)
S ratio between the volumetric flowrates in the underflow and the overflow.
Effect of particle porosity

It is possible to take into account the porosity of the particles through the parameter #16
which gives the porosity per particle type or component. The specific gravity m is then the
mean value of the specific gravity of particle types in the phase model and the specific
gravity of liquid filling pores.
USIM PAC 3.1

In addition, liquid filling pores follows particles in the partition process. Liquid not filling the
pores is split according to ratio S.
Notes
For each particle type class i, the model computes a corrected d50 (d50i), taking into account
the specific gravity of this particle type mi. This accounts for the difference in the cut-size
between minerals that one observes when the ore is composed of minerals of different
specific gravity.
A computation of the pressure drop is done in the model. The value obtained is written to the
Operating Parameters Display when the simulation converges.
This model reproduces, with a reasonable level of accuracy, the operation of hydrocyclones
in mineral slurries having a medium to high feed pressure and a feed percent solids lower
than 30%, even when the model is used without calibration, using the default values of 1 for
the three adjustment parameters. By contrast when it is a matter of simulating a cyclone with
a high feed percent solids (typical of a cyclone in a grinding circuit) calibration is absolutely
necessary.
The three adjustment parameters multiply the values of the corrected d50 (d50i), the
imperfection of the partition curve and the fines short circuit respectively. Their default value
is 1; that is to say there is no modification of the values predicted by Plitt's formulae when the
model is not calibrated.
The model relates exclusively to cyclone classifiers with underflow umbrella discharge. It
must not be used to simulate a cyclone thickener (with roping discharge from the underflow).
If, during a simulation, the operating conditions of the cyclone lead to roping of the underflow,
a warning message will be written into the Operating Parameters Display. In such a case, the
results of the simulation of the cyclone must be viewed with great suspicion.
Since the performance of cyclone classifiers is very sensitive to the percent solids of the
feed, it is recommended to precede the cyclone by a density regulator when drawing the
flowsheet.

The model has 3 adjustment parameters:
7 Adjustment of the corrected d50
8 Adjustment of the partition curve imperfection
9 Adjustment of the flow split
To calculate the values of these parameters to reach a set of measured data (in file 1), use
the following procedure:
Step 0
Perform a data reconciliation by material balance to obtain a set of balanced data (results in
file 2).
Open the Excel file Hydrocyclone Calibration.xls in the directory Model focus/Hydrocyclone
From the stream description sheet of the balanced data (file 2), copy the values of the slurry
volumetric flowrate in underflow and overflow, as well as the solids volumetric flowrate of
underflow into the corresponding column of the Excel file.
It calculates the ratio between volumetric flowrates of underflow and overflow S0.
USIM PAC 3.1

Step 1
Set the number and sizes of the cyclones and run a direct simulation keeping the adjustment
parameters to the default value 1 (results in file 3).
From the stream description sheet of the non calibrated simulated data (file 3), copy the
values of the slurry volumetric flowrate in underflow and overflow, as well as the solids
volumetric flowrate of underflow into the corresponding column of the Excel file.
It calculates also the ratio between volumetric flowrates of underflow and overflow S1 and the
adjustment of the flow split (parameter #9).
Step 2
Set the parameter #9 with the calculated value and run a direct simulation (results in file 4).
From the stream description sheet of the calibrated simulated data (file 4), copy the values of
the slurry volumetric flowrate in underflow and overflow, as well as the solids volumetric
flowrate of underflow into the corresponding column of the Excel file.
Verify the slurry volumetric flowrates. If the solids volumetric flowrate and the %-solids by
volume in the underflow are far from the balanced data, perhaps it is due to a roping effect.
In that case, use the level 2 model.
Step 3
Compare the partition curve generated at step 2 and the balanced one at step 0.
If necessary, adjust the parameters #7 and #8, using the Model Parameter Adjustment
algorithm, to reach the observed partition curve.
Remarks
The adjustment of parameters #7 and #8 will change the solids concentration in underflow.
Power calculation
The power consumed by the pump associated with the hydrocyclone is proportional to the
head inside the hydrocyclone according to the formula (Kelly, E.G., Spottiswood, D.J.,
Introduction to mineral processing, Ed. John Wiley and sons, 1982):
KH wQ
PW =
E
where:
K its value 977.1 N/m2 has been empirically established by Hicks and Edwards (Hicks,
T.G. and Edwards, T.W., Pump Application Engineering, Mc Graw-Hill, 1971)
E = Ew (1 K sp )
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
solids specific gravity, obtained thanks to a slurry pump factor chart (after McElvain
volume fraction of solids in slurry (calculated by the hydrocyclone model)
H
Hw =
1 K sp
where:
H total head of slurry: sum of head of slurry (m) calculated by the hydrocyclone model
and head (m) lost in piping (parameter #12)
Display" files.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a hydrocyclone depends on its diameter D
(parameter #2):
C = aD b
where:
D (in) a b
1 D 13.46 414.46 0.7582
13.46 D 50 72.256 1.430

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 127 Air cyclone (1)
Air cyclone 19 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of cyclones in parallel 1
2 Cyclone diameter: D (m) 3
3 Overall cyclone height/D 1.3
4 Cylindrical body height/D 1.3
5 Outlet duct diameter for dust/D 0.3
6 Gas outlet duct diameter/D 0.5
7 Gas outlet duct length/D 0.8
8 Inlet height/D 0.5
9 Inlet width/D (or 0 if unknown) 0.2
10 Specific gravity of gas (kg/m3) 1
11 Dynamic viscosity of gas (kg/m/s) 2.1.10-5
12 Absolute temperature of gas (Kelvin) 298
13 Volumetric flowrate of gas (m3/s) 1
14 Pressure drop coefficient 16
15 Adjustment of the cut size 1
16 Bypass of fines to the coarse stream (%) 20
17 Calculated pressure drop of Shepherd and Lapple (kPa) 0
18 Calculated pressure drop of Stairmand (kPa) 0
19 Calculated pressure drop of Barth (kPa) 0
This model calculates a partition efficiency with the Leith and Licht equation (Leith D. and
Licht W., 1972, "Collection efficiency of cyclone type particle collectors, a new theoretical
approach", AI.Ch.E. Symposium series: air - 1971):
1
Yc ( X ) = 1 e 2(C )
2 n+ 2
where C is a function of the cyclone dimensions, a function of the gas/particle system and
n a function of the cyclone diameter and the absolute temperature.
Dimensions of the hydrocyclone are:

D internal cyclone diameter (parameter #2)
h overall body height (h/D = parameter #4)
USIM PAC 3.1

De gas outlet diameter (De/D = parameter #6)

S gas outlet length (S/D = parameter #7)
a inlet height (a/D = parameter #8)
b inlet width (b/D = parameter #9)
H: overall cyclone height (H/D = parameter #3)
B: outlet duct diameter (B/D = parameter #5)
D
De
b
S
a
h
Inlet
l
H
Vortex
Dust exit
The vortex length is given by:

1
l 2.3 De D 2 3
=
D D ab
and the diameter of the conical section at the vortex bottom is:
USIM PAC 3.1

d = D (D B )
(S+l h )
(H h )
The dimension parameter C is given by:

4V1 + 8V2
C=
abD
where V1 is the volume of the selection region under the vortex finder:
V1 =
D 2 (2 2
)
(h S ) + D + Dd + d S + l h De l
2
4 4 3 4
and V2 is the volume of the feed region:
a D 2 D e
2

V2 = S
2 4 4
If l > H S , the volume V1 is given by:
V1 =
D 2
(h S ) + ( )
D 2 + DB + B 2 H h De2
(H S )
4 4 3 4
The gas/particle system parameter is given by:

n +1
= p X 2vg
18 g D
where:
p particle specific gravity
X particle diameter
g gas velocity through cyclone inlet
g dynamic viscosity of gas
The temperature parameter is given by:
(39.4 D )0.14 T 0.3

n = 1 1
2 .5 283

with T is the absolute temperature of gas (K).
The pressure drop between the inlet and the gas outlet is determined from the following
equation:
USIM PAC 3.1

vg2 g H
P =
2
H is calculated according to three theories:

1. Shepherd and Lapple (1939, 1940)
Kab
H =
De2
where K = 16 for a cyclone with standard tangential inlet, and K = 7.5 for a cyclone with an
inlet vane, i.e. with a feed flowrate that is much more tangential and which causes less
disturbance to the vortex.
2. Stairmand (1949)
2
D b 4ab
2
H = 1 + 2 2 1 + 2 2
D e De
where:
De 4 AG De ab
= +
2(D b ) ab 2(D b ) 2GA
G is a friction factor equal to 0.005 and A is the inside surface of the cyclone exposed to the
spinning gas:
(D + B )
( )
2

A = D 2 De2 + Dh + De S + (H h ) + D B
2
4 2 2
3. Barth (1956)
2 2
u 4ab
H = i 2 (e + i )
vi De
where:

De 1 4.4
e = 1 i = +1
D 2 2
1 (H S ) ui 2 ui 3
vi De
vi
and
USIM PAC 3.1

De
ui
(D b )
= 2
vi 2ab + (H S )(D b )
b
with 1 1.2
D
and the friction factor = 0.02.

The fines short circuit is directly adjusted, because it is not defined by the model but simply
added to the calculated efficiency. The d50 adjustment parameter produces a move of the
size classes from which the efficiency is determined.
The pressure drop results are written in the Operating Parameters Display.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of an air cyclone depends on its diameter D
(parameter #2):
C = aD b
where:
D (ft) a b
3 D 12.28 631.75 1.779
12.28 D 24 116.59 2.453

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 126 Attrition cell (1)
Attrition cell 7 parameters One output stream

1 Number of cells in parallel 1
2 Slurry volume in one cell (m3) 10
3 Critical size (mm) 0.1
4 Attrition rate kinetic constant (1/min) 1
5 Exponent for the size dependence of the attrition rate 2
6 Proportion of each component being attrited 1
7 Fines production only in the lower size class (Yes or No) Yes
This model is based on the representation of attrition of each mineral of the ore as a first-
order kinetic phenomenon. The attrition cell is represented as a perfect mixer characterized
by a mean residence time of the pulp.
Only a fraction of each mineral is worn. Only particles above the critical size (parameter #3)
are worn.
Hence, if Xi > Xc, the fraction of mineral k in size class i in the attrition mill discharge is:
Pk
msik = meik 1 Pk +
1 + kik
where:
Xc critical size
meik fraction of mineral k in size class i in the feed
Pk fraction of mineral k being worn (parameter #6)
mean residence time of the pulp:
Volume of pulp in the cell
=
Feed flowrate
kik attrition rate of mineral k in size class i:
n
X
kik = K k i
X1
where:
Kk kinetic constant (parameter #4)
Xi geometric mean of size class i
USIM PAC 3.1

n exponent given as parameter #5.

If the attrition is governed by the specific surface, the value of n is about -1. But this
parameter can have a non-integer value, which can be obtained by calibration.
All the attrition products of size classes above Xc fall into classes under Xc.
If parameter #7 is "Yes", all the products fall into the lower size class.
If parameter #7 is "No", the products fall into size classes under Xc in the following way:
the size class which contains Xc receives a proportion of the products according to the
position of Xc between the limits of that class,
the size classes under this one receive all the same proportion.

The proportion of each mineral that can be worn can be adjusted. The exponent of the
kinetics, and the critical size can be also adjusted.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of attrition cell depends on its volume V
(parameter #2 / 0.4):
C = aV b + cV d
where:
V (USG) a b c d
168 V 1540 11.41 0.7910 579.3 0.3348

Cost Estimation", Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1982, vol. 25, pp. 111 and
119.
USIM PAC 3.1

2.3 Level 2 models
Model 135 Crusher (2)
Crusher 20 parameters One output stream

2 Size under which no breakage occurs (mm) 4
3 Reduction factor for the breakage function 2
4 Slope of the breakage function 1
5 Proportion of breakage in the large size classes (%) 100
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Crusher 2
This model is based on an extremely simplified kinetic representation of breakage. It

describes the breakage of a particle by the following breakage function:
m
x
Bij = i if xi < xredj
x
redj
Bij = 1 if xi xredj
where:
USIM PAC 3.1

Bij fraction of products from breakage of size class j falling in size class i,
xi particle size,
m slope of the breakage function (parameter #4),
xredj defined by
xj
xredj =
R
where R is the reduction factor (parameter #3)
Ln(x)
Shape of the breakage function.
Only the proportion given in parameter #5 is broken in the size classes above the size
specified in parameter #2.
Power calculation
1 1
P = 10 BWi Q
P F80
80
A 1 1
P= 10W Q
P80n
i
P F80
80
Q feed flowrate,

USIM PAC 3.1


2mH 2.59 I
I= Wi =
td
Use of the model

This model is well adapted to represent hammer crushers.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 106 (1) Cone crusher (2)

2 Closed side setting: CSS (mm) 25
3 Proportion of "tensile fracture" breakage 0.05
4 CSS multiplier giving the size under which no breakage occurs 0.6
5 CSS multiplier giving the size above which all is broken 1.2
6 Correction of size above which all is broken (mm) 0
7 "Slope" of Whiten's probability function 2
8 Breakage function slope of the "tensile fracture" part 4.5
9 Breakage function slope of the "compressive fracture" part 0.5
25 Calculated feedrate (t/h) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Cone crusher 2
This model uses the representation of crushing by means of the grinding and classification
functions proposed by W.J. Whiten et al. in "A breakage function suitable for crusher
models". Fourth Tewksbury, Symposium, Melbourne, February, 1979.
USIM PAC 3.1

Whiten's classification function describes the probability of particles to enter the breakage
stage, as a function of particle size by:
0 for particles smaller than a given size k1
1 for particles larger than a given size k2

C(x) for particles of intermediate size k1 < x < k2
k3
x k2
C(X ) = 1
k1 k2
with:
k1 = Css
k2 = Css +
, , : parameters #4, #5 and #6 respectively
k3 : parameter #7
Css : closed side setting (parameter #2)
Whiten's grinding function is expressed by the following equation:

n m
(
P( x, y ) = 1 + Ky mq
)
x x
+ Ky m q
y y
with:
P ( x, y ) fraction of material smaller than size x produced from a particle of size y
K constant part of the expression for the amount of fine breakage - fraction (parameter
#3)
n exponent determining the slope of the portion of the size distribution produced by
compressive failure (parameter #8)
m exponent determining the slope of the position of the size distribution produced by
tensile fracture (parameter #9)
q exponent determining the size dependence of the amount of fine breakage (q = m for
this model).
Power calculation
1 1
P = 10 BWi Q
P F80
80
USIM PAC 3.1

A 1 1
P= 10Wi Q
n
P80 P F80
80
Q feed flowrate,

#11 or #16), feed flowrate (parameter #12 or #17), product d80 (parameter #13 or #18), feed
d80 (parameter #14 or #19) and the measured power consumption (parameter #15 or #20).
The adjusted Bond formula will use the first set of data and the adjusted Magdalinovic
formula will use both sets of data. The calculated values of the power consumption with
adjustment are displayed in parameters #23 and #24 and in the Calculated Power
Consumption file if it is generated during direct simulation.
2mH 2.59 I
I= Wi =
td
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a cone crusher depends on the diameter of
its discharge annulus D which can be estimated knowing its capacity Q (calculated
parameter #25):
USIM PAC 3.1

1
Q 2.2847
C = aD b D=
8.2091
where:
D (ft) a b
3 D 6.7 12579 1.742
6.7 D 10 271.6 3.757

Cost Estimation", Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1982, vol. 25, pp. 46 and 47.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 106 (2) Short head crusher (2)

2 Closed side setting: CSS (mm) 25
3 Proportion of "tensile fracture" breakage 0.05
4 CSS multiplier giving the size under which no breakage occurs 0.944
5 CSS multiplier giving the size above which all is broken 1.722
6 Correction of size above which all is broken (mm) 0.004826
7 "Slope" of Whiten's probability function 3
8 Breakage function slope of the "tensile fracture" part 2.475
9 Breakage function slope of the "compressive fracture" part 0.518
25 Calculated feedrate (t/h) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Crusher/Cone crusher 2
Variant of the previous model with default values of the breakage function parameters well
adapted for short head crushers.
USIM PAC 3.1


3 Length / diameter ratio 1
8 Number of perfect mixers equivalent to the mill 2
9 Specific rate of breakage per component (K1E) 1
10 Exponent 1 per component for the size dependence of K 0.7
11 Exponent 2 per component for the size dependence of K 0
12 Size of the largest balls (mm) 0
15 Calculated load of the mill (t) 0
This model is based on the work of Austin (Austin, L.G.,Klimpel, R.R., and Luckie, P.T.,
Process Engineering of size reduction: ball milling. AIME, New York, 1984, Chap. 4.8.) and
of Herbst & Bascur (Herbst, J.A. and Bascur, O.A., A program for the simulation of steady
state circuit behavior, using a small computer. Report of Department of Metallurgical
Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, 1979). It combines a simplified kinetic
approach with an energetic approach. The energy consumed by the mill is first computed as
a function of its characteristics, using the same formula as in the Ball mill 1 model, this
being the empirical formula used in the Allis Chalmers methods for dimensioning mills:

Wst = 4.879 D 0.3 (3.2 3Tc )Vr 1 910V + s 50.8 (Db 12.5 D )
0.1 1.102
2 r
where:
Wst power (kW) consumed per short ton of material milled
D mill diameter (m)
Tc fraction of mill volume occupied by the balls
Vr fraction of critical speed.
USIM PAC 3.1


Then, this energy is used in a formula, which results from a simplification of the kinetic
approach:
the transport of the ore is characterized by a number of perfect mixers in series
(parameter #8). The method for determining this parameter is exposed below.
the grinding and selection functions are represented together in application of the
hypothesis of compensation using the relationship:
di d i
2
Bij S j = K i = K1di 1
= K1. exp 1 ln + 2 ln
d1 d1

where:
di mean particle size in particle size class i
d1 reference particle size = 1 mm
Furthermore, it is considered that K1 depends on the energy consumed during grinding

according to the relationship given by Herbst:
P
K1 = K1E
H
where:
P energy available for grinding
H total hold up of material in the mill.
The numerical values of 1, 1 and K1E for each mineral are obtained by calibration
employing experimental data on at least one point of operation of a continuously running mill,
called the calibration point.
The particle size distribution of the mill discharge is then computed:

N
K P
Pi = Fi 1 + i
NQ
where:
Pi proportion (in mass) of particles coarser than particle size class i in the mill product
Fi proportion (in mass) of particles coarser than particle size class i in the mill feed
P power consumed by the mill (kW)
Q solids flowrate
N number of perfect mixers in series.
USIM PAC 3.1


Basically, the model uses a kinetic approach to describe the comminution process. The
kinetic parameters are calibrated to fit a set of experimental data.
The main interest of the model is that it is able to take into account the dimensions and
working conditions of the mill by the use of energy.
The model reproduces the selectivity of grinding when several minerals of different
grindabilities describe the ore.
It does not take into account the influence of the solids concentration of the slurry.

Residence time distribution should be determined by a specific test (see below), but most of
the time, the default value of 3 perfect mixers in series makes it possible to obtain
satisfactory results.
The model necessitates the adjustment of two or three parameters per mineral.
Method for determining the resident time distribution in a mill

The residence time distribution for the solids characterizes the transport of the material
through the mill. In practice, it is generally valid to approximate the residence time
distribution in a ball or rod mill to that obtained with m perfect and identical mixers having a
mean residence time of .
The determination of the residence time distribution therefore consists in obtaining, by

means of an experimental procedure, the values of m and which best characterize the
transport of the material through the mill.
Experimental procedure
Measuring the residence time distribution of solids is often extremely complicated, giving rise
to tedious and expensive manipulations (the use of fluorescence to label the liquid phase,
the neutron activation of the solids with the following-up of the radioactivity, etc.). Since the
behavior of the fines is, furthermore, similar to that of the water, measurements are generally
made on the residence time distribution of the water in the pulp. This latter procedure is used
at BRGM and is detailed below. The results are then used to represent the residence time
distribution of the solids in the model.
The assumption that the residence time distribution of the solid phase is similar to that of the
liquid phase is fairly usual and has been used to model large mills. It is nevertheless an
approximation, detailed research work having demonstrated that in reality different initial
particle size classes give rise to significantly different residence time distributions.
Measuring the residence time distribution in a mill (industrial or pilot-scale) involves the
following stages:
establishment of steady-state operation of the circuit: the tracer must not be introduced
until steady state has been reached,
USIM PAC 3.1

injection of a water-soluble tracer into the inlet of the mill in the form of a nearly saturated
solution, generally of lithium chloride LiCl. Injection must be carried out as rapidly as
possible,
removal of pulp samples from the mill outlet at regular time intervals (30 seconds to 1
minute),
treatment of each of the samples which have been taken by filtration then analysis of the
concentration of lithium in the filtrate.
The plot of lithium concentration against time gives the residence time distribution in the mill
if the circuit is open. For a closed circuit, a mathematical correction must be applied because
of the effect of the return of the tracer into the mill. This then necessitates taking samples
from the returned stream as well as the primary samples, and of measuring or calculating the
circulating load: this procedure is not detailed here.
Processing the experimental data

It is necessary, first of all, to correct the concentrations of the tracer because of the finite
duration of its injection (it should theoretically be instantaneous, but this is not possible in
practice). Such a correction involves the following relationships:
if t < To and F(o) = 0 then F(t) = t.C'(t)
if t > To then F(t) = To.C'(t) + F(t - To)
where:
t time. The start time is fixed as the end of the injection of the tracer
C'(t) tracer concentration measured at time t
To duration of the injection of the tracer
F(t): cumulative residence time distribution (integral of the non-cumulative distribution
function E(t)).
One can then (although this operation is optional) calculate mo, the mass of tracer injected,
from the concentrations C'(t) and Q, the volumetric flowrate of the pulp, assuming no
retention of tracer in the unit.
Comparing mo, the calculated mass, and Mo, the mass of tracer measured by weighing
before injection, makes it possibly to verify the reliability of the experiment.
The following stage consists of normalizing F(t) so that F(t) becomes equal to 1 for a high
value of t, corresponding to a tracer concentration at the mill outlet, which is very close to 0.
Then the adjustment of the values of F(t) to a model of m perfect mixers in series is carried
out, using regression software. The model tested is:
m 1 i mt
1 mt
F (t ) = 1 e
i = 0 i!
where:
m number of perfect mixers
mean residence time in the mill
USIM PAC 3.1

The parameter m characterizes the residence time distribution in level 2 and level 3 grinding
simulation models. For the industrial mills with which BRGM has worked, the value of m is
typically of the order of 2 or 3.
Capital cost
L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 20 3875.3 2.111 580

USIM PAC 3.1


3 Length / diameter ratio 1.6
8 Specific rate of breakage per component (K1E) 1
9 Exponent 1 per component for the size dependence of K 0.7
10 Exponent 2 per component for the size dependence of K 0
This model is based on the same theoretical basis and has the same structure as the ball
mill (2) model.
The only difference resides in the computation of the power consumed using the Allis
Chalmers methodology:
1
Wst = 1.752.D 3 (6.3 5.4Tc )Vr
where:
Wst power consumed per ton of rods (kW)
D mill diameter (m)
Capital cost
L
C = aDe b 0.8 + c D 2 L
D 4
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 5 4364.8 2.105 490

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 121 Hydrocyclone (2)

1 Number of cyclones in parallel 1
2 Cyclone diameter: D (m) 0.3
3 Distance between the underflow and overflow nozzles/D 3
4 Diameter of the feed nozzle/D 0.25
5 Diameter of the overflow nozzle/D 0.3
6 Diameter of the underflow nozzle/D 0.18
7 Adjustment of the corrected d50 1
8 Adjustment of the partition curve imperfection 1
9 Adjustment of the short circuiting fraction 1
10 Adjustment of the rope discharge limit 1
11 Calculated pressure drop (kPa) 0
12 Calculated underflow nozzle diameter (cm) to prevent roping 0
Model focus example Model focus/Hydrocyclone/Hydrocyclone 2

Model focus/Hydrocyclone/Hydrocyclone 2/Phosphate
This model is based on the empirical equations established as a result of experimental work
by L.R. Plitt (L.R. Plitt, "A mathematical model of the hydrocyclone classifier", CIM Bull., Dec.
1976). Plitt considered that the corrected partition curve of a hydrocyclone corresponds to a
Rosin-Rammler formula:
m
d
0.693
Yc (d ) = 1 e d 50 c
where:
d particle size
Yc proportion of the particle population of size d which reports to the cyclone overflow,
without accounting for the short circuiting fraction
d50c corrected d50
USIM PAC 3.1

m parameter characterizing the sharpness of the classification commonly termed the

"slope". It is related to imperfection as follows:
1 1
0.77
I = 0.5 x 2 0.415
m m
m

Four basic empirical equations characterize, directly or indirectly, the parameters of the
corrected partition curve and the short-circuiting fraction as a function of the geometrical
parameters of a cyclone and the characteristics of its feed:
52.5D 0.46 DA0.6 DO1.21 e0.063

d50i = 0.71 0.38 0.45
DU H QV ( mi )
0.5
1.88QV1.78 e0.0055
P=
(
D 0.37 DA0.94 H 0.28 DU2 + DO2 ) 0.87
0.15
-1.58R V D2H
m = 1.93 e
Qv
3.31
D
1.9 u
D
(
H 0.54 Du2 + Do2 )
0.36 0.0054
e
S = o
Pm0.24 D1.11
where:
D internal diameter of the cyclone (cm)
DA diameter of the feed nozzle (cm)
DO diameter of the overflow nozzle (cm)
DU diameter of the underflow nozzle (cm)
H free vortex height or distance between the overflow and underflow nozzles (cm)
percent solids by volume in the feed pulp to the cyclone
QV volumetric flowrate of the feed pulp (l/min)
mi specific gravity of particle type i
specific gravity of liquid (equal to 1 in the model)
RV fraction of the volumetric feedrate passing to the underflow
P pressure drop in the cyclone (kPa)
Pm P expressed in pulp height (m)
S ratio between the volumetric flowrates in the underflow and the overflow.
Notes
For each particle type class i the model computes a corrected d50 (d50i), taking into account
the specific gravity of this particle type mi. This accounts for the difference in the cut-size
USIM PAC 3.1

between minerals which one observes when the ore is composed of minerals of different
specific gravity.
A computation of the pressure drop is done in the model. The value obtained is written to the
Operating Parameters Display when the simulation converges.
Other values written in the Operating Parameters Display are:
Average corrected d50
Imperfection
Rf (short circuiting fraction)
Rope limit in % solids by volume to the underflow
Mean specific gravity of the feed solids
This model simulates the operation of hydrocyclones in mineral slurries. Even when the
model is used without calibration, that is using default values of 1 for the four adjustment
parameters, the results are usually within a reasonable level of precision.
The three adjustment parameters multiply the values of the corrected d50, the imperfection
and the fines short circuit parameter respectively. Parameter #10 is for adjustment of the
point at which rope discharge occurs and is only used for calibration of a roping cyclone. This
parameter also has a default value of 1 and adjusts the % solids by volume of the cyclone
underflow during roping. All the adjustment parameters have a default value of 1.

The model has 4 adjustment parameters:
7 Adjustment of the corrected d50
8 Adjustment of the partition curve imperfection
9 Adjustment of the flow split
10 Adjustment of the rope discharge limit
To calculate the values of these parameters to reach a set of measured data (in file 1), use
the following procedure:
Step 0
Perform a data reconciliation by material balance to obtain a set of balanced data (results in
file 2).
Open the Excel file Hydrocyclone Calibration.xls in the directory Model focus/Hydrocyclone
From the stream description sheet of the balanced data (file 2), copy the values of the slurry
volumetric flowrate in underflow and overflow, as well as the solids volumetric flowrate of
underflow into the corresponding column of the Excel file.
It calculates the ratio between volumetric flowrates of underflow and overflow S0.
Step 1
Set the number and sizes of the cyclones and run a direct simulation keeping the adjustment
parameters to the default value 1 (results in file 3).
From the stream description sheet of the non calibrated simulated data (file 3), copy the
values of the slurry volumetric flowrate in underflow and overflow, as well as the solids
volumetric flowrate of underflow into the corresponding column of the Excel file.
USIM PAC 3.1

It calculates also the ratio between volumetric flowrates of underflow and overflow S1 and the
adjustment of the flow split (parameter #9).
Step 2
Set the parameter #9 with the calculated value and run a direct simulation (results in file 4).
Verify the slurry volumetric flowrates.
Step 3
Open the Operating Parameters Display to see if roping effect occurs or not.
o If roping effect doesnt occur go to step 4.
o If roping effect occurs and the %-solids by volume in the underflow is correct, the
calibration is finished.
o If roping effect occurs and the %-solids by volume in the underflow is not correct,
copy the value of the Adjustment of the rope discharge limit Predicted in
parameter #10 and run a direct simulation (results in file 5).
o If roping effect occurs by simulation but not actually or conversely doesnt occur by
simulation but actually occurs, copy the value of the Adjustment of the rope discharge
limit Theoretical in parameter #10 and run a direct simulation (results in file 5).
Verify the slurry volumetric flowrates and the solids volumetric flowrate and % by volume of
the underflow.
If roping effect occurs, calibration is finished. Otherwise go to step4
Step 4
Compare the partition curve generated at step 2 or 3 and the balanced one at step 0.
If necessary, adjust the parameters #7 and #8, using the Model Parameter Adjustment
algorithm, to reach the observed partition curve.
Remarks
If the parameter #10 is chosen to oblige the model to predict roping effect, it is not necessary
to adjust parameters #7 and #8.
If the roping effect actually occurs and one wants to reproduce partition curve, choose
parameter #10 to not predict roping effect and then adjust the parameters #7 and #8 as in
step 4.
The adjustment of parameters #7 and #8 will change the solids concentration in underflow.
Power calculation
The power consumed by the pump associated with the hydrocyclone is proportional to the
head inside the hydrocyclone according to the formula (Kelly, E.G., Spottiswood, D.J.,
Introduction to mineral processing, Ed. John Wiley and sons, 1982):
KH wQ
PW =
E
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
K its value 977.1 N/m2 has been empirically established by Hicks and Edwards (Hicks,
T.G. and Edwards, T.W., Pump Application Engineering, Mc Graw-Hill, 1971)
E = Ew (1 K sp )
where:
solids specific gravity, obtained thanks to a slurry pump factor chart (after McElvain
volume fraction of solids in slurry (calculated by the hydrocyclone model)
H
Hw =
1 K sp
where:
H total head of slurry: sum of head of slurry (m) calculated by the hydrocyclone model
and head (m) lost in piping (parameter #14)
Display" files.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a hydrocyclone depends on its diameter D
(parameter #2):
C = aD b
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
D (in) a b
1 D 13.46 414.46 0.7582
13.46 D 50 72.256 1.430

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 129 SAG/AG mill (2)
SAG/AG mill 29 parameters One output stream

4 Filling with balls (%) 5
7 Size of the discharge grate openings (mm) 25
8 Imperfection of the classification of the discharge grate 0.4
9 Maximum diameter of extracted pebbles (mm) 0
10 Imperfection of the grate for pebble extraction 0.4
11 Adjustment of pebble extraction efficiency 1
12 Minimum diameter of extracted pebbles (mm) 0
13 Percentage of mean residence time in the first mixer (%) 80
14 Wear coefficient (0=surface, 1=volume) 0.6
15 Wear rate per component 1
16 PHIG (distribution of attrition products) 0.7
17 BETAG (distribution of attrition products) 0.5
18 GAMMAG (distribution of attrition products) 0
19 Reference size for the distribution of attrition products (mm) 0
20 ALPHA1 (grinding function for particles) 0.5
21 ALPHA2 (grinding function for particles) 0
22 K1 (grinding function for particles) 1
23 Reference size for the grinding function (mm) 0
24 Percent solids in the mill, if known (%) 0
25 Effective porosity of the load (fraction) 0.3
27 Target volumetric loading (%) 0
29 Calculated load of grinding media 0
Model focus example Model focus/SAG mill/SAG mill 2
USIM PAC 3.1

This model combines a first order kinetic approach for particles below the size of the
discharge grate, a wear function for the rocks, and a classification function for pebbles
extraction.
The terms employed to characterize the different fragments of the feed are represented in
the following figure:
Maximum diameter
of extracted pebbles
Extracted
pebbles
Feed
Minimum diameter
of extracted pebbles
Particles
Size of the discharge

grate openings :
- below = particles
- above = rocks
1 - Wear of the rocks

The wear of rocks is considered analogous to that of balls studied by Austin (Austin L.G.,
Menacho J.M., Pearcy F., A general model for semi-autogenous and autogenous milling,
Proceeding, APCOM 87, SAIMM, Johannesburg, Vol. 2, Metallurgy, pp 107-126, 1987).
1.1 - Main assumption

The mass produced by abrasion per unit of time is expressed as:
dm
= 4r 2+ V (1)
dt
where:
r radius of the bloc being worn (unit of length),
can range from 0 if the wear is proportional to the surface to 0.999 if the wear is
proportional to the volume (parameter #14),
V abrasion rate constant, whose unit depends on (m/s if = 0),
specific gravity of the material.
This expression means that the mass produced by abrasion per unit of time is proportional to
the mass of the rock if is almost 1, and proportional to its surface area if = 0. The
coefficient is generally around 0.6.
USIM PAC 3.1

The abrasion of a rock generates fines (below the discharge grate opening) and other rocks
which fall into the size class just below.
1.2 - Mass balance of rocks

The mass balance over one size class of rocks when the mill is operated steadily can be
expressed as:
Variation of mass per unit of time = feed flowrate + flowrate of production from
the size class just above - flowrate of disappearance by abrasion - flowrate
extracted.
This equation is:
r
3

m i
i 1 ri 1 m
0 = Q fi + (1 )V 1 1 1 i 1 Qei
ri 1 ri ri ri +1

for 1
where:
Qfi feed flowrate (kg/s),
Qei extracted flowrate (kg/s),
V abrasion rate (unit of r1-/s),
mi mass of rocks (kg),
ri radius of a rock (whatever unit of length),
i index of the size class.
1.3 - Influence of mill diameter on abrasion rate

The value of V is determined by:
V = V0 D 0.66
where:
V0 abrasion rate per component (parameter # 15),
D mill diameter (parameter #2).
1.4 - Pebble extraction

The rocks with diameters between maximum (parameter #9) and minimum (parameter #12)
diameters of extracted pebbles are considered to be "critical". If these parameters are
specified ( 0), the extraction occurs.
The grate for pebble extraction is represented by the classification function expressed by:
USIM PAC 3.1

1
C max i =
if xi < d p max
d p max
1 +
xi
C max i =1 if xi d p max
where:
C max i proportion of rocks retained in the mill,
xi geometric mean diameter of rocks in size class i.
d p max maximum diameter of extracted pebbles (parameter #9),
slope of the classification:
log 3
=
(
log I p max + 1 + I p2 max )
I p max imperfection (parameter #10),
The grate for the return of fines to the mill is considered as perfect, that is to say:
C min i = 0 if xi < d p min
C min i = 1 if xi < d p min
C min i proportion of pebbles retained by the grate,
d p min minimum diameter of extracted pebbles (parameter #12),
The flowrate of extracted pebbles is assumed to be proportional to their mass in the mill. The
global expression is:
Qei = mi. (1 Cmax i )Cmin i E
where:
E extraction efficiency which depends on the length of the mill according to:
d p max
E = aE
L
where:
aE adjustment parameter #11,
L mill length (parameter #3).
1.5 - Algorithm
USIM PAC 3.1

Starting with size class 1 (top size), the mass of rocks in each size class is calculated.
This calculation allows the total holdup to be determined, as well as the holdup of rocks in
the critical size and the flowrate of production of fines by abrasion.
2. Power calculation.
The power calculation is the following (Ref. "A mill power equation for SAG mills", L.G.
Austin, Minerals & Metallurgical Processing, Vol 7, n1, pp 57-62, Feb.1990) :
0.1
PW = 10.6 D 2.5 L(1 1.03Tl ) (1 ) s Tl + 0.6Tb b s Vr 1 9 10V (2)
cs cs 2 r

where:
PW calculated power (kW - output parameter #28),
porosity of the load, typically 0.3,
b specific gravity of balls (ton/m3 - parameter #6),
s mean specific gravity of rocks (ton/m3),
cs weight fraction of rocks in rocks + water,
Tl fractional volume filled with the load,
Tb fractional volume filled with balls (parameter #4),
Vr fraction of critical speed (parameter #5).
3. Grinding of the ore

The fines are then distributed according to:
j j
d d
Bij = j i + (1 j ) i (3)
da da
where:
Bij fraction of fines produced by abrasion of rocks of component j which report to size
class i
di upper bound of the size class i
j parameter #16
j parameter #17
j parameter #18
da reference size (parameter #19)
Bij = 1 if di > d a
The parameters j and j depend on the mill filling according to the relations:
USIM PAC 3.1

j = j (1 + 5(Tl 0.3))
j = j (1 + 5(Tl 0.3))
if the mill filling Tl is between 0.1 and 0.5.
The ore is ground according to the kinetic description of grinding, assuming the
compensation hypothesis. The coefficients of the selection function are determined by
adjustment on the basis of grinding data from continuous pilot or industrial scale grinding.
The selection function K is modeled by the following form:
2
xi x
1 ln + 2 ln i
Pu dg dg
K i = K1 e
(4)
Hp
where:
xi mean diameter of the particles in the particle size class i,
Hp holdup of particles in the mill,
K1, 1, 2 selection function parameters #22, #20, #21 respectively,
dg reference size for grinding (parameter #23),
Pu useful power calculated from the following formula:
H Hc + Hb
Pu = PW
H + Hb
H holdup of rocks,
Hc holdup of pebbles with critical size,
Hb holdup of balls.
Caution
The selection function must be an increasing monoton function of the particle size. Verify this
constraint in the Operating parameter display option.
The transport of material in the mill is characterized by a series of two perfect mixers whose
respective volumes are determined by parameter #13. The discharge grate creates an
internal circulating load in the second mixer with a partition curve similar to the one of the
pebble extraction grate, characterized by the opening (parameter #7) and the imperfection
(parameter #8).
Use of the model

Basically, the parameters that determine the capabilities of the model for sizing purposes are
those of wear rate equation (1) and power calculation equation (2). When trying to calibrate
the model, these parameters have to be determined first. The most important is V0
(parameter #15). A guess has to be made and the power or/and the percent filling calculated
by the model (read in the Operating Parameters Display) have to be compared to the
measured ones.
USIM PAC 3.1

Once the relations between power, percent filling and wear rate have been adjusted, the
second step of the calibration of the model is to fit the parameters of the breakage and
selection functions. The fit should normally be very good, at least graphically.
If the shape of the output size distribution is not correct, the most sensitive parameters will
be first the reference sizes for breakage and selection functions, and then the exponents in
equation (3) and the 's of equation (4).
If the shape is correct, but a gap remains, the most sensitive parameters will be again the
reference sizes and the specific rate of breakage (parameter #22).
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a SAG/AG mill depends on its power PW
(parameter #28):
C = aPwb
where:
PW (HP) a b
3000 Pw 10000 4195 0.7547

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 138 SAG/AG mill + Trommel (2)
SAG/AG mill with trommel 31 parameters Two output streams

8 Imperfection of the classification of the discharge grate 0.4
9 Maximum diameter of extracted pebbles (mm) 0
10 Imperfection of the grate for pebble extraction 0.4
11 Adjustment of pebble extraction efficiency 1
12 Minimum diameter of extracted pebbles (mm) 0
13 Percentage of mean residence time in the first mixer (%) 80
14 Wear coefficient (0=surface, 1=volume) 0.6
15 Wear rate per component 1
16 PHIG (distribution of attrition products) 0.7
17 BETAG (distribution of attrition products) 0.5
18 GAMMAG (distribution of attrition products) 0
19 Reference size for the distribution of attrition products (mm) 0
22 K1 (grinding function for particles) 1
24 Percent solids in the mill, if known (%) 0
25 Effective porosity of the load (fraction) 0.3
28 Size of the trommel openings (mm) 20
31 Calculated load of grinding media 0
USIM PAC 3.1

This model works as the SAG/AG mill (2) model. The only difference concerns the trommel
classification.
Trommel classification
The classification is perfect. The flowrate of the size class containing the trommel opening
(parameter #28) is split by linear interpolation.
Capital cost
(parameter #30):
C = aPwb
where:
PW (HP) a b
3000 Pw 10000 4195 0.7547

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 128 Screen (2)

3 length/width ratio 2
5 Percent solids in the coarse stream 85
6 Adjustment of the kinetic constant 1
7 Adjustment of the probability constant 1
2
8 Kinetic constant K50 (t/h.cm ) 5
9 Probability parameter 2
13 Deck (for vibrating) (Single, Double or Triple) Single
Model focus example Model focus/Screen/Screen 2
The model uses the Ferrara, Preti and Schena work ("Modelling of screening operations",
International Journal of Mineral Processing, 22, 1988, pp. 193-222). It calculates the partition
efficiency per size class i and component p:
ip
Eip = e
with ip solution of:
( )

n Y j ip ji m
F ( ip ) = di L
e 1 + Y j ip + K 50 p 2 1 =0
j =1
4 d W
3 1
ji j = n +
14 42444 424 1
3 1444244430
Ai ( ip ) Bi ( ip ) C ip
where:
m number of size classes
n number of the size class including the screen opening
Yi weight fraction of the feed in the size class j
probability parameter, function of mesh type and operating conditions (parameter #9)
d screen opening (parameter #4)
USIM PAC 3.1

di average particle diameter in size class i

d dj
ji =
d d i
L screen length (parameter #3 x parameter #2)

W0 feed flowrate per unit of screen width (g.s-1.cm-1)
K 50 p kinetic constant in the overloaded zone of p type particles with d/2 diameter
(parameter #8)
Ai ( ip ) effect of particles smaller than the screen mesh on the particles of class i
Bi ( ip ) effect of particles larger than the screen mesh on the particles of class i
The equation F ( ip ) = 0 is solved with a Newton algorithm.
The model does not calculate water partition. The percent solids in the coarse stream must
then be specified (parameter #5).
Capital cost
(parameter #10):
DSM curved screen:
C = al b
where:
5 ft 1 in 1 l 2.11 3079 0.1452
2.11 < l 8 1911.4 0.7826

2 ft 6 in 1 l 3.64 2329.8 0.2857
3.64 < l 8 1062.2 0.8931

Stationary screen:
(parameter #2):
C = a l2L( ) b
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
Steel a b
l2L (in3)
Stainless
10 l 2 L 63.19 2822.7 0.2135
63.19 l 2 L 162 1374.5 0.3870
Carbon
10 l 2 L 65.77 2465.9 0.2035
65.77 l 2 L 162 689.33 0.5079
Vibrating screen:
( )
C = a l2L
b
where:
Deck a b
l2L (in3)
Single
11 l 2 L 1536 2141.3 0.4069
Double
11 l 2 L 1536 2280.4 0.4256
Triple
54 l 2 L 1536 1862.4 0.4908
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 137 SALA Agitated Mill (2)
SALA agitated mill 16 parameters One output stream

2 Filling of the mill (%) 100
3 Stirrer rotational speed (rpm) 75
4 Inside mill diameter (mm) 690
5 Inside mill height (calculated if zero) (mm) 1200
6 Grinding media diameter (mm) 8
7 Reference size for the selection function (m) 10000
8 Specific rate of breakage (S1E) 100
9 Exponent (ALPHA) 1
10 Correction related to the limit of grinding (m) 0.5
11 Number of perfect mixers in series (calculated if zero) 3
12 Optimum pulp density (mass % of solids) 60
13 Grinding media specific gravity (g/cm3) 7.5
14 Grinding media porosity 0.6
15 Calculated media load (kg) 0
This model of the Sala Agitated Mill (SAM) uses a simplified solution to the population
balance approach. The rate of breakage is modified by the mill power, providing predictions
of the resulting product size distribution for different grinding conditions and mill sizes. The
power of the mill is estimated by a physically derived function, using an assumption that the
mill power consumption mainly arises from the ball to ball friction within the mill. The grinding
efficiency is approximated in the model depending on the media ball size and pulp density.
Mill description
The Sala Agitated Mill consists in a grinding chamber filled with grinding media. A rotor
equipped with stirring pins agitates the media. The rotor is driven by an electric motor located
on the top of the mill with the power of 7.5 kW for the pilot scale mills up to 75 kW for the
industrial mills.
A number of parts, specially designed to reduce wear, are found in the mill. The mill design is
shown in figure 1. Despite the wear protection, the pressure at the mill bottom prevents the
design of large mills without considerable redesign efforts. This is why there are no SAM
mills larger than 75 kW (Holmberg, 1993). For the pilot scale SAM 7.5, the internal diameter
is 275 mm and the grinding chamber height 780mm, while in the biggest SAM, the SAM 75,
the mill diameter is 690 mm and the grinding chamber height 1200mm.
USIM PAC 3.1

In wet grinding, the pulp is fed at the bottom of the mill and overflows at the top, while for dry
grinding the mill is fed at the top and is discharged at the bottom (See figure 1).
The diameter of the grinding media is very important for the grinding results. It has been
considered that the ratio between grinding media and the largest particle to be ground should
be 20 - 40 in the SAM.
Drive motor
Speed reducer
Wear resistant rotor

Discharge
Baffles
Solid tungsten carbide pins

Lifter
Feed
Figure 1 The Sala Agitated Mill (wet grinding)

Theory
1. Population balance
This model is based on a population balance approach, represented in the batch case by the
following equation:
i 1
dwi
= Si wi (t ) + bij S j w j (t ) (1)
dt j =1
i >1
where:
Si breakage rate of particles in size class i,
wi the mass hold-up,
bij breakage distribution function.
When integrating the batch grinding equation to simulate continuous equation, the
Residence Time Distribution (RTD) gives a description of the mass transport through the mill:
m
m t m 1 mt
h(t ) = e (2)
(m 1)!
where:
total mean residence time,
m number of identical perfect mixers in series.
USIM PAC 3.1

A simplified solution to the batch grinding equation (1), completed with the residence time
distribution of m equal mixers in series gives:
1 F ( xi )
P( xi ) = 1 m
(3)

1 + Si 1
m
where F(xi) is the feed size distribution.
2. Power calculation
The Sala Agitated Mill has, according to Bogen J. (1994), a 1/1 scale-up performance. The
grinding product from a 7.5 kW SAM with flowrate q is the same as the product from a 75 kW
mill with flowrate 10.q, if the grinding conditions (ball size, pulp density, feed, etc.) are the
same. The 1/1 ratio indicates strongly that the energy approach used in ball milling
simulation (Herbst, 1979) is also valid for the SAM, and states that the B (breakage matrix)
values are constant and S proportional to the power divided by the solid flowrate. This
conclusion is very important as it can be used for scaling up using pilot scale mill.
A power function for the SAM was built, taking into account the following hypothesis: The
energy consumed by grinding is mainly due to the friction between the balls in the mill, and
the friction between two balls is determined by the pressure from the load over the balls.
Friction multiplied with length is energy, thus giving that the ball speed will be related to the
power of the mill. This assumption does not consider the resistance force from the mill shell,
but only the friction between the balls originated from the pressure lying on it.
The formula obtained is a function of (see figure 2):
mill parameters (i.e., h the total height, rm the mill radius, rr the rotor radius, rs the stirrers
radius, n the rotational speed of the rotor);
media parameters (i.e., hf the height of the media load, a friction coefficient, the unit
area per unit volume (1/m), 2 the density of the media phase, p0 the porosity of the
media);
pulp parameter (i.e., 1 the pulp density).
rr
r1
h
r2
hf
rs
rm
USIM PAC 3.1

Figure 2. Characteristics of the mill

3. Grinding efficiency
It is known (Persson, 1994), that the grinding performance in the SAM does not depend on
the energy input only, but is strongly depending on a factor that can be called the grinding
efficiency. The model uses the assumption that the attrition-based grinding is efficient on the
whole media surface area, and that the breakage rate is directly proportional to this area. If a
batch of fixed volume containing n spherical balls, all with the same diameter d is
considered, the total area in the batch will be proportional to d-1. A decreasing media
diameter will thus give a higher grinding efficiency.
The effect on the grinding efficiency of changes in pulp density is more difficult to simulate as
it is related probably more to the pulp viscosity than to the pulp density. It is known that the
mill grinds more efficiently with high pulp density, but that the grinding deteriorates if the
density grows too high due to transport problems (Persson, 1994). A simple formula shows a
pattern similar to the description of the influence of pulp density:
(cs co ) + co2
2
E= (4)
co2
where cs is the actual concentration of solids in the feed and co the "optimal pulp density" for
the most efficient grinding. For the cases studied, a default value of co = 60 % was good
enough to describe the grinding performance. Nevertheless co is kept as one parameter of
the model and may be changed for some minerals and feed size distributions. It must be
pointed out that this function does not have any theoretical basis at all except being a
function that seems to be flexible enough to describe the effect of a change in pulp density.
Figure 3 shows how the function of equation (4) will change with different values of co.
1
Grinding efficiency (Eff)
0.75
0.5
0.25
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Concentration of solids (Csol in %)
Copt=20%
Copt=40%
Copt=70%
Copt=100 %
Figure 3. Grinding efficiency versus pulp density for different optimal pulp densities
In the SAM model, the grinding efficiency function is multiplied by the calculated power and
the result will be multiplied with the ore specific kinetic constant, Ke.
4. Selection function and limit of grinding

The selection function dependency on particle size was expressed as:
USIM PAC 3.1

Si = K ( xi d )

for xi d > 0
where K and are constants, and d is a correction factor for the finest particle sizes.
Determination of d is only needed when very small product particle sizes are expected.
The value of d does not correspond to the actual limit of grinding, but only reduces the errors
generated by the slower rate of disappearance in these regions.
References
Holmberg, K, 1993. Comparison of fine grinding equipment: VertiMill, SAM Mill, Vibrating Mill
and Ball Mill. Soc. Royale Belge des Ingnieurs Study day
Guillaneau, J-C, Villeneuve, J, Blot, P, 1992. Advances in the Design and Optimization of
Mineral Processing Plants, Proceedings of the APCOM 92, 23rd International Symposium on
the Application of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industry, April 7-11,
Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A., Chapter 54, pp. 549-566.
Bogen, J, 1994. Private communication, Sala International AB
Austin, L G, Klimpel, R R and Luckie, P T, 1984. Process Engineering of Size Reduction:
Ball Milling. AIME New York, Chap. 4, 8.
Herbst, J A and Bascur, O A, 1979. A program for the simulation of steady-state grinding
circuit behaviour, using a small computer, Report of Department of Metallurgical Engineering,
University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Persson, H, 1994. Private communication, Lule University of Technology, Div. of Mineral
Processing, Lule, Sweden.
Kser O, 1993. Untersuchungen zu Zerkleinerungsverhalten und Materialtransport in einer
langsamlaufenden, vertikalen Rhrwerkmhle vom Typ SAM 7.5, Lule University of
Technology, Div. of Mineral Processing, Lule, Sweden.
Bendel, S and Mellberg, F, 1993. Ommalning och finmalning med agiterad kvarn, Internal
report Union Minire Sverige AB.
USIM PAC 3.1

2.4 Level 3 models

5 Percent volumetric loading of pulp 20
7 Balls specific gravity 7.8
10 Breakage function: PHI per component 0.5
11 Breakage function: BETA per component 0.5
12 Breakage function: GAMMA per component 2
13 Breakage function: DELTA per component 0
14 Specific rate of breakage per component (S1E in t/kWh) 1
15 Exponent 1 per component for the size dependence of S 0.7
16 Exponent 2 per component for the size dependence of S 0
This model combines a complete kinetic approach, based on the works of Austin and Herbst,
with an energetic approach to grinding. This model differs from the level 2 model in that it
takes separate account of the grinding matrix B and the selection matrix S. The grinding
matrix is modeled on the basis of at least one laboratory test. The selection matrix is
represented by a function, the coefficients of which are determined by linear adjustment on
the basis of grinding data from continuous pilot or industrial scale grinding.
The energetic approach to grinding is introduced to make it possible to compute the energy
consumed by the mill as a function of its characteristics, using the empirical formula used in
the Allis Chalmers methods for dimensioning mills, exactly as in the Ball mill (1) and Ball mill
(2) models:
USIM PAC 3.1


Wst = 4.879 D 0.3 (3.2 3Tc )Vr 1 910V + s 50.8 (Db 12.5 D )
0.1 1.102
2 r
where:
D mill diameter (m)
Tc fraction of mill volume occupied by the balls
This energy is then integrated into a formula resulting from the kinetic approach:
the transport of material in the mill is characterized by N, the number of perfect mixers in
series (parameter #9). The method for determining the value of this parameter is given in
detail in the description of the Ball mill (2) model. The percent loading by volume of pulp
(parameter #5) can be adjusted in case of different level of pulp and ball loadings.
the breakage function is modeled by a function of the following form:

x x
Bij = j i 1 + (1 j ) i 1
x x
j j
where:
Bij cumulative breakage function
xi upper limit of size class i
j breakage parameter, function of the size of the particles to be milled and defined by:

x
i = 1 i
x1
, , and 1 are parameters of the model: , and 1 are determined from the modeling of
the breakage function obtained during a laboratory test, whilst is obtained by adjustment
when several laboratory tests are available. The method for determining the values of ,
and 1 is detailed below.
the selection function S is modeled by a single-parameter function of the following form:
2
di d
1 ln + 2 ln i
d1 d1
Si = S1e
where:
di geometric mean size of the particles in the particle size class i.
d1 reference particle size = 1 mm.
USIM PAC 3.1

the link between the kinetic approach and the energy available for grinding is done with
the following relationship:
P
S1 = S1E
H
where:
P the energy available for grinding
H the total mass contained in the mill (hold up of material in the mill)
S1E the 'normalized' parameter of the selection function.

Residence time distribution must be determined by a specific test (see model 119), but most
of the time, the default value of 3 perfect mixers in series makes it possible to obtain
Three parameters per mineral are necessary for modeling the breakage matrix. They are
determined from laboratory tests (see below). The values of these parameters have to be
introduced into the model before any calibration. Furthermore, the model requires the
adjustment of two or three other parameters for each mineral.
Notes
The model predicts the selectivity of grinding when several minerals of different grindabilities
describe the ore.
It does not take directly into account the influence of the slurry percent solids.
Method for determining the breakage matrix

This methodology is derived from the work of AUSTIN and GUPTA. It involves using a
laboratory mill to grind a batch of ore particles all belonging to the same particle size class.
The particle size distribution of the product after grinding makes it possible to calculate the
grinding matrix by applying simple hypotheses.
Laboratory equipment
The laboratory batch mill should preferably be of the cylindrical jar type. The level of filling
with the charge and the rotation speed of the laboratory mill should be similar to these of the
industrial or pilot-scale mill to model. The charge should consist of balls of at least three
different sizes, and the number of balls of each size should be the same or nearly the same
so as to constitute a "worn-in" charge which has a distribution similar to the average
distribution of charges in industrial mills.
Preparation of the sample

The feed is a single particle size class, the particle size distribution of which is verified by
careful sieving of a sample produced by successive quartering.
If, after sieving, the sample is found to contain less than 5% of out-of-class particles, it is
considered that the feed is suitable for the test. The proportion of out-of-class particles in the
USIM PAC 3.1

feed constitutes a corrective factor that is involved in calculating the matrix. If the level of
out-of-class particles exceeds 5%, the feed must be sieved again.
The feed mass is calculated to occupy between 45% and 60% of the space between the
balls, and the feed percent solids should be similar to that of the industrial or pilot-scale mill
to model.
Carrying out the test

Several "feed" batches are produced. In practice, the grinding time is obtained by successive
grinding tests, the object being to determine the time at the end of which between 70% and
80% of the initial batch remains within the initial particle size class.
Once this time t has been determined, a "feed" batch is milled: sieving the milled product
then gives the cumulative rejects Ri(t) for each sieve i after a time t.
The cumulative breakage matrix is calculated using the formula:
Ri (0 )
log
Ri (t )
Bij =
R (0 )
log 1
R1 (t )
In the above equation, sieve 1 is the one that corresponds to the finer limit of the particle size
class of the feed. The value 0 relates to the initial time, where R1(0) = 100% - percentage of
out-of-class particles in the feed,
Note
On the basis of the chemical analysis of the various particle size distribution classes, it is
possible, if a mineralogical model and the chemistry-mineralogical transformation formula
have been defined, to deduce a matrix B for each of the constituents of the phase model.
This methodology, developed at BRGM, allows the selectivity of grinding to be taken into
account, unlike the case of a single breakage matrix, which characterizes the totality of the
ore.
Modelling the breakage matrix

For the level 3 grinding models in USIM PAC, the cumulative breakage matrix is modeled by
means of a cumulative grinding function of the following form:

x x
Bij = j i 1 + (1 j ) i 1
x x
j j
where j is a function of the size of the particles to be milled.
Modeling the grinding matrix corresponding to the products of particles of a given size class
involves determining the coefficients , and by regression of a function:

y y
B( y,x ) = ( x ) + (1 ( x ))
x x
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
y size of the children particles
x size of the parent particles
B( y, x ) percentage of particles of size x which, having been milled, produce particles of a

size smaller than y where y < x
(x ) coefficient calculated for the size class corresponding to size x.
Capital cost
L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 20 3875.3 2.111 580

USIM PAC 3.1


5 Percent volumetric loading of pulp 20
This model differs only from the ball mill (3) model in regard to the formula used to compute
the power available for grinding:
1
Wst = 1.752.D 3 (6.3 5.4Tc )Vr
where:
Wst power consumed per ton of rods (kW)
D mill diameter (m)
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
L
C = aDe b 0.8 + c D 2 L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 5 4364.8 2.105 490

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 133 SAG/AG mill (3)
SAG/AG mill 27 parameters One output stream

7 S1E (grinding function for particles) 1
10 PHIG (breakage function for rocks) 0.5
11 BETAG (breakage function for rocks) 1
12 GAMMAG (breakage function for rocks) 3
14 Reference size for rocks (mm) 50
15 Discharge rate constant (t/kWh) 1
16 Rock breakage rate (t/kWh) 1
17 Water transport constant (1/h) 0.5
18 Power equation constant 2
19 KA1: angle of repose 0
23 Adjustment of the density coefficient for solids 1
24 Holdup of particles (t) 0
26 Typical grade per size in output (%) 0
The SAG mill achieves particle breakage through the action of a reduced ball charge
(5-10%) and through material self-breakage. In the latter case, large rock breaks other rock
USIM PAC 3.1

and smaller particles. Autogenous milling relies solely on material self-breakage and has no
ball charge.
Population balance.
The material in the mill is divided into rock, which is considered to be the grinding media, and
particles. By convention, the material coarser than the grate size is called rock; the material
finer than the grate size is called particles.
The rock is lumped into a single size fraction and leaves the mill only by being broken into
particles. At steady state, the rate at which rock enters the mill is equal to its breakage rate.
This is represented by the following equation:
M r Kr H r = 0
where:
Mr rock feedrate (t/h)
Kr overall rock breakage rate constant (1/h)
Hr weight of rock in the mill (holdup) (t).
The particles (material smaller than the grate) are divided into N size fractions. The rate of
accumulation of material in each size is due to rock and particle breakage, and to the
transport of particles through the mill as expressed by:
dH p mi i 1
= M f m fi K d H p mi + K r H r bi Si H p mi + bij S j H p m j
dt j =1
where:
Mf feedrate of particle (t/h)
m fi fraction of particles in size fraction i in the feed
Kd mill discharge rate constant (1/h)
Hp weight of particles in the mill (holdup) (t)
mi fraction of particles in size fraction i in the mill
bi rock breakage distribution
Si fractional breakage rate of particles in size fraction i (1/h)
bij particle breakage distribution
This equation is simplified by assuming that breakage of particles to smaller sizes is

occurring at rates such that:
Bij S j = Si 1 or bij S j = Si 1 Si
where:
USIM PAC 3.1

Bij cumulative breakage distribution.
The dependency of the rate constants on mill conditions is represented as follows:

P P P
K r = K rE K d = K dE Si = SiE
Hr Hp Hp
where:
P mill power (kW)
K rE specific rock breakage rate (t/kWh)
K dE specific discharge rate constant (t/kWh)
SiE normalized breakage rate of particles in size fraction i (t/kWh)
Assuming no accumulation of material in any size fraction, one obtains:
( ) m
i 1
M f m fi + M r bi K dE Pmi + P SiE1 SiE j =0
j =1
The sum of these equations on i gives:
M f + Mr Md
P= =
K dE K dE
Once P is known, each of the mi can be calculated.
Operation of the mill

The model then calculates the holdup of solids inside the mill by using the following power -
dimensions relation:
(
)
0.1
P = K p sin D 0.3 (H t + H w + H b ) 3.2 3V * Vr 1 9 10V
2 r

where:
Kp power constant
Ht = H p + H r
Hw weight of water in the mill (t)
Hb weight of balls in the mill (t)
D inside mill diameter (m)
V* volume fraction filling (solids + balls) (%)
Vr relative mill speed (fraction)
USIM PAC 3.1

angle of repose of the load (rd), which can be calculated with:
= K A1e K A 2Vr + K A3cs

where:
K A1 , K A2 , K A3 adjustment parameters
cs mass fraction of solids (particles) in the mill. If it is not known, it can be assumed as the
solid mass fraction of the feed, which is calculated by the model as follows:
Mr + M f
cs =
Mr + M f + Wf
The water hold-up is given by:
Wf
Hw =
Kw
where:
Wf water feed rate (t/h)
Kw water transport constant that is inverse of water mean residence time
The holdup of balls is deduced from the parameter #4 Vb* and the mill volume Vm :
H b = b*Vb*Vm
b* is the bulk density of balls: 0.6 where is the density of iron. Vb* parameter should
be given accordingly.
The percentage of mill volume occupied by balls and solids is calculated by:
Ht
V* = + 0.6Vb*
sVm
where s is the bulk density of solids, calculated by s = 0.6 Ad , being the density of
the solids in the feed, given as a physical property in the ore-model; the coefficient 0.6 is
generally used to describe the volume of solids in pulp. It can be modified by the adjustment
parameter #23, Ad , to take into account the effect of size distribution. 1 Ad 1.5
Note
The structure of the model does not permit immediate dimensioning. The Power-to-size
equation can give, for each value of D, two (or zero) values of Ht. Conversely, if V* is known,
Ht is also known as a function of D and then, D can be calculated. The parameter #25
(Target volumetric loading) permits this use of the equation.
USIM PAC 3.1

Discharge grades
The above population balance model calculates the global size distribution of the discharge.
The grades of the particle types in each size class are calculated as follows:
The parameters give the grades of each particle type in each size class in a typical
discharge; the total grades of the feed are known. The model calculates a proportionality
coefficient p so that:
n
T j = xi ptij
i =1
where:
xi calculated ore fraction in size class i
tij given typical grade of particle type j in size class i (parameter #26)
Tj grade of particle type j in the feed
The grades in output stream are then ptij
Capital cost
(parameter #27):
C = aPwb
where:
PW (HP) a b
3000 Pw 10000 4195 0.7547

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 132 SAG/AG mill + Trommel (3)
SAG/AG mill with trommel 29 parameters Two output streams

7 S1E (grinding function for particles) 1
10 PHIG (breakage function for rocks) 0.5
11 BETAG (breakage function for rocks) 1
12 GAMMAG (breakage function for rocks) 3
14 Reference size for rocks (mm) 50
15 Discharge rate constant (t/kWh) 1
16 Rock breakage rate (t/kWh) 1
17 Water transport constant (1/h) 0.5
18 Power equation constant 2
23 Adjustment of the density coefficient for solids 1
24 Holdup of particles (t) 0
27 Percent solids in the coarse stream 90
USIM PAC 3.1

This model works as the SAG/AG mill (3) model. The only difference concerns the trommel
classification.
The classification is perfect. The flowrate of the size class containing the size of the trommel
openings (parameter #26) is split by linear interpolation.
Capital cost
(parameter #29):
C = aPwb
where:
PW (HP) a b
3000 Pw 10000 4195 0.7547

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 134 Pebble mill (3)
Pebble mill 22 parameters One output stream

7 Reference size for the wear function (mm) 50
8 Wear coefficient (from 0=surface to 1=volume) 1
9 Wear rate of pebbles (1/s) 1
10 Angle of repose (degree) 30
11 Reference size class for the selection function 1
12 SE1 (selection function for particles) 1
13 ALPHA1 (selection function for particles) 0.5
14 ALPHA2 (selection function for particles) 0
15 PHIG (breakage function for particles) 0.5
16 BETAG (breakage function for particles) 1
17 GAMMAG (breakage function for particles) 3
18 Number of perfect mixers in series 2
19 Number of the pebble addition stream 0
20 Fraction of pebble wear going to size class i 0
This model combines a kinetic approach identical to Level 3 ball mill with a wear function for
the pebbles.
The feed to the mill has to be made of two streams: one of pebbles only (parameter
#19) and one of ore.
1. Grinding of the ore

The ore is ground according to the kinetic description of grinding.
USIM PAC 3.1

The grinding matrix is modeled on the basis of at least one laboratory test. The selection
matrix is represented by a function, the coefficients of which are determined by linear
adjustment on the basis of grinding data from continuous pilot or industrial scale grinding.
the breakage function is modeled by a function of the following form :

x x
Bij = i 1 + (1 ) i 1
x x
j j
where:
, , breakage parameters #17, #16 and #15 respectively.
the selection function S is modeled by the following form:

2
di d
1. ln + 2 ln i
d iref d iref
Si = S1E e
where:
S1E ,1 , 2 selection function parameters #12, #13 and #14 respectively
iref reference size class (parameter #11)
the transport of material in the mill is characterized by a series of perfect mixers

(parameter #18). The method for determining the value of this parameter is given in detail
in the description of the Ball mill (2) model.
2. Wear of the pebbles

The wear of pebbles is considered analogous to that of balls studied by Austin (Austin L.G.,
Menacho J.M., Pearcy F., A general model for semi-autogenous and autogenous milling,
Proceeding, APCOM 87, SAIMM, Johannesburg, Vol. 2, Metallurgy, pp 107-126, 1987).
The mass produced by abrasion per unit time is expressed as:
dm
= 4r 2 + K p
dt
where:
r radius of the bloc being worn (m)
can range from 0 if the wear is proportional to the surface to 1 if the wear is
proportional to the volume (parameter #8)
Kp wear rate constant (parameter #9), whose unit depends on (m/s if = 0 to 1/s if
= 1)
USIM PAC 3.1

specific gravity of the material.
This assumption leads to the expression of the mass lost in a size class of pebbles:
1
dH pi d
= 3H pi K p i
dt dr
where:
H pi mass of pebbles in size class i in the mill
dr reference size for the wear function (parameter #7)
The material balance of the size class i of pebbles can be expressed as:
dH pi
0 = Q fi Q pi
dt
where:
Q fi flowrate of pebbles entering the mill in size class i
Q pi flowrate of pebbles leaving the mill in size class i
Assuming the pebbles are perfectly mixed in the mill, the size distribution of pebbles inside
the mill is taken identical to that of the output stream:
Q pi H pi
=
Qp Hp
where:
Hp holdup of pebbles in the mill, calculated from the mill filling according to:
D 2
Hp = L 0.6Tc p
4
Qp flowrate of pebbles leaving the mill
D mill diameter (parameter #2)

L length of the mill deduced from parameter #3
Tc parameter #6 (mill filling)
p mean specific gravity of pebbles
One obtains:
USIM PAC 3.1

1
Hp di

Q fi = Q pi 1+3 K p
Qp d r

This equation is solved by an iterative method, assuming as starting point that Qp equals
Qf . At each step, Q pi are calculated and Qp replaced by Q pi until

i
Q p Q pi 10 4 kg.
i
This calculation allows the flowrate of pebbles leaving the mill and the flowrate of fines
created to be known. The fines are then distributed according to their distribution function
(parameter #20).
3. Power calculation
The power calculation is the following:
0.1
PW = 10 sin ( ) A D 2.3 LcTc (3.2 3Tc )Vr 1 9 10V
4 2 r

where:
angle of repose of the mill load (parameter #10)
A 1 for overflow discharge, 1.1 for grate discharge (parameter #5)
c bulk density of the total charge, calculated as follows:
c = 0.6 pebb + 0.4 pulp

Vr relative mill speed (parameter #4)
There is no link between the kinetic of grinding and the calculated power (parameter #22).
4. Output reconstruction
Parameter #21 gives the typical mineral contents per size class in the output stream tij.
The above calculations give the total size distribution si. The flowrate per component and per
size pij are calculated as follows:
Qj
pij = sitij
sitij
i
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a pebble mill depends on its external
diameter De (parameter #2 + shell thickness) and its length/diameter ratio L D (parameter
#3):
L
C = aDe b
D
where:
De (ft) a b
3 De 7.2 12165.1 1.462
7.2 De 20 2624.9 2.239

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 130 Pebble mill + Trommel (3)
Pebble mill with trommel 24 parameters Two output streams

7 Reference size for the wear function (mm) 50
8 Wear coefficient (from 0=surface to 1=volume) 1
9 Wear rate of pebbles (1/s) 1
10 Angle of repose (degree) 30
11 Reference size class for the selection function 1
12 SE1 (selection function for particles) 1
13 ALPHA1 (selection function for particles) 0.5
14 ALPHA2 (selection function for particles) 0
15 PHIG (breakage function for particles) 0.5
16 BETAG (breakage function for particles) 1
17 GAMMAG (breakage function for particles) 3
18 Number of perfect mixers in series 2
22 Number of the pebble addition stream 0
23 Fraction of pebble wear going to size class i 0
This model works as the Pebble mill (3) model. The only difference concerns the trommel
classification.
The classification is perfect. The flowrate of the size class containing the size of the trommel
openings (parameter #19) is split by linear interpolation.
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a pebble mill depends on its external
diameter De (parameter #2 + shell thickness) and its length/diameter ratio L D (parameter
#3):
L
C = aDe b
D
where:
De (ft) a b
3 De 7.2 12165.1 1.462
7.2 De 20 2624.9 2.239

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 140 Feed liberation (3)
Feeder 4 parameters One output stream

1 Dilution with barren waste 0
2 Valuable mineral grade 0
3 Effective mineral grain size (m) 0
4 Calculated grade mineral feed 0
Model focus example Model focus/Liberation
This model is able to generate the composition of each size class in terms of liberation
classes. It uses the calculation method developed by R.L. Wiegel based on the Gaudin
liberation model (R.L. Wiegel, The Rational behind the Development of One Model
Describing the Size Reduction/Liberation of Ores, in Advances in Comminution, Ed. By S.
Komar Kawatra, SME, 2006, pp.225-241).
The principle of this model is to supposed that the ore body, diluted with barren waste, is
ground to produce the size distribution of the feeder input stream. The liberation process
uses 3 parameters:
o The dilution factor (parameter #1) expressed as the mass (in kg) of barren waste
added to 100 kg of ore body;
o The valuable mineral grade (parameter #2) in the material (ore body + barren waste):
o The effective grain size (parameter #3).
These parameters can be obtained by model regression onto laboratory tests such as Davis
tube test, image analysis
In this model, the composition in liberation classes is independent of the size distribution. It is
why this model has to be used at the beginning of the process flowsheet or just after the
crushing stage (in that case, only size distribution is used without composition effect), before
all separations and circulating loads.
Particles in one liberation class of one size class generate, by size reduction, particles
distributed in the closest liberation classes in the just finer size class:
Liberation classes
z
classes
Size
z z z z z
USIM PAC 3.1

The directional coefficient are calculated by the model and give the following typical
liberation distribution:
70
60
50
40
%
30
1664.9 m
1177.3 m
20 832.44 m
588.63 m
416.22 m
10 294.31 m
208.11 m
147.16 m
Particle size
0 104.06 m
73.578 m
0%
5%
52.028 m
15%
25%
35%
36.789 m
45%
55%
65%
26.014 m
75%
85%
95%
100%
Liberation class

The phase model must have at least one ore phase with size distribution, particle types
representing liberation classes with their proportion in each size class, minerals with the
mineral composition of each particle type. The predefined phases Min Liberation or Iron
Ore Liberation are well adapted to this model.
Note
This model is generally associated with the following Mill liberation (3) model.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 139 Mill liberation (3)
Ball mill
23 parameters One output stream
Rod mill

4 Grinding media (Balls or Rods) Balls
7 Grinding media specific gravity 7.8
10 Feed unit number in the flowsheet 1
11 Breakage matrix mode (Simple or Selective) Simple
16 Selection function mode (Simple, Ratio, Prop. or Selective) Simple
23 Rate ratio waste / valuable 1
Model focus example Model focus/Liberation
This model combines a complete kinetic approach, based on the works of Austin and Herbst,
with an energetic approach to grinding and the mineral liberation model of R.L. Wiegel (The
Rational behind the Development of One Model Describing the Size Reduction/Liberation of
Ores, in Advances in Comminution, Ed. By S. Komar Kawatra, SME, 2006, pp.225-241). This
model differs from the level 3 ball or rod mill models in that it takes into account the mineral
liberation. The grinding matrix is modeled on the basis of at least one laboratory test. The
USIM PAC 3.1

selection matrix is represented by a function, the coefficients of which are determined by

linear adjustment on the basis of grinding data from continuous pilot or industrial scale
grinding.
The model represents as well a ball mill or a rod mill depending on parameter #3.
The energetic approach to grinding is introduced to make it possible to compute the energy
consumed by the mill as a function of its characteristics, using the empirical formula used in
the Allis Chalmers methods for dimensioning mills, exactly as in the Ball mill (1, 2 and 3)
models:
0.1
Wst = 4.879 D 0.3 (3.2 3Tc )Vr 1 9 10V
2 r

or as Rod mill (1, 2 and 3) models:
1
Wst = 1.752.D 3 (6.3 5.4Tc )Vr
where:
D mill diameter (m)
Tc fraction of mill volume occupied by the grinding media
This energy is then integrated into a formula resulting from the kinetic approach:
the transport of material in the mill is characterized by N, the number of perfect mixers in
series (parameter #9). The method for determining the value of this parameter is given in
detail in the description of the Ball mill (2) model.
the breakage function is modeled by a function of the following form:

x x
Bij = j i 1 + (1 j ) i 1
x x
j j
where:
j breakage parameter, function of the size of the particles to be milled and defined by:

x
i = 1 i
x1
, , and 1 are parameters of the model: , and 1 are determined from the modeling of
the breakage function obtained during a laboratory test, whilst is obtained by adjustment
when several laboratory tests are available. The method for determining the values of ,
and 1 is detailed below.
the selection function S is modeled by a single-parameter function of the following form:
USIM PAC 3.1

2
di d
1 ln + 2 ln i
d1 d1
Si = S1e
where:
d1 reference particle size = 1 mm.
the link between the kinetic approach and the energy available for grinding is done with
the following relationship:
P
S1 = S1E
H
where:
P the energy available for grinding
H the total mass contained in the mill (hold up of material in the mill)
S1E the 'normalized' parameter of the selection function.

Residence time distribution must be determined by a specific test (see model 119), but most
of the time, the default value of 3 perfect mixers in series makes it possible to obtain
Three parameters per mineral are necessary for modeling the breakage matrix. They are
determined from laboratory tests (see below). The values of these parameters have to be
introduced into the model before any calibration. Furthermore, the model requires the
adjustment of two or three other parameters for each mineral.
Notes
The model must be associated to the Feeder liberation model by pointing to the feeder unit
through the parameter #10.
The model predicts the selectivity of grinding when several particle types (liberation classes)
of different grindabilities describe the ore. It depends of the breakage matrix mode
(parameters #11) and selection function mode (parameter #16).
o Simple breakage matrix: all particle types (liberation classes) use the breakage matrix
parameters of the first one.
o Selective breakage matrix: each particle type (liberation class) has its own set of
breakage matrix parameters.
o Simple selection function: all particle types (liberation classes) use the selection
function parameters of the first one.
o Ratio selection function: all particle types (liberation classes) use the selection
function parameters of the last one (the pure valuable) but the value of the selection
function of the first particle type (the pure waste) is multiplied by the parameter #23
and the others are linearly interpolated versus volume composition in valuable
mineral.
USIM PAC 3.1

o Proportional selection function: only the first particle type (the pure waste) and the
last one (the pure valuable) use their corresponding selection function parameters.
The other particles types are linearly interpolated versus volume composition in
valuable mineral.
o Selective selection function: each particle type (liberation class) has its own set of
selection function parameters.
It does not take directly into account the influence of the slurry percent solids or the ball size
on grinding.
Method for determining the breakage matrix

This methodology is derived from the work of AUSTIN and GUPTA. It involves using a
laboratory mill to grind a batch of ore particles all belonging to the same particle size class.
The particle size distribution of the product after grinding makes it possible to calculate the
grinding matrix by applying simple hypotheses. The breakage matrix selectivity is in fact very
difficult to obtain.
Laboratory equipment
The laboratory batch mill should preferably be of the cylindrical jar type. The level of filling
with the charge and the rotation speed of the laboratory mill should be similar to these of the
industrial or pilot-scale mill to model. The charge should consist of balls of at least three
different sizes, and the number of balls of each size should be the same or nearly the same
so as to constitute a "worn-in" charge which has a distribution similar to the average
distribution of charges in industrial mills.
Preparation of the sample

The feed is a single particle size class, the particle size distribution of which is verified by
careful sieving of a sample produced by successive quartering.
If, after sieving, the sample is found to contain less than 5% of out-of-class particles, it is
considered that the feed is suitable for the test. The proportion of out-of-class particles in the
feed constitutes a corrective factor that is involved in calculating the matrix. If the level of
out-of-class particles exceeds 5%, the feed must be sieved again.
The feed mass is calculated to occupy between 45% and 60% of the space between the
balls, and the feed percent solids should be similar to that of the industrial or pilot-scale mill
to model.
Carrying out the test

Several "feed" batches are produced. In practice, the grinding time is obtained by successive
grinding tests, the object being to determine the time at the end of which between 70% and
80% of the initial batch remains within the initial particle size class.
Once this time t has been determined, a "feed" batch is milled: sieving the milled product
then gives the cumulative rejects Ri(t) for each sieve i after a time t.
The cumulative breakage matrix is calculated using the formula:
USIM PAC 3.1

Ri (0 )
log
Ri (t )
Bij =
R (0 )
log 1
R1 (t )
In the above equation, sieve 1 is the one that corresponds to the finer limit of the particle size
class of the feed. The value 0 relates to the initial time, where R1(0) = 100% - percentage of
out-of-class particles in the feed,
Note
On the basis of the chemical analysis of the various particle size distribution classes, it is
possible, if a mineralogical model and the chemistry-mineralogical transformation formula
have been defined, to deduce a matrix B for each of the constituents of the phase model.
This methodology, developed at BRGM, allows the selectivity of grinding to be taken into
account, unlike the case of a single breakage matrix, which characterizes the totality of the
ore.
Modelling the breakage matrix

For the level 3 grinding models in USIM PAC, the cumulative breakage matrix is modeled by
means of a cumulative grinding function of the following form:

x x
Bij = j i 1 + (1 j ) i 1
x x
j j
where j is a function of the size of the particles to be milled.
Modeling the grinding matrix corresponding to the products of particles of a given size class
involves determining the coefficients , and by regression of a function:

y y
B( y,x ) = ( x ) + (1 ( x ))
x x
where:
y size of the children particles
x size of the parent particles
B( y, x ) percentage of particles of size x which, having been milled, produce particles of a

size smaller than y where y < x
(x ) coefficient calculated for the size class corresponding to size x.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a ball mill (parameter #4 is Balls) depends
on its external diameter De (parameter #2 + shell thickness), its length/diameter ratio L D
(parameter #3) and the ball filling (t/m3 parameters #5 and #7):
USIM PAC 3.1

L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 20 3875.3 2.111 580
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a rod mill (parameter #4 is Rods) depends
on its external diameter De (parameter #2 + shell thickness), its length/diameter ratio L D
(parameter #3) and the rod filling (t/m3 parameters #5 and #7):
L
C = aDe b 0.8 + c D 2 L
D 4
where:
De (ft) a b c
3 De 5 4364.8 2.105 490

Cost Estimation", Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1982, vol. 25, pp. 61 and 65.
USIM PAC 3.1

3 - SEPARATION MODELS
Separation models allow the user to describe and simulate physical separation circuit such
as flotation, gravity and magnetic separation..
The separation models that already exist in your version of the USIM PAC software are:
all gravity separators model: Separator (0)
dense medium cyclone model: Gravity Separation (0)
spiral model: Spiral Concentrator (1)
jig model: Jig (1)
shaking table model: Shaking Table (1)
agitated sump model: Conditioner (2)
flotation bank model: Separator (0)
Flotation (0)
Flotation (1)
Flotation (2A)
Flotation (2B)
Flotation (2C)
flotation column model: Separator (0)
Flotation (0)
Column Flotation (3A)
Column Flotation (3B)
magnetic separator model: Separator (0)
WHIMS (2)
thickener model: Thickener (1)
USIM PAC 3.1

3.1 - Level 0 models
Model 201 Gravity Separation (0)
Dense medium cyclone 5 parameters Two output streams

1 Cut point specific gravity 2.85
2 Density standard deviation (dens75c - dens25c)/2 0.05
3 Percent solids in the heavy stream (%) 50
4 Minimum value of the partition coefficient (fraction) 0.02
5 Maximum value of the partition coefficient (fraction) 0.98
Model focus example Model focus/Gravity separation/Gravity separation 0
This model is derived from the modelling of the gravity concentration of ores by means of the
washability curves of Fournol (H. Fournol: "Mthodes de calcul des possibilits d'puration -
prvision et garantie des rsultats industriels.", Rev. Ind. Minrale, June 1974, pp. 5-19): the
partition curve is the integral of the Normal law:
2

Y ( ) = C1 + (C2 C1 )
1
e
d

where:
cut point specific gravity (parameter #1)
E
=
0.6744
E density standard deviation (parameter #2)
75c 25c
E=
2
75c particle specific gravity at which the value of the corrected partition is 75%
25c particle specific gravity at which the value of the corrected partition is 25%
C1 minimum value of the density partition curve (parameter #4)
C2 maximum value of the density partition curve (parameter #5)
The liquid split is calculated to achieve the desired percent solids in the heavy stream
(parameter #3). If there is not enough water, all feed water reports to this stream.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 202 Separator (0)
Flotation column, Flotation

bank, dense medium
cyclone, spirals, jig, shaking 2 parameters Two output streams
tables and magnetic
separators

1 Number of the stream for which the recovery is defined 0
2 Recovery (%) 0
This model allows the user to define the recovery (parameter #2) of each particle type and
each size class in the stream specified in parameter #1. The number of this stream has to be
read from the flowsheet.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 203 Flotation (0)
Flotation bank and flotation

column

1 Recovery in the froth per component (%) 50
2 Percentage of water in the froth 50
Model focus example Model focus/Flotation/Flotation 0
This model describes the concentration of minerals in the froth through the following
equation:
Ri
Qci = Q fi
100
with:
Qci flowrate of the mineral i in the froth
Q fi flowrate of the mineral i in the feed
Ri recovery of the mineral i in the froth (% - parameter #1).
The liquid split is calculated to achieve the desired percentage of water in the froth
(parameter #2). If there is not enough water, all feed water reports to the froth.
USIM PAC 3.1

3.2 Level 1 models
Model 204 Spiral Concentrator (1)
Spiral 31 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of units in parallel 1
2 Nominal solid flowrate per unit (t/h) 2
3 Nominal volumetric flowrate per unit (m3/h) 3
4 Specific gravity of water + slimes 1
5 Minimum specific gravity for corrected cutpoint 3.5
7 Maximum particle size tolerated by the unit (mm) 2.5
8 Lower size of the optimum separation range (mm) 0.06
9 Upper size of the optimum separation range (mm) 2
10 Minimum recovery of light particles in the heavy stream 0.05
11 Minimum recovery of heavy fines 0.1
12 Minimum recovery of heavy coarses 0.3
13 Maximum recovery of heavy particles in the optimum range 0.98
14 Corrected cutpoint specific gravity for coarse particles 0
15 Particle size at minimum cutpoint specific gravity (mm) 0.1
16 Power of cutpoint specific gravity according to fine size 1
17 Adjustment of cutpoint specific gravity according to fine size 0
18 Power of cutpoint specific gravity according to coarse size 1
19 Adjust. of cutpoint specific gravity according to coarse size 0
20 Minimum corrected imperfection 0.3
21 Corrected imperfection for the coarse fraction 0
22 Particle size at minimum corrected imperfection (mm) 0.5
23 Power of corrected imperfection according to fine size 1
24 Adjustment of corrected imperfection according to fine size 0
25 Power of corrected imperfection according to coarse size 1
26 Adjustment of corrected imperfection according to coarse size 0
27 Power of corrected imperfection according to solids flowrate 1
28 Adjust. of corrected imperfection according to solids flowrate 0
29 Power of corrected imperfection according to vol. flowrate 1
30 Adjustment of corrected imperfection according to vol. flowrate 0
USIM PAC 3.1

31 Spiral material (Steel or Fiberglass) Steel
Model focus example Model focus/Jig/Jig 1
This model is derived from the description of the gravity concentration of ores by means of
Fournol's density partition curves (H. Fournol: "Mthodes de calcul des possibilits
d'puration - prvision et garantie des rsultats industriels", Rev. Ind. Minrale, June 1974,
pp. 5-19). This curve uses a log-normal law to represent the corrected density partition
curves in units such as shaking tables, spirals and jigs; that is to say units which do not use a
dense medium as the means of concentration.
The curve of gravity partition takes the following form:
F ( ) = C1 + (C2 C1 )F' ( )
where:
F ( ) probability of a particle of specific gravity reporting to the heavy stream
C1 minimum probability of reporting to the heavy stream (parameter #10)
C2 maximum probability of reporting to the heavy stream
F ( ) value of the corrected density partition curve for a particle of specific gravity
,
O( ) u2

F' ( ) =
1
2 e 2 du
with:
0.6744 s
O( ) = log
(
log I + I + 1
2
p )

s
where:
p cutpoint specific gravity
s pulp specific gravity (parameter #4)
I imperfection
The parameters ( I , p , C1 and C2 ) of the density partition curve are determined for each
particle size class by using a model, derived by BRGM, which takes into account the size of
the particles, the volumetric and solid flowrates for each unit and type of unit (jig, shaking
table, spiral concentrator).
USIM PAC 3.1

Computation of the maximum probability that a particle will report to the heavy
products stream as a function of its size: C2 d ( )
C2 (d ) = (C2 max C2 min f )
d
+ C2 min f if d < d inf
d inf
C2 (d ) = C2 max if d inf d < d sup
d max d
C2 (d ) = (C2 max C2 min c ) + C2 min c if d sup d < d max
d max d sup
C2 (d ) = C2 min c if d d max
where:
C2 min f minimum recovery of heavy fine particles in the heavy product stream
(parameter #11)
C2 min c minimum recovery of heavy coarse particles (parameter #12)
C2 max maximum recovery of heavy particles (parameter #13)
dinf lower limit of the optimal particle size range (parameter #8)
dsup upper limit of the optimal particle size range (parameter #9)
d max maximum particle size tolerated by the unit (parameter #7)
Computation of the corrected cutpoint specific gravity as a function of particle size:

p (d )
f
d
p (d ) = p min + f ln 1 if d < d1
d
c
d
c
p (d ) = p min + ( pc p min ) d1
c
if d d1
d
1 + c
d1
where:
p min minimal corrected cutpoint specific gravity (parameter #5)
pc corrected cutpoint specific gravity for coarse particles (parameter #14)
d1 particle size corresponding to the minimal corrected cutpoint specific gravity

(parameter #15)
USIM PAC 3.1

f adjustment parameter #16
f adjustment parameter #17
c adjustment parameter #18
c adjustment parameter #19
If account is not to be taken of the variation in p as a function of the particle size then the
following values are entered: f = 0 and c = 0 .
Computation of the corrected imperfection as a function of particle size: I (d )

If
d
I (d ) = I min + If ln 0 if d < d 0
d
Ic
d
Ic
I (d ) = I min + (I c I min ) d0 if d d 0
Ic
d
1 + Ic
d0
where:
I min minimal corrected imperfection (parameter #20)
Ic corrected imperfection for coarse particle (parameter #21)
d0 particle size corresponding to the minimal corrected imperfection (parameter

#22)
If adjustment parameter #23
If adjustment parameter #24
Ic adjustment parameter #25
Ic adjustment parameter #26
If account is not to be taken of the variation in I as a function of particle size then the
following values are entered: If = 0 and Ic = 0
Computation of the corrected imperfection as a function of the volumetric and solids

flowrates
I = I (d )[1 + X (Qs , Qv )]
USIM PAC 3.1

with:
Q s
X (Qs , Qv ) = s s * 1 if Qv NQv*
NQs
Q s Q v
X (Qs , Qv ) = s s 1 + v v * 1
*
if Qv > NQv*
NQs NQv
where:
Qs* nominal solids mass flowrate (parameter #2)
Qv* nominal volumetric flowrate (parameter #3)
N number of units in parallel (parameter #1)
s adjustment parameter #27
s adjustment parameter #28
v adjustment parameter #29
v adjustment parameter #30
If account is not to be taken of the variations of I as a function of the flowrates, then the
following values are entered: s = 0 and v = 0
General shape of the partition surface in the density - size space
1.0
0.8
Recovery
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
Pa 500
rti
cle 1000 7
siz 1500 6
5 y
es 2000
( 4 gr avit
m 2500 3
p ecific
) 2 S
3000
USIM PAC 3.1

Specific gravity = 7.1

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
Recovery
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Particle sizes (m)

The model allows three levels of use:
1. Defining the gravity partition curve as a function of particle size distribution by defining
parameters #1 through #13 in order to define the partition curve. At this level, the
corrected specific gravity cutpoint and the imperfection are considered constant.
2. Taking into account the variation of the corrected specific gravity cutpoint as a function of
the particle size by defining parameters #14 through #19, taking into account the
variation of the imperfection as a function of the particle size by defining parameters #20
through #26.
3. Taking into account the variation of the imperfection as a function of the flowrates by
defining parameters #27 through #30.
The levels 2 and 3 are independent but you always have to define the parameters requested
for the 1st level of use.
Notes
Parameters #8 through #13 are determined using an experimental partition curve.
The imperfection is calculated applying the following formula to the gravity partition curves
(Tromp's curve):
75c 25c
I=
2( 50c s )
where:
s pulp specific gravity (parameter #4)
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a spiral depends on its nominal capacity
Qs* (parameter #2) and its material type (parameter #31):
b
C = aQ s*
where:
Material a b
Qs* (st/h)
Steel
1.5 Qs* 3000 1472 1.00
Fiberglass
1 Qs* 3000 2448 0.870

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 209 Jig (1)
Jig 32 parameters Two output streams

3 Nominal volumetric flowrate per unit (m3/h) 100
7 Maximum particle size tolerated by the unit (mm) 20
8 Lower size of the optimum separation range (mm) 1
15 Particle size at minimum cutpoint specific gravity (mm) 2
21 Corrected imperfection for the coarse fraction 0.15
22 Particle size at minimum corrected imperfection (mm) 2
31 Jigging area (m2) 0.14
USIM PAC 3.1

32 Jig type (Simplex or Duplex) Simplex
This model is identical to the Spiral model.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a jig depends on its area A (parameter
#31) and its type (parameter #32):
C = aA b
where:
Type A (in2) a b
Simplex 24 A 217.22 6498.7 0.05716
217.22 A 864 742.7 0.4603

Duplex 96 A 233.16 4930 0.1786
233.16 A 864 1069.8 0.4589

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 210 Shaking Table (1)
Shaking table 33 parameters Two output streams

3 Nominal volumetric flowrate per unit (m3/h) 0.1
7 Maximum particle size tolerated by the unit (mm) 2.5
8 Lower size of the optimum separation range (mm) 0.02
15 Particle size at minimum cutpoint specific gravity (mm) 0.2
21 Corrected imperfection for the coarse fraction 0
22 Particle size at minimum corrected imperfection (mm) 0.5
31 Deck area (m2) 1
USIM PAC 3.1

32 Deck (Single, Double or Triple) Single

33 Deck shape (Rectangular or Diagonal) Rectangular
This model is identical to the Spiral model.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a shaking table depends on its area A
(parameter #31) and its type (parameter #32 and #33):
C = KaA b
where:
Shape A (ft2) a b
Rectangular 5 A 93 5552.1 0.3619
Diagonal 5 A 90 6138.7 0.2100
and
Deck K
Single 1
Double 2.35
Triple 3.55
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 205 Flotation (1)
Flotation bank 6 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of banks in parallel 1
2 Number of cells per bank 10
3 Pulp volume in one cell (m3) 16
5 Half flotation time (min) 2
6 Effective volume percentage 90
Model focus example Model focus/Flotation/Flotation 1
This model is based on the representation of the flotation of each particle type of the ore
using a first order kinetic phenomenon.
Each cell is represented as a perfect mixer, characterized by a mean residence time for the
pulp. For each particle type of the ore, one therefore has:
1
Qci = Q fi 1
1 + ki
where:
Q fi solids flowrate of the particle type i in the cell feed,
Qci solids flowrate of the particle type i in the cell froth,
ki kinetic constant of flotation for the particle type i.
pulp mean residence time
The constant ki characterizes the flotation kinetics of particle type i. Since it is not always
easy to evaluate its value a priori the model uses the concept of the half flotation time which
is more illustrative: the half flotation time (parameter #5) is the mean residence time for which
50% of the particle type class has reported to the froth.
Note
Typical values for half-flotation times:
sulfide roughing 2 minutes
sulfide scavenging 10 minutes
barite 3 minutes
gangue roughing 20 minutes
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a flotation bank depends on its volume V ,
which is the volume of pulp (parameter #3) divided by the effective volume percentage
(parameter #6), and its number of cells N (parameter #2):
1
C = N 1.09 aV + 100V 3
b

where:
V (ft3) a b
3 V 99.58 1955.3 0.3079
99.58 V 1275 482.4 0.6121

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 215 Thickener (1)
Thickener 6 parameters Two output streams

1 Slurry split to underflow 0.5
2 Richardson-Zaki constant V0 (m.s-1) 0.001
3 Richardson-Zaki exponent n 4.65
-3
4 Solids concentration at compression point (kg.m ) 50
5 Thickener area (m2) 50
6 Thickener drive (cable or Traction) Cable
Model focus example Model focus/Thickener/Thickener 1
The model simulates a continuous thickener.
overflow
feed
underflow
The first parameter is the volumetric split between the feed stream and the underflow.
The two next parameters (V0, in m.s-1 and n, dimensionless) are the values of the
Richardson-Zaki parameters. These parameters can be determined from discontinuous
tests in settling vessels during which the height of the mudline (H) as a function of time is
measured. The corresponding batch settling curve can be fitted using the equation of
Richardson-Zaki:
dH dH
(1 C )
n
=
dT dT 0
dH
where H (m) is the height of the interface, (m.s-1) is the initial velocity of the
dT 0
interface and C (m3solid.m3pulp-1) is the volumetric solids concentration at the interface.
USIM PAC 3.1

0.45
0.4
0.35
Height of the interface (m)
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000
Time (s)
Batch settling curve
The value of C as a function of time is determined thanks to the Kynchs equation:

Co H ini
C (T ) =
H1 (T )
where Co is the initial volumetric solids concentration in the pulp, Hini is the initial height of the
pulp and H1(T) is the height corresponding to the intercept between the Y-axis and the
tangent to the curve at a time T.
The fourth parameter of the model is the volumetric solids concentration at the compression
point, which can also be calculated from the batch settling curve, by making a double linear
regression on the curve giving log(H-Hfinal) as a function of T.
USIM PAC 3.1

Log(H-Hfinal)=f(T)
-0.5
log(H-Hfinal)
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000
T (s)
T(compression point)
The last parameter is the thickener cross section area.

The model predicts the solids concentration in the two output streams (overflow and
underflow).
One limitation of the model is that it makes no allowance for compression, which will be
significant if the underflow concentration reaches the compression region. It ignores cross-
flow effects in assuming perfect one-dimensional flow. The conical rake section at the
thickener base is not taken into account, and inertial effects at discontinuities are neglected.
Capital cost
The capital cost calculation is made only for a thickener. The capital cost C (in Canadian
Dollar 1982) of one thickener depends on its diameter D calculated from area (parameter
#5) and drive (parameter #6):
C = aD b
where:
Drive Diameter a b
Cable 4' D 46.72' 5050.7 0.7141
46.72' < D 300 2258.7 0.9235

Traction 20 D 100 3224.9 0.8060
USIM PAC 3.1

3.3 Level 2 models
Model 207 Conditioner (2)
Agitated tank 5 parameters One output stream

1 Limit recovery per component (%) 100
2 Slow floating particles / total floating particles (%) 50
3 Number of tanks 1
4 Tank volume (m3) 0
5 Residence time (min) 10
Model focus example Model focus/Flotation/Flotation 2A

Model focus/Flotation/Flotation 2B
This model is intended to accompany the Flotation (2A) (or the Flotation (2B)) bank of
flotation cells model.
Use of the model

This model should only be used when flotation is represented with the aid of the kinetic
model that handles three sub-populations and two kinetic constants for each particle type. It
therefore accompanies the Flotation (2A) and the Flotation (2B) models for a bank of
flotation cells by preceding it in the simulation flowsheet.
Its function is to enable the user to indicate, for the stream leaving the conditioner, the
percentage of floating particles after an infinite time ( R ) and the proportion of slow floating
particles ( s ) in the floating sub-population.
Note
The use of the conditioner model is not necessarily linked to the physical presence of one or
more of these units in the real simulated circuit. The model can, in effect, serve to
characterize the pulp after a change in the flotation property linked, for example, to the direct
addition of a reagent into the circuit or into a flotation cell.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of a conditioner tank depends on its volume V
(parameter #4), which can be calculated from the residence time (parameter #5):
(
C = aV b + a 'V b ' )
where:
USIM PAC 3.1

V (USG) a b a b
15 V 1200 11.41 0.7910 118.3 0.4476

Cost Estimation", Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1982, vol. 25, pp. 112 and
119.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 206 Flotation (2A)

3
3 Pulp volume in one cell (m ) 16
5 Fast floating kinetic constant (1/min) 1
6 Slow floating kinetic constant (1/min) 1
Model focus example Model focus/Flotation/Flotation 2A
As in the Flotation (1) model, this model is based on the representation of flotation by a first
order kinetic phenomenon. However, in this model, three sub-populations for each particle
type are considered, differentiated by their flotation behavior:
a fast floating sub-population, according to a kinetic characterized by a so-called fast
constant k f (parameter #5),
a slow floating sub-population, with a slow kinetic constant ks (parameter #6),
a non-floating sub-population.
Since each cell is represented as a perfect mixer, one has, for each cell:
1
+ (1 si )1
1
Qci = Q fi Ri si 1
1 + k
(1 + k si ) fi

where:
Qci flowrate of particle type i in the froth
Q fi flowrate of particle type i in the feed
Ri maximum possible recovery of particle type i in the froth
si proportion of particle type i capable of floating and which show slow floating
behavior
mean residence time in the cell, computed from the ratio of the effective cell
volume (parameter #3) to the cell feedrate.
USIM PAC 3.1


Since this model uses descriptions of sub-populations of particles, it is imperative to indicate
that they have been taken into account, and this is done in the phase model. Then each
stream is described.
R corresponds to the percentage of floating particles for each particle type after an
infinite time,
s corresponds to the percentage of slow floating particles for each floating particle
type.
The meaning of R and s as given above is a convention specific to the Flotation (2A)
and the Flotation (2B) (using only R ) models and also to the Conditioner (2) model.
The Flotation (2A) model for a bank of flotation cells is often preceded, in the simulated
flowsheet, by a Conditioner (2) model (this model can be used through the icon
representing an agitated vessel). The conditioner allows the user to specify, for the stream
leaving the unit, the populations of fast and slow floating corresponding to each particle type.
Method for determining parameters

The object of this paragraph is to set out the methodologies employed by BRGM, and
integrated into USIM PAC when using the Flotation (2A) model.
The methodologies differ according to the types of available data. Two cases are described
hereafter, depending on whether the data have been obtained from continuous (pilot or
industrial plant) or batch (laboratory) operation.
Data from continuous operation

The necessary data
When using a level-2 flotation model, to simulate an existing pilot scale or industrial circuit,
operating continuously at equilibrium, the available data must make it possible to reconstitute
the kinetics for each of the particle types defined on the basis of the phase mineralogical
model, which characterizes the ore being processed.
These data, which must be as complete as possible, relates to the measurements of
flowrates, concentrations and percent solids.
The streams characterized in this manner relate to the feed and the rejects from the banks,
the concentrates for each cell of the same bank and, if possible, the overall concentrate of a
bank so as to have redundant data.
Conditions for collecting the data

Defining a simulation dedicated to one type of ore necessitates two data sets: one to
calibrate the retained model, the other to validate it. These two data sets correspond to
different sampling conditions.
The data used to calibrate the model must, if possible, be collected during open operation of
the circuit so as to make it possible to collect kinetic information related to the principal feed
stream to the bank.
USIM PAC 3.1

The data for validation must be collected from a configuration of the circuit which includes
any recycling likely to take place.
In order to calibrate the Flotation (2A) model, it is mathematically necessary to have at least
four kinetic calibration points per particle type for the same flotation bank in a roughing
circuit. That is to say information on the flow and recovery rates in the concentrates for at
least four cells or groups of consecutive cells. For a cleaning bank, three kinetic points per
particle type are mathematically necessary, always provided that consideration has been
given that the particles which have already floated during previous roughing or cleaning
stage are all capable of floating another time. The infinite recovery in this case is therefore
100%.
Level of confidence in the collected data

One of the main problems encountered during a sampling campaign is the instability of the
circuits. It is therefore imperative to specify the conditions under which sampling was carried
out (duration of sampling, etc.) and to evaluate, at the same time, the level of confidence
which it is reasonable to allocate to each of the measurements made. It is desirable, where
this is possible, to establish a variogram for different points of the circuit.
A coherent mass balance

All raw experimental data are flawed with measuring errors. It is therefore desirable, and in
practice frequently necessary, to make these data as coherent as possible before calibrating
the models, by employing an algorithm for balancing the data. Processing of the raw data is
carried out by using the material balance option of USIM PAC. In this way, estimates can be
computed for the flowrates, concentrations and contents of the solids.
These estimations are coherent, that is to say they satisfy all the equations of conservation
of materials, and they are also as close as possible to the experimental data with a weighting
factor which uses the accuracy of each of the measurements.
Establishing the kinetic curves for recoveries

Using the coherent data provided by USIM PAC, it is possible to establish recovery kinetic
curves for each of the retained particle types. The flotation time in each cell, in the same
bank is taken as being equal to the ratio of the effective volume of the particular cell to the
volumetric flowrate of the cell feed. The kinetic data defined in this way will be used as the
basis for calibrating the model.
The basic equation of the model

The flowrate of particle type i in the froth is given by the following expression:
k k
Qci = Q fi R i si si + (1 si ) fi
1 + k si 1 + k fi

Calibration of the model involves determining, from the kinetic data defined above and for
each particle type, the parameters Ri , k fi , k si and si . Calibration is obtained by using a
non-linear regression algorithm, with optimization without constraint.
USIM PAC 3.1

Using the model

The fast and slow kinetic constants k fi and k si are introduced for each particle type defined
in the "phase model": they are expressed as min-1. The proportions Ri and si are
introduced as percentages in the Stream Description option.
Data from batch test

Basic formula for flotation in the laboratory
The formula for the model set out above takes the following form in the case of flotation in
the laboratory (batch):
[
Qci = Q fi Ri 1 si e k si (1 si )e
k fi
]
Collecting the laboratory data
The data to be collected must make it possible to reconstitute the kinetic flotation curves for
each retained particle type.
In order to calibrate the model, these curves must possess at least four experimental points
for roughing and three for cleaning, always provided that, in this latter case, the maximum
recovery is 100% (the same hypothesis as in the case of continuous flotation).
The difficulties in using such laboratory data are linked, in particular, to the conditions for
preparing the pulp and to the reproducibility of tests on this scale. In order to limit these
difficulties, it is strongly advised that an instrumented and automated laboratory flotation cell
be used.
Calibrating the model

Calibration involves determining from the laboratory kinetic data, and for each particle type,
the four parameters Ri , k fi , k si and si . Calibration is carried out, as in the case of
continuous flotation, by using a non-linear regression algorithm with optimization without
constraint.
Scaling-up the calibrated kinetic parameters

The kinetic parameters, which have been calibrated on the basis of the laboratory tests,
cannot be used as is in USIM PAC to simulate a continuously operating and steady state
industrial installation. Whilst the maximum recoveries may be regarded as similar at
laboratory and industrial or pilot scale, a scale factor should be introduced for the kinetic
constants.
Work has been carried out at BRGM on this subject, in cooperation with Universit Laval in
Qubec, PQ, Canada.
Using the model

Once the kinetic parameters have been scaled up, the use procedure is the same as the
previous case. The methodology for using level-2 flotation models becomes much more
difficult when one has only laboratory data. This is principally due to the difficulty of carrying
USIM PAC 3.1

out reproducible tests in the laboratory and of knowing the scale factors to be used as a
function of the ore being processed and the conditions being used, especially the
hydrodynamic conditions.
Capital cost
1
C = N 1.09 aV + 100V 3
b

where:
V (ft3) a b
3 V 99.58 1955.3 0.3079
99.58 V 1275 482.4 0.6121

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 208 Flotation (2B)

3
5 Largest floatable particle size per component (m) 400
6 Easiest floatable particle size per component (m) 35
7 Adjustment parameter per component 100
Model focus example Model focus/Flotation/Flotation 2B
As in the Flotation (1) model, this model is based on the representation of flotation by a first
order kinetic phenomenon. However, in this model, it is considered that there are two
sub-populations for each particle type, which correspond to different flotation behaviors:
a floating type,
a non-floating type.
This is expressed by a maximum possible recovery Ri for each particle type i. The model
considers that the maximum possible recovery is independent of the size distribution.
If the sub-populations of floatation are not defined, the maximum recovery is supposed to be
100%.
A kinetic constant is calculated for each particle type i and size class j according to King's
formula:
2
d opti
dj 1.5

2d j

kij = i 1 e
dj d
max i
where:
i adjustment parameter for particle type i (parameter #7)
dj average size in size class j
d max i largest floating particle size for particle type i (parameter #5)
d opti easiest floating particle size for particle type i (parameter #6)
USIM PAC 3.1

Since each cell in a bank is represented by a perfect mixer, one has, for each cell:
1
Qcij = Q fij Ri 1
1 + kij
where:
Qcij flowrate of particle type i and size class j in the froth
Q fij flowrate of particle type i and size class j in the feed
Ri maximum possible recovery of particle type i in the froth
volume (parameter #3) to the cell feedrate.

Since this model uses descriptions of sub-populations of particles, it is imperative to indicate
that they have been taken into account in the phase model by stating that one flotation
parameter ( Ri ) is being used.
Then the acquisition of the description of each stream is carried out.
Notes
The percentage of non-floating particles for each type of particle is calculated by subtracting
the maximum possible recovery from 100.
The Flotation (2B) model for a bank of flotation cells is very often accompanied, in the
simulated flowsheet, by the Conditioner (2) model. The object of the latter is to allow the
user to specify, for the stream leaving the unit, the maximum possible recovery
corresponding to each particle type.
Capital cost
1
C = N 1.09 aV + 100V 3
b

where:
V (ft3) a b
3 V 99.58 1955.3 0.3079
99.58 V 1275 482.4 0.6121
USIM PAC 3.1


USIM PAC 3.1

Model 211 Flotation (2C)

3
2
4 Surface area of one cell (m ) or 0 if cubic cell 0
6 Viscosity of the liquid (mPa.s) 1
7 Influence of the volumetric fraction of solids on viscosity 0
8 Largest floatable particle size per component (m) 400
9 Easiest floatable particle size per component (m) 35
10 Adjustment parameter of kinetic function per component 100
11 Adjustment of the effect of size on entrainment 100
12 Adjustment of the probability of entrainment 0
This model represents flotation as a first order kinetic phenomenon and takes into account
the entrainment of particles by water.
a. Flotation
As in the Flotation (2B) model, there are two sub-populations of particles for each component
of the ore, which correspond to different flotation behavior:
a floating type,
a non-floating type.
This is expressed by a maximum possible recovery Ri for each particle type i. The model
considers that the maximum possible recovery is independent of the size distribution.
A kinetic constant is calculated for each particle type i and size class j according to King's
formula:
2
d opti
i d j
1.5
2d j
kij = 1 e
d j d max i

where:
USIM PAC 3.1

i adjustment parameter for particle type i (parameter #10)
dj average size in size class j
d max i largest floating particle size for particle type i (parameter #8)
d opti easiest floating particle size for particle type i (parameter #9)
Since each cell in a bank is represented by a perfect mixer, the recovery Rij of component i
in size class j can be calculated as follows:
1
Rij = Ri 1
1+ k
ij
where:
volume (parameter #3) to the cell feed.
b. Entrainment
The equation allowing the calculation of entrainment can be found in V.M. Kirjavainen,
"Mathematical model for the entrainment of hydrophilic particles in froth flotation",
International Journal of Mineral Processing, n1/2, 35, pp 1,11, 1992.
In the model, the relations between particle mass, water recovery rate and slurry viscosity
are described as follows:
Rij = Pij Rw
where:
Rij recovery by entrainment of component i in size class j in one cell
Rw recovery of water in the cell froth (calculated using parameter #5)
Pij probability factor:
w0.7
Pij =
mij
w0.7 + ai

where:
w recovery rate of water (kg/s.m2) calculated using Rw and parameter #4
ai adjustment parameter #11
mij mean mass of a particle of type i in the size class j
viscosity of the medium:
USIM PAC 3.1

Cv
= 0 +
(1 Cv )4.8
where:
0 viscosity of the liquid (parameter #6 = 1 mPa.s for water)
Cv volume fraction of solids
constant depending on the material (parameter #7 = 1.83 for quartz, = 3.8 for
phlogopite).
3. Total recovery in one cell

The above equations are used to describe the macroscopic phenomenon of flotation in a
single formula:
1
Qcij = Q fij Ri 1 + Ai Pij Rw
1 + kij

where:
Qcij flowrate of particle type i and size class j in the froth
Q fij flowrate of particle type i and size class j in the feed
Ai adjustment parameter #12 permitting to disconnect the calculation of entrainment
The resolution of this equation is the following.

In a first step, only the flowrate of floating particles is calculated, allowing a first calculation of
the recovery and the recovery rate of water.
The entrainment is then calculated, and the flowrate of water is calculated again to match
parameter #5.
The resolution is not iterative to avoid the risk of divergence, producing a kind of self-
entrainment, which could lead the flowrate of entrained particles to be greater than the
flowrate of floating particles.
This model can be used to describe the different behavior of each component. If Ai is
null, only flotation will occur; if the parameter Ri is null, only entrainment will occur;
if both are different than zero, both mechanisms will occur.
Capital cost
USIM PAC 3.1

1
C = N 1.09 aV + 100V 3
b

where:
V (ft3) a b
3 V 99.58 1955.3 0.3079
99.58 V 1275 482.4 0.6121

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 216 WHIMS (2)
Magnetic separator 8 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of WHIMS in parallel 1
2 Applied magnetic field strength (T) 2
3 Saturation magnetic field strength (T) 1
4 Interstitial velocity of slurry (m/s) 0.2
5 Fractional loading of the matrix 0.8
6 % water in the concentrate 10
7 Magnetic cut point 0.01269
8 Slope of the recovery curve 0.348
Model focus example Model focus/Magnetic separation/WHIMS 2
This model represents Wet High Intensity Magnetic Separation (WHIMS) as a partition curve
function of the particle size and susceptibility. It is based on the empirical model of Dobby
and Finch (G. Dobby, and J.A. Finch, An empirical model of capture in a high gradient
magnetic separator and its use in performance prediction. XIIth IMPC, 1977, Sao Paulo,
Brazil, Vol. I, pp. 128-152).
The recovery Rij of particle type (susceptibility class) i in size class j is given by:
1 M ij
Rij = + B log10
2 M 50
truncated to 0 as lower bound and 1 as upper bound.
HG ( i i )1.2 d 2j .5
M ij =
v1.8 L0.8
where:
H applied magnetic field strength (parameter #2) to the matrix;
G = min (H , H s ) where Hs is the saturation magnetic field strength
(parameter #3);
i density of particle type i;
i magnetic susceptibility of particle type i;
dj average size in size class j;
USIM PAC 3.1

v average velocity of slurry flowing through the matrix (parameter #4);

L matrix loading (parameter #5) as the ratio between the mass fraction of
magnetics in feed and the mass of matrix;
B slope of the partition curve (parameter #8);
M 50 value of M ij for which there is 50% recovery (parameter #7).
The partition of water is calculated to reach the % water in the concentrate (parameter #6).
USIM PAC 3.1

3.3 Level 3 models
Model 214 Column Flotation (3A)
Flotation column 21 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of columns in parallel 1
2 Column diameter (m) 2
3 Column height Hc (between air addition and froth lip) (m) 10
4 Height of the feed point / Hc (from the bottom) 0.7
5 Thickness of the froth (m) 1
6 Gas superficial velocity (cm/s) 3
7 Bias superficial velocity (cm/s) (>0 is down) 0.15
8 Percent water in the concentrate (%) 50
9 Gas holdup in the collection zone (%) 20
10 Liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) (water=0.001) 0.001
11 Bubble size in the collection zone (mm) 1
12 Coefficient m for the calculation of bubble size 3
13 Kinetic parameter per mineral for the fast floating particles 0.1
14 Kinetic parameter per mineral for the slow floating particles 0.01
15 Adjustment of the dispersion number 1
16 Recovery at the interface (%) 100
17 Recovery in the froth (%) 100
18 Kinetic constant for detachment in the froth (1/s) 0
19 Gas holdup at the interface (%) 60
20 Adjustment of the effect of particle size on the collection rate 1
21 Not used 0
The column is considered to be made of three zones: the collection zone between the
bottom and the feed point, the cleaning zone between the feed point and the interface, and
the froth zone between the interface and the top (Figure 1).
In each zone, a recovery per mineral and per size class is calculated. The total recovery per
mineral is computed for the three reactors in series according to:
R1R2 R3
Rt =
1 R1 (1 R2 ) R1R2 (1 R3 )
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
R1 recovery in the collection zone
R2 recovery in the intermediate zone
R3 recovery in the froth
water concentrate
froth First order kinetics of detachment

R3 Plug flow
interface Recovery at interface

R2
feed
First order kinetics of flotation
Axial dispersion
collection
R1 Maximum carrying capacity
air tailings
Figure 1. The three zones of the column and the corresponding phenomena.
a. Collection zone
In the collection zone, the flotation is a first order kinetic phenomenon with limitation of the
recovery per component.
Each mineralogical component is divided into fast-floating, slow-floating and non-floating
sub-populations. The fast-floating sub-population represents the proportion of each mineral
that may be recovered with a kinetic k f . The slow-floating sub-population represents the
proportion of each mineral that may be recovered with a kinetic ks .
The transport is represented by the axial dispersion model, which gives, for each floating
sub-population, after integration, combined with a first order transfer phenomenon:
1
2N p
4ae
R1n = a a

(1 + a ) e
2 2 N p
(1 a ) e
2 2N p
with:
a = 1 + 4knTp N p
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
kn kinetic constant per mineral and size class (1/s), with n = f or s (fast or slow)
Tp residence time per mineral and size class (s)
Np vessel dispersion number
The total recovery in the collection zone is then:

[
R1 = R s R1s + (1 s )R1 f ]
where:
s proportion of slow floating particles in the floating ones,
R proportion of floating particles,
The particle residence time is calculated according to:

ul
T p = Tl
ul + usp
where:
Tl liquid residence time in the collection zone (s)
ul liquid superficial velocity in the collection zone (m/s)
u sp particle terminal settling velocity relative to the liquid (m/s)
H c (1 g )
Tl =
ul
where:
Hc height of the collection zone (m) (parameters #3 and #4)
g gas fractional holdup in the collection zone (parameter #9)
ul = u fl + ubias
where:
u fl superficial velocity of feed liquid (m/s)
ubias bias superficial velocity (m/s) (parameter #7)
The calculation of the terminal particle settling velocity in the liquid is iterative:
USIM PAC 3.1

gd p2 ( s l )(1 s ) d p u sp s (1 s )
2 .7
u sp = R ep =
( 0 .687
18 l 1 + 0 .15 .R ep ) l
where:
g acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
l liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) (parameter #10)
l liquid density (kg/m3)
s solid density (kg/m3)
s volume fraction of solids in the slurry
dp particle diameter (m)
Rep particle Reynolds number
The kinetic constant of the fast- (n = f) or slow- (n = s) floating particles of type i of the size
class j is defined according to:
2ak
3 ug d
knij = Pnij Pnij = ni pj
2 db db
where:
Pnij probability of flotation
ug gas superficial velocity (m/s) (parameter #6)
db diameter of bubbles (m)
d pj particle diameter (m)
ni adjustment constant (parameter #13 or #14)
ak adjustment of the effect of particle size on the collection rate (parameter #20)
The diameter of bubbles may be specified in parameter #11. If this parameter is set to 0, the
following equations relating the gas holdup and the gas flowrate are used:
(
18 l usb 1 + 0.15Reb 0 .687 dbusb l (1 g )
)
db = R =
g (l g )(1 g )
m 1 eb
l
ug ul
u sb = +
g 1 g
where:
USIM PAC 3.1

g gas density (g/cm3)
m parameter #12
usb slip velocity between liquid and bubbles (cm/s)
ug superficial gas velocity (cm/s)
The vessel dispersion number is:
u g (1 g )
0 .63
a D
N p = Np c
0.6 H c ul
where:
a Np adjustment parameter #15
Dc column diameter (m) (parameter #2)
b. Intermediate zone
A recovery R2 per component may be specified to account for the effect of the interface
(parameter #17).
c. Froth zone
In the froth zone, a first order kinetics of detachment combined with a plug flow behavior of
bubbles gives the recovery:
R 3 = e k d Tz
where:
kd detachment rate constant (1/s) (parameter #18)
Tz residence time of bubbles in the froth (s):

zf
g (z )dz
Tz = 0
ug
where:
g (z ) fractional gas holdup at level z
The value of the fractional holdup at the interface (level 0) is given in parameter #19. A
normal value of 55 to 60 % corresponds to a packed bed of spheres. The fractional holdup is
supposed to vary according to a parabolic profile until it reaches the value at the concentrate
lip (level z f ).
USIM PAC 3.1

The fractional gas holdup is calculated knowing the superficial velocity of water in the
concentrate and its water content (parameter #8):
ug
g (z f ) =
ulc
ug +
pw
where:
pw percent water in the concentrate
ulc superficial velocity of water in the concentrate (m/s):
ulc = uw ubias
where:
uw superficial velocity of wash water (m/s)
Use of the model

This level 3 model needs more than industrial data obtained at steady state to be used.
Particularly, the kinetic constants of flotation and detachment must be obtained from lab or
pilot test data.
Three sub-populations must be defined in the phase model to characterize the floatability of
minerals. They must be initialized in the stream description.
References
Finch, J.A. and Dobby, G.S., 1989, Column flotation, Pergamon press
Yoon, R.H., Mankosa, M.J., Luttrel, G.H. and Adel, G.T., 1990, "Modelling of flotation with a
view towards scale-up and control", Control' 90, SME annual meeting in Salt Lake City,
USA, Edited by Rajamani, R.K. and Herbst, J.A., Chap. 5, 35
Yianatos, J.B., Finch, J.A. and Laplante, A.R., 1988, "Selectivity in column flotation froths",
Int. J. Miner. Process., 23, pp 279-292
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 213 - Column Flotation (3B)
Flotation column 21 parameters Two output streams

1 Number of columns in parallel 1
2 Column diameter (m) 2
3 Column height Hc (between air addition and froth lip) (m) 10
4 Height of the feed point / Hc (from the bottom) 0.7
5 Thickness of the froth (m) 1
6 Gas superficial velocity (cm/s) 3
7 Bias superficial velocity (cm/s) (>0 is down) 0.15
8 Percent water in the concentrate (%) 50
9 Gas holdup in the collection zone (%) 20
10 Liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) (water=0.001) 0.001
11 Bubble size in the collection zone (mm) 1
12 Coefficient m for the calculation of bubble size 3
13 Kinetic parameter per mineral 0
14 Maximum size of floating particles (m) 400
15 Adjustment of the dispersion number 1
16 Recovery at the interface (%) 100
17 Recovery in the froth (%) 100
18 Kinetic constant for detachment in the froth (1/s) 0
19 Gas holdup at the interface (%) 60
20 Adjustment of the effect of particle size on the collection rate 1
21 Not used 0
The model is similar to the Column Flotation (3A) model. The only difference concerns the
kinetics in the collection zone.
Collection zone.
Each mineralogical component is divided into floating and non-floating sub-populations. The
floating sub-population represents the maximum proportion of each mineral that may be
recovered. There is no difference between fast- and slow floating.
The transport is represented by the axial dispersion model, which gives, after integration
combined with a first order transfer phenomenon:
USIM PAC 3.1

1
2N p
4ae
R1 = a a

(1 + a ) e
2 2 N p
(1 a ) e
2 2N p
with:
a = 1 + 4kTp N p
where:
k kinetic constant per mineral and size class (1/s)
Tp residence time per mineral and size class (s) calculated as in the level 3A model
Np vessel dispersion number calculated as in the level 3A model
The kinetic constant of the particles of type i of the size class j is defined according to:
3 ug d
2ak
d pj 1.5
kij = Pij Pij = i pj 1
2 db
d max i
db
where:
Pij probability of flotation
ug gas superficial velocity (m/s) (parameter #6)
db diameter of bubbles (m)
d pj particle diameter (m)
d max i maximum size of floating particles (m) (parameter #14)
i adjustment constant (parameter #13)
ak adjustment of the effect of particle size on the collection rate (parameter #20)
The diameter of bubbles may be specified in parameter #11. If this parameter is set to 0, it is
calculated as explained in the level 3A model.
Note
Two sub-populations must be defined in the phase model to characterize the floatability of
minerals. They must be initialized in the stream description.
USIM PAC 3.1

4 HYDROMETALLURGICAL MODELS
Hydrometallurgical models allow the user to describe and simulate hydrometallurgical

operation circuit such as leaching, adsorption, precipitation, solvent extraction or
electrolysis..
The hydrometallurgical models that already exist in your version of the USIM PAC software
are:
Leaching tank model: Leaching (0)
Leaching (1A)
Leaching (1B)
Leaching and evaporation model: Leaching with Evaporation (0)
Carbon-in-leach tank model: CIL - Carbon-In-Leach (0A)
CIL - Carbon-In-Leach (0B)
CIL - Carbon-In-Leach (1A)
CIL - Carbon-In-Leach (1B)
Carbon-in-pulp tank model: CIP - Carbon-In-Pulp (0A)
CIP - Carbon-In-Pulp (0B)
CIP - Carbon-In-Pulp (1A)
CIP - Carbon-In-Pulp (2A)
Adsorption column model: CIC - Carbon-In-Column (0)
Elution column model: Elution (0)
Evaporation model: Evaporation (0)
Solvent extraction model: Solvent extraction (0)
Solvent extraction (1)
Precipitation tank model: Precipitation (0A)
Precipitation (0B)
Cementation model: Cementation (0)
Filter washer model: Filter-washer (0)
Filter-washer (1)
Electrolysis model: Electrolysis (0A)
Electrolysis (0B)
USIM PAC 3.1

Material transfer from one phase to another

The following models for simulation of hydrometallurgy processing use the same "mass
transfer function" from one phase to another.
Model Transfer: From To

Leaching (0 - 1A - 1B). Ore and SolidLiquid
Leaching and evaporation (0) Solidliquid
Evaporation (0) LiquidSolid
CIL (0 - 1). OreLiquidSolid
CIP (0 - 1 - 2A - 2B). LiquidSolid
Elution (0). SolidLiquid
CIC (0). LiquidSolid
Solvent extraction (0 - 1). LiquidLiquid
Precipitation (0A - 0B). LiquidSolid
Cementation Solid-LiquidLiquid-Solid
Electrolysis (0A - 0B) LiquidSolid
The mass transfer function in these models is called the "mass conversion from ... to ...". It
appears as a duplicated parameter from one phase (origin in column) to another (destination
in line).
To phase Component 1 Component 2

From phase
Component 1 x11 x12
Component 2 x21 x22
Component 3 x31 x32
This array means that for 1 kg lost in component 1 of the original phase, x11 kg of component
1 appears in the phase destination, and x12 kg of component 2.
The values of xij may be whatever the user needs, 1 or 0 in most cases, but also less or more
than 1, to account for chemical transformation of the components.
There is no constraint on the sum of the lines. If the sum x11 + x12 is greater than 1, it means
that some mass is "created" in the unit operation. As an example, the dissolution of 1 kg of
pyrite (FeS2) from the ore may produce 0.467 kg of dissolved Fe and 1.6 kg of SO4 ions.
USIM PAC 3.1

4.1 Level 0 models
Model 303 Leaching (0)

1 Leached percentage per component of ore and solid phases (%) 0
2 Mass conversion from ore and solid to liquid 0
Model focus example Model focus/Leaching/Leaching 0
For each component of the ore phase, from the leached fraction indicated by the user
(parameter #1), the model calculates the fraction of the component moving from the ore and
solid phases to the different components of the solution according to parameter #2.
The performance of leaching (leached percentage per component) may be estimated from
laboratory tests or back calculated from plant data.
The mass conversion depends on the chemical reactions occurring in the process and on the
definition of the components of each phase. It represents mass stoechiometry and is intrinsic
to the phase definition.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 320 Leaching with Evaporation (0)
Two output streams:

Leaching tank with
3 parameters output 1 = pulp
evaporation
output 2 = evaporated liquid

3 Evaporation percentage (% of input liquid) 0
For each component of the ore phase, depending on the fraction leached defined by the user
(parameter #1), the model calculates the fraction of the component moving from the ore and
solid phases to the different components of the solution according to parameter #2.
The performance of leaching (leached percentage per component) may be estimated from
laboratory tests or back calculated from plant data.
The mass conversion depends on the chemical reactions occurring in the process and on the
definition of the components of each phase. It represents mass stoechiometry and is intrinsic
to the phase definition.
The evaporation percentage (parameter #3) is related to the flowrate of the liquid phases fed
to the reactor.
Notes
The evaporation is made on the last component of each liquid phase. If the flowrate to be
evaporated, calculated from the total flowrate of a liquid phase, is above the partial flowrate
of the last component of that phase, the evaporation is limited to that partial flowrate.
The evaporated liquid remains in the liquid phase in output #2. There is no phase transfer
from liquid to gas involved in the evaporation.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 301 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (0A)
Two output streams:

Carbon-in-leach tank 4 parameters output 1 = pulp
output 2 = carbon

3 Adsorbed percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
4 Mass conversion from liquid to solid 0
Model focus example Model focus/CIL/CIL 0
For each component of the ore phase, depending on the fraction leached specified by the
user (parameter #1), the model calculates the fraction of the component moving from the ore
phase to the different components of the solution according to parameter #2.
From the fraction adsorbed (parameter #3), it then calculates the fraction of the component
moving from the solution to the different solid components according to parameter #4.
The performances (parameters #1 and #3) may be estimated from laboratory tests or back
calculated from plant data.
The mass conversions (parameters #2 and #4) depend on the chemical reactions occurring
in the process and on the definition of the components of each phase. They represent mass
stoichiometry and are intrinsic to the phase definition.
The model gives the composition of the leached ore phase of the barren solution (stream #2)
and of the loaded solid phase (activated carbon, stream #1).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 329 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (0B)
Two output streams:

output 2 = carbon

1 Leached percentage per component of ore (%) 0
2 Mass conversion from ore to liquid 0
3 Adsorbed percentage per component of liquids (%) 0
5 Desorbed percentage per component of solids (%) 0
6 Mass conversion from solid to liquid 0
7 Percentage of each phase transferred to carbon stream (%) 0
For each component of the ore phase, depending on the fraction leached specified by the
user (parameter #1), the model calculates the fraction of the component moving from the ore
phase to the different components of the solution according to parameter #2.
From the fraction adsorbed (parameter #3), it then calculates the fraction of the component
moving from the solution to the different solid components according to parameter #4.
Conversely, from the fraction desorbed (parameter #5), it then calculates the fraction of the
component moving from the solid to the different solution components according to
parameter #6.
A little pulp can be carried during the carbon transfer and fines of carbon can be carried with
pulp. To simulate that, parameter #7 gives the percentage of each phase transferred to the
carbon stream. The value is 0% or few % for the liquid and ore phases and 100% or few %
below for the carbon phase.
The performances (parameters #1, #3 and #5) may be estimated from laboratory tests or
back calculated from plant data.
The mass conversions (parameters #2, #4 and #6) depend on the chemical reactions
occurring in the process and on the definition of the components of each phase. They
represent mass stoichiometry and are intrinsic to the phase definition.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 302 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (0A)
Two output streams:

Carbon-in-pulp tank 2 parameters output 1 = pulp
output 2 = carbon

Model focus example Model focus/CIP/CIP 0
For each component of the liquid phase, depending on the fraction adsorbed specified by the
user (parameter #1), the model calculates the fraction of the component moving from the
solution to the different solid components according to parameter #2.
The performance (parameter #1) may be estimated from laboratory tests or back calculated
from plant data.
The mass conversion (parameter #2) depends on the chemical reactions occurring in the
process and on the definition of the components of each phase. It represents mass
stoichiometry and is intrinsic to the phase definition.
The model gives the composition of the barren solution (stream #2) and of the loaded solid
phase (activated carbon, stream #1).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 328 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (0B)
Two output streams:

output 2 = carbon

1 Adsorbed percentage per component of liquids (%) 0
3 Desorbed percentage per component of solids (%) 0
5 Percentage of each phase transferred to carbon stream (%) 0
Conversely, from the fraction desorbed (parameter #3), it then calculates the fraction of the
component moving from the solid to the different solution components according to
parameter #4.
A little pulp can be carried during the carbon transfer and fines of carbon can be carried with
pulp. To simulate that, parameter #5 gives the percentage of each phase transferred to the
carbon stream. The value is 0% or few % for the liquid and ore phases and 100% or few %
below for the carbon phase.
The performances (parameters #1 and #3) may be estimated from laboratory tests or back
calculated from plant data.
in the process and on the definition of the components of each phase. They represent mass
stoichiometry and are intrinsic to the phase definition.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 307 CIC Carbon-In-Column (0)
Two output streams:

Adsorption column 2 parameters output 1 = barren solution
output 2 = loaded solids

Model focus example Model focus/CIC/CIC 0
from plant data.
The model gives the composition of the barren solution (stream #1) and of the loaded solid
(stream #2).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 304 Elution (0)
Two output streams:

Elution column 2 parameters output 1 = loaded solution
output 2 = solids

1 Eluted percentage per component of the solid phase (%) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Elution/Elution 0
For each component of the solid phase, depending on the fraction eluted specified by the
solid (activated carbon) to the solution components according to parameter #2.
from plant data.
The model gives the composition of the eluted solid phase (stream #2) and of the pregnant
solution (stream #1).
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 321 Evaporation (0)

output 1 = solution
Evaporator 6 parameters
output 2 = sludge
output 3 = vapor

1 Percent of feed evaporated (%) 0
2 Concentration set point (g/l) 0
3 Solubility at set point (g/l) 0
5 Percent solids in the sludge (%) 80
6 Liquid specific gravity after evaporation 1
The aim of the process is to increase the concentration of one component in the output
stream by evaporating a part of the water (or more generally the solvent) and eventually
precipitating salts.
Output stream
Vapor
Solution in which the concentration

is to be controlled
Sludge
Feed stream
Only a part of the feed stream (parameter #1) is subject to evaporation.

The concentration set point, solubility and specific gravity (parameters #2, #3, and #6) are
given for the intermediate solution. If the value of the specific gravity is zero, the specific
gravity defined in the phase model is taken into account. The concentration set point must be
specified for only one component. If several are specified, only the first one is taken into
account. If none is specified, the first solubility different from zero is taken into account. If the
concentration set point is above the solubility of one component, only the solubility is taken
into account.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 308 Solvent Extraction (0)
Two output streams

Mixer-settler 3 parameters output 1 = organic
output 2 = aqueous

1 Extracted percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
2 Mass conversion between liquid phases 0
3 Organic/Aqueous ratio if regulation of organic phase 0
Model focus example Model focus/SX/SX 0
The percentage extracted specified by the user (parameter #1) defines for each component
of the liquids the quantity which is transferred to another liquid phase according to parameter
#2.
This model allows description of an exchange between phases: the extraction of a metal
from aqueous to organic phase may be accompanied by the transfer of acid from organic to
aqueous phase by specifying a percentage extracted in both phases.
The phases must have different specific gravities as the organic phase is recognized as the
lighter.
If parameter #3 is specified (value different from 0) the flowrate of organic phase is

calculated. This parameter MUST be used to initialize the flowrate of organic phase in a
closed-loop circuit. However, to ensure the material conservation in all the streams of the
closed-loop, ONLY ONE mixer-settler has to regulate in the loop.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 309 Precipitation (0A)
Precipitation tank 2 parameters One output stream

1 Precipitated percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Precipitation/Precipitation 0A
For each component of the liquid phase, depending on the fraction precipitated specified by
the user (parameter #1), the model calculates the fraction of the component moving from the
solution to the different precipitate components according to parameter #2.
The model gives the composition of the residual solution and the precipitate.
from plant data.
This model does not calculate the size distribution of the precipitate. If the precipitate is
defined in the phase model with size classes, the precipitated solids appear in the smallest
size class.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 314 Precipitation (0B)
Precipitation tank 3 parameters One output stream

1 Precipitated percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
3 Molar mass per component of the liquid phase (g/mol) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Precipitation/Precipitation 0B
The fraction precipitated specified by the user defines for each component of the liquids the
maximum quantity which may move from the solution to the different precipitate components.
The real precipitated fraction is calculated by minimizing the quantity of components
remaining in solution after precipitation. This method allows taking into account i) a
consumption limitation due to one reagent in the precipitation reaction or ii) an eventual
competition between precipitates consuming the same liquid component.
The quantity of the liquid component i consumed during precipitation may be written as:
np
Pj
mci =
j =1 ij
where:
Pj created quantity of precipitate j
np number of components in the precipitate phase
ij mass conversion from liquid component i to precipitate component j (parameter

#2)
The remaining quantity after precipitation is:
mi = m0i mci = (1 pmax i )m0i + ( pmax i m0i mci )
where:
m0i initial quantity of liquid component i
pmax i maximum fraction of component i which may precipitate (parameter #1)
The mathematical problem is the minimization of:

nl
mi
J =
i =1 M i
subject to linear constraints:
USIM PAC 3.1

pmax i m0i mci 0 i = 1, nl

Pj 0 j = 1, n p
where:
nl number of components in the liquid phase
Mi molar mass of liquid component i (parameter #3)
The minimization is done with a simplex method.
If parameter #3 is specified (value different from 0) and if it represents the molar mass per
component, the minimization is done on the number of moles remaining in solution. This
parameter may represent any value in relation with the process (free energy of formation for
example). If it is set to zero (default value), it is not taken into account ( M i = 1 for any i).
This model allows a "predictive" calculation of the composition of precipitate according to the
composition of the liquid phases. It has a practical value, even if the calculation is not based
on chemical equilibrium calculation, but must be used with care.
This model does not calculate the size distribution of the precipitate. If the precipitate is
defined in the phase model with size classes, the precipitated solids appear in the smallest
size class.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 325 Cementation (0)
Cementation tank 4 parameters One output stream

1 Cemented percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
2 Metal consumption (kg/kg of cement product) 0
Model focus example Model focus/Cementation/Cementation 0
The percentage cemented specified by the user (parameter #1) defines for each component
of the liquid the quantity which is transferred to the cement.
The quantity of metal consumed for cementation (parameter #2) is then compared to the
quantity introduced in the feed.
If the consumption is higher than the quantity available, the cemented percentages are
modified so that all the metal available is consumed. The model indicates in the Operating
Parameters Display the decrease of the specified percentages, which may be used to
increase the flowrate of metal fed in the same proportion if the percentages specified are to
be valid.
in the process and on the definition of the components of each phase. It represents mass
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 310 Filter-Washer (0)

Belt, cartridge and press output 1 = filtrate
3 parameters
filter-washer output 2 = cake
output 3 = washing filtrate

1 Percent solids of the cake at the output (%) 80
2 Washing efficiency per component of the liquid (%) 0
3 Number of the washing stream, if needed 0
Model focus example Model focus/Filter/Filter-Washer (0)
The split of water is made according to parameter #1 in the filtration zone.

The liquid remaining in the cake is washed. Washing entrains components of this remaining
liquid according to the efficiency defined by parameter #2. The percent solids of the cake
remains unchanged after washing. All the entrained components are replaced by "water",
which must be the last component of the liquid phase.
If several streams containing only liquid are fed to the filter, the model cannot select which is
the washing stream. In that case, the number of the washing stream must be specified in
parameter #3.
The model can be used without washing.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 327 Electrolysis (0A)
Two output streams:

Electrolysis cell 6 parameters output 1 = solution
output 2 = sludge

1 Electrolyzed percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
3 Number of electrons exchanged (+ for reduction, - for oxidation) 0
5 Mass conversion from liquid to liquid 0
6 Flowrate of drained solution and extracted metals (t/h) 0
Model focus example Model focus/EW/Electrolysis 0A
The percentage electrolyzed specified by the user (parameter #1) defines for each
component of the liquid the quantity which is transferred to the metal deposited at the
cathode (parameter #2).
The metal produced at the cathode is extracted at the bottom of the cell (output #2). The
quantity of liquid drained with the metal is calculated according to parameter #6.
The other parameters should be used if the oxidation is to be taken into account (generally,
the oxidation of water). The number of electrons consumed for the reduction of metals must
be equal to the number of electrons produced by the oxidation of water.
The number of electrons consumed for the reduction of metals is calculated taking into
account the total number of moles of metals produced (using parameter #4), and the number
of electrons consumed per mole of metal (parameter #3, if positive). This total number of
electrons exchanged is used to calculate the number of moles of liquid components oxidized
(parameter #3, if negative), and the resulting mass is calculated using mass transfer
parameter #5.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 326 Electrolysis (0B) with Cathode

output 1 = solution
Electrolysis cell 7 parameters
output 2 = sludge
output 3 = cathodes

1 Electrolyzed percentage per component of the liquid phase (%) 0
3 Number of electrons exchanged (+ for reduction, - for oxidation) 0
5 Mass conversion from liquid to liquid 0
6 Flowrate of drained solution and extracted metals (t/h) 0
7 Solid sludge in % of cathodes produced 0
Model focus example Model focus/EW/Electrolysis 0B with Cathode
The metals are deposited at the cathodes, and the cathodes extracted in output stream #3.
The percentage electrolyzed specified by the user (parameter #1) defines for each
component of the liquid the quantity which is transferred to the metal deposited at the
cathode (parameter #2). A part of this metal is not recovered as cathodes and produces
sludge (parameter #7).
The sludge produced is extracted at the bottom of the cell (output stream #2). The quantity of
liquid drained with the sludge is calculated according to parameter #6.
The other parameters should be used if the oxidation is to be taken into account (generally,
the oxidation of water). The number of electrons consumed for the reduction of metals must
be equal to the number of electrons produced by the oxidation of water.
The number of electrons consumed for the reduction of metals is calculated taking into
account the total number of moles of metals produced (using parameter #4), and the number
of electrons consumed per mole of metal (parameter #3, if positive). This total number of
electrons exchanged is used to calculate the number of moles of liquid components oxidized
(parameter #3, if negative), and the resulting mass is calculated using mass transfer
parameter #5.
USIM PAC 3.1

4.2 Level 1 models
Model 313 Leaching (1A)

3
1 Tank volume (m ) 500
2 Number of tanks in series 1
3 Maximum recovery per component of ore and solid phases (%) 0
4 Rate constant per component (1/h) 0
6 Top (Closed or Open) Closed
7 Coating (Uncoated, Natural rubber or Butyl rubber) Uncoated
Model focus example Model focus/Leaching/Leaching 1A
For each component of the ore phase, the model calculates the fraction of component
moving from the ore phase to the solution according to parameter #5 and using a first order
kinetic rate equation, the maximum recovery specified and a rate constant. This equation is
derived from Mc Laughlin and Agar publication (Mc Laughlin, J., Agar, G. E., 1991,
Development and application of a first order rate equation for modelling the dissolution of
gold in cyanide solution. Minerals Engineering, Vol. 4, N 12, pp 1305-1314).
The basis equation of Mc Laughlin and Agar is:
dC
= k (C (t ) Cr )
dt
where:
C (t ) metal concentration (g/t) of the solid at time t (h)
Cr metal concentration (g/t) of the leach residue at theoretically infinite time
k rate constant (1/h - parameter #4)
The model considers that all tanks are identical and are perfectly mixed. In that case, the
rate at which each component is recovered can be calculated as a function of the mean
residence time:
1
R = R 1
1 + k
where:
R maximal recovery in one tank per component of phase ore (% - parameter #3)
USIM PAC 3.1

mean residence time calculated using the tank volume (parameter #1) and the
volumetric feedrate
Recovery
(%) Maximal recovery
for each mean residence time

the model calculates the
extraction
Mean residence time (h)
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Rand 1991) of a leaching tank depends on its volume V (parameter
#1), its top design (parameter #6) and its coating (parameter #7):
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
Top Coating V (m3) a b c
Closed Uncoated 10 V 200 7.681 0.4125 -6.205.10-4
200 V 5000 15.13 0.2187 1.558.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.11 0.6513 -9.948.10-4
Rubber
200 V 5000 32.06 0.3246 -2.376.10-6
Butyl 10 V 200 12.55 0.7360 -1.124.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 35.91 0.3635 -2.661.10-6
Open Uncoated 10 V 200 6.719 0.3610 -5.434.10-4
200 V 5000 13.24 0.1914 1.360.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 9.718 0.5698 -8.699.10-4
Rubber
200 V 5000 28.07 0.2830 -2.112.10-6
Butyl 10 V 200 10.98 0.6439 -9.830.10-4
Rubber
200 V 5000 31.43 0.3180 -2.365.10-6
a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1


Ref: Metallurgical equipment costs march 91.
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 305 Leaching (1B)

3 Maximum recovery per component of ore and solid phases (%) 0
4 Coefficient A of the kinetic equation (third degree) 3.0.10-5
5 Coefficient B of the kinetic equation (second degree) 0.0029
6 Coefficient C of the kinetic equation (first degree) 0.01
8 Not used
Model focus example Model focus/Leaching/Leaching 1B
For each component of the ore phase, the model calculates the fraction of the component
moving from the ore phase to the solution phase according to parameter #7 and using an
empirical kinetic equation and the maximum recovery specified.
The rate at which each component is recovered is a polynomial function of the recovery:
dR
= A(R R(t )) + B(R R(t )) + C (R R(t ))
3 2
dt
where:
R(t ) metal recovery (%) of the solid at time t (h)
A, B, C parameters #4, #5 and #6 respectively

The calculation of the recovery assumes that all tanks are identical and perfectly mixed, and
uses the residence time of the ore per tank. An iterative method is used to minimize:
dR R

dt
where is the residence time of the ore in one tank calculated using parameter #1 and the
volumetric feedrate.
USIM PAC 3.1

Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Rand 1991) of a leaching tank depends on its volume V (parameter
#1), its top design (parameter #9) and its coating (parameter #10):
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 15.13 0.2187 1.558.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.11 0.6513 -9.948.10-4
Rubber
200 V 5000 32.06 0.3246 -2.376.10-6
Butyl 10 V 200 12.55 0.7360 -1.124.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 35.91 0.3635 -2.661.10-6
Open Uncoated 10 V 200 6.719 0.3610 -5.434.10-4
200 V 5000 13.24 0.1914 1.360.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 9.718 0.5698 -8.699.10-4
Rubber
200 V 5000 28.07 0.2830 -2.112.10-6
Butyl 10 V 200 10.98 0.6439 -9.830.10-4
Rubber
200 V 5000 31.43 0.3180 -2.365.10-6
a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 318 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (1A)
Two output streams:

output 2 = carbon

3 Maximum recovery in one tank per component of ore phase (%) 0
4 Leaching rate constant per component (1/h) 0
5 Mass conversion from ore to liquid 0
6 Adsorption rate constant per component of the liquid (<0 if 0
desorbed)
7 Adsorption time constant per component of the liquid 0.9
9 Mean residence time of carbon in one tank (h) 24
Model focus example Model focus/CIL/CIL 1A
The model is a combination of the Leaching (1A) model and of the CIP (1A) model.
moving from the ore phase to the solution phase according to parameter #5 and using a first
order rate equation, the maximum recovery specified and a rate constant. The leaching part
of the model is derived from Mc Laughlin and Agar publication (Mc Laughlin, J., Agar, G. E.,
1991, Development and application of a first order rate equation for modelling the dissolution
of gold in cyanide solution. Minerals Engineering, Vol. 4, N 12, pp 1305-1314).
Then, for each component of the liquid phase, the model calculates the fraction of the
component moving from the solution to the different solid component according to parameter
#8. The model used is derived from the "kn" model (Fleming, C.A., Nicol, M.J., Nicol, D.I.,
1980, The optimization of a carbon in pulp adsorption circuit based on the kinetics of
extraction of aurocyanide by activated carbon. Ion Exchange and Solvent Extraction in
Mineral Processing Meeting, Mintek Randburg, South Africa, February.).
a. Leaching
The basic equation of Mc Laughlin and Agar is:
dC
= k (C (t ) Cr )
dt
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
k leaching rate constant (1/h - parameter #4)
residence time:
1
R = R 1
1 + k
where:
mean residence time calculated using the tank volume (parameter #1)
b. Adsorption
The basic equation of Nicol and Fleming model is:
Cc (t ) Cc (0) = KCs (t )t n
where:
Cc (t ) concentration on carbon at time t (mg/kg)
Cs (t ) concentration in solution at time t (mg/kg)
K adsorption rate constant (1/h - parameter #6)

n adsorption time constant (parameter #7)
()
Knowing the concentration of feed liquid Cs 0 in the first tank, the calculation of the
concentration of gold in the solution in tank i is done as follows:
Cci Cci +1 = KCsi n

where is the mean residence time of the carbon in one tank (parameter #9).
The material balance equation is then:
Qs (Csi 1 Csi ) = Qc (Cci Cci +1 )
where:
Qs flowrate of liquid (kg/h)
Qc flowrate of carbon (kg/h)
The model considers that all tanks are identical and are perfectly mixed.
USIM PAC 3.1

The main limitation of this model is the hypothesis of steady-state operation; the non-
equilibrium phases observed industrially cannot be taken into account.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Rand 1991) of a carbon conical tank depends on its volume V
(parameter #1), its top design (parameter #10) and its coating (parameter #11):
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 4.161 0.3622 6.904.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 13.41 0.8097 -1.354.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.74 0.4741 4.739.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 14.01 0.8988 -1.503.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 21.52 0.5150 5.165.10-5
Open Uncoated 10 V 200 8.927 0.5099 -8.803.10-4
200 V 5000 3.754 0.3217 6.164.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.92 0.7199 -1.204.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 17.55 0.4200 4.211.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 13.25 0.7991 -1.336.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.13 0.4578 4.590.10-5
a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 332 CIL Carbon-In-Leach (1B)
Two output streams:

output 2 = carbon

3 Maximum leaching of ore and solid phases (%) 0
4 Leaching rate constant (1/h) 0
6 Carbon mean residence time per tank (h) 24
7 Carbon concentration in the tank (g/l) 25
8 Adsorption rate constant (k) 0
9 Adsorption time constant (n) 0.5
11 Carbon lost by abrasion (g/kg) in the pulp 0
12 Carbon transfer (Pumping or Only carbon) Pumping
13 Tank diameter (m) 1
14 Agitator diameter (m) 1
15 Selection of agitation (No, Suspension or Dispersion) Suspension
16 Liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) 0
This model is a combination of the Leaching (1A) model and of the CIP (1B) model.
moving from the ore phase to the solution phase according to parameter #5 and using a first
order rate equation, the maximum recovery specified and a rate constant. The leaching part
of the model is derived from Mc Laughlin and Agar publication (Mc Laughlin, J., Agar, G. E.,
1991, Development and application of a first order rate equation for modelling the dissolution
of gold in cyanide solution. Minerals Engineering, Vol. 4, N 12, pp 1305-1314).
Then, for each component of the liquid phase, the model calculates the fraction of the
component moving from the solution to the different solid component according to parameter
#10. The model used is derived from the "kn" model (Fleming, C.A., Nicol, M.J., Nicol, D.I.,
1980, The optimization of a carbon in pulp adsorption circuit based on the kinetics of
USIM PAC 3.1

extraction of aurocyanide by activated carbon. Ion Exchange and Solvent Extraction in

Mineral Processing Meeting, Mintek Randburg, South Africa, February.).
It has been adapted to describe also desorption and transfer of components from carbon to
solution.
It allows the calculation of the losses of carbon in the pulp stream due to abrasion and the
pumping of the pulp during carbon transfer from one tank to another.
a. Leaching
The basic equation of Mc Laughlin and Agar is:
dC
= k (C (t ) Cr )
dt
where:
k leaching rate constant (1/h - parameter #4)
residence time:
1
R = R 1
1 + k m
where:
m mean residence time of pulp:
V Vc
m =
Qvp
with:
V volume of the tank (parameter #2)
Vc volume of carbon in the tank (m3)
Qvp volumetric flowrate of the pulp except carbon (m3/h)
In the model, Qvp is supposed to be constant in all the tanks. It is then possible to calculate
the recovery of the leached components in each tank.
USIM PAC 3.1

Using the mass conversion (parameter #5), the quantity of liquid components produced in
each tank is known. This quantity, named Qsi , will enter in the balance equation of
adsorption.
b. Adsorption
Cc (t ) Cc (0 ) = KCs (t )t n
where:

In a continuous operation of a series of tanks, the calculation is as follows:
FL
Csi-1
Csi
Tank i-1
Tank i
Tank i+1
Cci
Cci+1 FC
The calculation of the concentration of gold in the solution in tank i is done as follows:
Cci Cci +1 = KCsi n

where is the mean residence time of the carbon in one tank (parameter #6). If the carbon
concentration (parameter #7) is different from 0, the residence time is calculated as:
VX c
=
Qc
where:
Xc carbon concentration (parameter #4)

Qsi + Qs (Csi 1 Csi ) = Qc (Cci Cci +1 )
where:
USIM PAC 3.1

Qs flowrate of solution (kg/h)
The final solution is then:
Qsi
Csi 1 +
Qs
Csi =
Qc
1+ K n
Qs
Knowing the concentration of fed solution Cs 0 in the first tank, the Csi are known, and then
knowing the concentration CcN +1 of the carbon fed to the last tank, the Cci are known.
c. Desorption
Even if there is no fundamental evidence that the equation of Nicol and Fleming may be used
for desorption, it has been found practical to consider that the reverse of adsorption can be
written:
Csi Csi +1 = KCci n
The resolution is identical to the case of adsorption just changing Csi in Cci . To specify that
one component is desorbed, the parameter K for this component must be negative.
Carbon loss
The losses of carbon are evaluated with:
Lc
Qcl = Qc
1000
where Lc is the fraction of carbon lost by abrasion (parameter #8).
The flowrate Qcl is directed to the pulp stream. The rest Qc Qcl reports to the carbon
stream.
Pulp entrainment
If parameter #9 is set to Only carbon, all the other phases (ore and liquid) report to the pulp
stream. If it is set to Pumping, the transfer of carbon is made by pumping directly into the
tank, and then, pulp is entrained with carbon.
All phases are pumped in proportion of their respective masses in the tank. These masses
are calculated knowing the mean residence time m of all phases except carbon:
M p = Q p m
USIM PAC 3.1

where Qp is the mass flowrate of phase p (kg/h).
The recovery per tank of each liquid component transferred is written in the Operating
Parameter Display. This recovery is calculated as:
Csi 1 Csi
R=
Csi 1
In the case of desorption, it may be negative.
Power calculation
The power consumption for agitation (output parameter #17) is given by:
P = P0 l N 3 Da5
where:
l NDa2
P0 power number depending on the number of Reynolds ( Re a = written

in Power Consumption Display) and the type of the agitator; 1.1 for the current
conditions;
l liquid density;
N rotation speed calculated to reach the desired the agitation level;
Da agitator diameter (parameter #14);

liquid viscosity (parameter #16).
The rotation speed:

1
K a v 3.75
N = 2.81
154 K D
ac a
where:
Ka agitation factor depending (by abacus) on the level of agitation (parameter
#15) and ratio between tank diameter (parameter #13) and agitator diameter
(parameter #14); level 1 (No), level 5 (Suspension) and level 10 (Dispersion) are
considered;
K ac agitation concentration factor depending (by abacus) on the %-solids;
Re p
v = particle velocity limit;
l d
d mean particle size;
USIM PAC 3.1

Re p number of Reynolds of the particle obtained (by abacus) from the value of
f p Re 2p =
4
( s l ) l 2g d 3 ;
3
s mean solid density.
Use of the model

One limit of this model is the hypothesis of steady-state operation particularly in carbon
transfer. The batch counter current transfer practiced industrially cannot be taken into
account.
Another limit is that adsorption is not dependant on carbon loading. The proportion of the
components transferred is the same in each tank. This can be observed on operating plants
if there are no pollutants in the pulp, if there is no extra dissolution taking place, and if the
adsorption is not near equilibrium.
Capital cost
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 4.161 0.3622 6.904.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 13.41 0.8097 -1.354.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.74 0.4741 4.739.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 14.01 0.8988 -1.503.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 21.52 0.5150 5.165.10-5
Open Uncoated 10 V 200 8.927 0.5099 -8.803.10-4
200 V 5000 3.754 0.3217 6.164.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.92 0.7199 -1.204.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 17.55 0.4200 4.211.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 13.25 0.7991 -1.336.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.13 0.4578 4.590.10-5
USIM PAC 3.1

a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

Two output streams:

Adsorption tank 8 parameters output 1 = pulp
output 2 = carbon

4 Rate constant per component of the liquid (0 if not adsorbed) 0.9
5 Time constant per component of the liquid 0
6 Mean residence time of the carbon in one tank (h) 24
Model focus example Model focus/CIP/CIP 1A
For each component of the liquid phase, the model calculates the fraction of the component
moving from the solution to the different solid component according to parameter #3.
The model used is derived from the "kn" model (Fleming, C.A., Nicol, M.J., Nicol, D.I., 1980,
The optimization of a carbon in pulp adsorption circuit based on the kinetics of extraction of
aurocyanide by activated carbon. Ion Exchange and Solvent Extraction in Mineral
Processing Meeting, Mintek Randburg, South Africa, February.).
Cc (t ) Cc (0 ) = KCs (t )t n
where:

()
Knowing the concentration of feed liquid Cs 0 in the first tank, the calculation of the
concentration of gold in solution in tank i is done as follows:
Cci Cci +1 = KCsi n
USIM PAC 3.1

where is the mean residence time of the carbon in one tank (parameter #6).
where:
Qs flowrate of liquid (kg/h)
The main limitation of this model is the hypothesis of steady-state operation; the non-
equilibrium phases observed industrially cannot be taken into account.
stoechiometry and is intrinsic to the phase definition.
Capital cost
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 4.161 0.3622 6.904.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 13.41 0.8097 -1.354.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.74 0.4741 4.739.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 14.01 0.8988 -1.503.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 21.52 0.5150 5.165.10-5
Open Uncoated 10 V 200 8.927 0.5099 -8.803.10-4
200 V 5000 3.754 0.3217 6.164.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.92 0.7199 -1.204.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 17.55 0.4200 4.211.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 13.25 0.7991 -1.336.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.13 0.4578 4.590.10-5
USIM PAC 3.1

a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

Two output streams:

Adsorption tank 16 parameters output 1 = pulp
output 2 = carbon

3 Carbon mean residence time per tank (h) 24
5 Exchange rate constant per component 0
6 Time constant per component 0.5
12 Selection of agitation (No, Suspension or Dispersion) No
13 Liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) 0
For each component of the liquid phase, the model calculates the fraction of the component
moving from the solution to the different solid component according to parameter #3.
The model used is derived from the "kn" model (Fleming, C.A., Nicol, M.J., Nicol, D.I., 1980,
The optimization of a carbon in pulp adsorption circuit based on the kinetics of extraction of
aurocyanide by activated carbon. Ion Exchange and Solvent Extraction in Mineral
Processing Meeting, Mintek Randburg, South Africa, February.).
It has been adapted to describe also desorption and transfer of components from carbon to
solution.
It allows the calculation of the losses of carbon in the pulp stream due to abrasion and the
pumping of the pulp during carbon transfer from one tank to another.
Adsorption
USIM PAC 3.1

Cc (t ) Cc (0) = KCs (t )t n
where:

In a continuous operation of a series of tanks, the calculation is as follows:
FL
Csi-1
Csi
Tank i-1
Tank i
Tank i+1
Cci
Cci+1 FC
The calculation of the concentration of gold in the solution in tank i is done as follows:
Cci Cci +1 = KCsi n

where is the mean residence time of the carbon in one tank (parameter #3). If the carbon
concentration (parameter #4) is different from 0, the residence time is calculated as:
VX c
=
Qc
where:
Xc carbon concentration (parameter #4)

where:
The final solution is then:
USIM PAC 3.1

Csi 1
Csi =
Q
1 + c K n
Qs
Knowing the concentration of fed solution Cs 0 in the first tank, the Csi are known, and then
knowing the concentration CcN +1 of the carbon fed to the last tank, the Cci are known.
Desorption
Even if there is no fundamental evidence that the equation of Nicol and Fleming may be used
for desorption, it has been found practical to consider that the reverse of adsorption can be
written:
Csi Csi +1 = KCci n
The resolution is identical to the case of adsorption just changing Csi in Cci . To specify that
one component is desorbed, the parameter K for this component must be negative.
Carbon loss
The losses of carbon are evaluated with:
Lc
Qcl = Qc
1000
where Lc is the fraction of carbon lost by abrasion (parameter #8).
The flowrate Qcl is directed to the pulp stream. The rest Qc Qcl reports to the carbon
stream.
Pulp entrainment
If parameter #9 is set to Only carbon, all the other phases (ore and liquid) report to the pulp
stream. If it is set to Pumping, the transfer of carbon is made by pumping directly in the tank,
and then, pulp is entrained with carbon.
All phases are pumped in proportion of their respective masses in the tank. These masses
are calculated knowing the mean residence time of all phases except carbon:
V Vc
m =
Qvp
where:
m mean residence time of pulp (h)
Vc volume of carbon in the tank (m3)
USIM PAC 3.1

Qvp volumetric flowrate of the pulp except carbon (m3/h)
The mass of the phase p is calculated by:

M p = Q p m
where Qp is the mass flowrate of phase p (kg/h).
The recovery per tank of each liquid component transferred is written in the Operating
Parameter Display. This recovery is calculated as:
Csi 1 Csi
R=
Csi 1
In the case of desorption, it may be negative.
Power calculation
P = P0 l N 3 Da5
where:
l NDa2

conditions;
l liquid density;

The rotation speed:

1
K a v 3.75
N = 2.81
154 K ac Da
where:
considered;
USIM PAC 3.1

Re p
l d
f p Re 2p =
4
( s l ) l 2g d 3 ;
3
Use of the model

One limit of this model is the hypothesis of steady-state operation particularly in carbon
transfer. The batch counter current transfer practiced industrially cannot be taken into
account.
Another limit is that adsorption is not dependant on carbon loading. The proportion of the
components transferred is the same in each tank. This can be observed on operating plants
if there are no pollutants in the pulp, if there is no extra dissolution taking place, and if the
adsorption is not near equilibrium.
stoechiometry and is intrinsic to the phase definition.
Capital cost
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 4.161 0.3622 6.904.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 13.41 0.8097 -1.354.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.74 0.4741 4.739.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 14.01 0.8988 -1.503.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 21.52 0.5150 5.165.10-5
USIM PAC 3.1

Open Uncoated 10 V 200 8.927 0.5099 -8.803.10-4
200 V 5000 3.754 0.3217 6.164.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.92 0.7199 -1.204.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 17.55 0.4200 4.211.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 13.25 0.7991 -1.336.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.13 0.4578 4.590.10-5
a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 312 Belt Filter-Washer (1)
Three output streams

output 1 = filtrate
Belt filter washer 12 parameters
output 2 = cake
output 3 = washing filtrate

1 Number of filters in parallel 1
2 Length of the filter (m) 10
3 Length of the filtration zone / length of the filter ratio 0.5
4 Length / width ratio 20
5 Linear speed of the belt (m/s) 0.2
6 Pressure drop (Pa) 50000
7 Viscosity of the liquid (Pa.s) 0.001
8 Cake residual minimum moisture content (%) 5
9 Specific resistance of filter cake (m/kg) 1E+009
10 Resistance of the filter medium (m-1) 0
11 Number of counter-current washings 0
12 Type of flow (Plug flow, Laminar or Perfect mixing) Plug flow
Model focus example Model focus/Filter/Filter-Washer (1)
The filter is divided into two zones. The filtration zone is the one from which the filtrate flows,
and the washing zone is the remaining part (see Figure). Parameters #2, #3 and #4 define
these zones.
Pulp Washing solution
Cake
n washings
Filtrate Dilute solution
a. Filtration zone
The cake is assumed to be incompressible and homogeneous. The relations of Kozeny-
Carman and Darcy-Carman describe the flow of filtrate through the cake:
USIM PAC 3.1

dV SP
=
dt R
where:
V volume of filtrate collected at time t (m3)
P pressure drop across the cake and the medium (Pa - parameter #6)
S filtration area (m2)
dynamic viscosity of the liquid (Pa.s - parameter #7)
R resistance of the cake and the medium (1/m)

The resistance of the cake is defined by:
rcV
R=
S
where:
r specific resistance of the cake (m/kg - parameter #9)
c solids concentration (kg of solids/m3 of filtrate)
Rearranging these equations, considering that P is constant with time and taking into
account that the medium is equivalent to a layer of cake that would be obtained after the
production of a volume V f of filtrate during a time t f , the integration of the filtration "law"
gives:
2PS 2
(V + V f )
2
= (t + t f )
rc
or:
2PS 2
V + 2VV f = t
rc
where:
Vf volume of filtrate that would produce a cake of the same resistance as the filter
medium (m3) expressed using the resistance R0 of the filter media (1/m -
parameter #10):
SR0
Vf =
rc
t filtration time (s) depending on the length L of the filtration zone (m) and the
linear speed vb of the belt (m/s - parameter #5):
L
t=
vb
USIM PAC 3.1

b. Washing zone
Washing entrains components of the remaining liquid according to the last two parameters
(number of counter-current washings and type of flow).
The type of flow is used to calculate the concentrations for each step of washing in a matrix
form, according to the wash-ratio. (The wash-ratio is the flowrate of washing water divided
by the flowrate of liquid remaining in the cake after filtration).
Consider the following figure representing one step of washing:

Washing in (Wi)
Filtrate in (Fi) Cake piece Filtrate out (Fo)
Washing out (Wo)
The matrix formulation of the transfer of the components is:
Wo WW FW Wi
=
Fo WF FF Fi
Wi
Let the wash ratio R= .
Fi
In the plug flow case, we have:
if R > 1: if R 1:
1 WW = 0
WW = 1
R FW = R
FW = 1
1 WF = 1
WF =
R FF = 1 R
FF = 0
In the laminar flow case, we have:
if R > 0.5 : if R 0.5 :
1
2 WW =0
WW = 1
2R FW =R
FW =1
1 WF =1
4R FF =1 R
2
1
WF = 1 1
2R
1
FF =
4R
In the case of perfect mixing, we have:
USIM PAC 3.1

R
WW =
1+ R
R
FW =
1+ R
1
WF =
1+ R
1
FF =
1+ R
The above matrices are rearranged to directly give the results for several steps of washing.
Notes
The specific resistance of the filter cake may be determined by laboratory tests (Ruth, B. F.,
1935, "Studies in filtration", Ind. Eng. Chem. 27, 708, 806). It may also be back calculated by
the model from pilot plant or industrial data: the necessary experimental data are the length
of the filtration zone and the residual moisture content of the cake. The model calculates the
specific resistance that should provide a residual humidity specified in parameter #8 and
displays it in the Operating Parameters Display.
The percent solid of the cake remains unchanged after washing. All the components
entrained are replaced by "water", which must be the last component of the liquid phase.
If several streams fed to the filter contain only liquid, the model considers all of them as
washing streams.
The model can be used without washing.
Capital cost
The capital cost C (in Canadian Dollar 1982) of one belt filter depends on its area A
(parameters #2 and #4):
C = aA b
where:
Area (ft2) a b
10 A 192 15105.9 0.4916
USIM PAC 3.1

Model 337 Solvent Extraction (1)
Two output streams

Mixer-settler 20 parameters output 1 = organic
output 2 = aqueous

1 Number of steps 1
2 Organic/Aqueous flowrate volumetric ratio if regulated 0
3 Entrainment of Organic in Aqueous (g of O per kg of A) 0
4 Entrainment of Aqueous in Organic (g of A per kg of O) 0
5 Number of reactions 0
6 Reactions numbers 0
7 Ratio: specie for isotherm definition/component 1
8 For X<=XJ, production type (No, Hyperbolic, Log, Polynomial or No
%)
9 Parameter A of the isotherm 0
10 Parameter B of the isotherm 0
11 Parameter C of the isotherm 0
12 Parameter D of the isotherm 0
13 XJ 0
14 For X>XJ, production type (Hyperbolic, Log or Polynomial) 1
15 Parameter A of the isotherm 0
16 Parameter B of the isotherm 0
17 Parameter C of the isotherm 0
18 Parameter D of the isotherm 0
19 Data type (Concent. (g/l), Grade (g/kg) or Molal (g/kg solvent)) 1
20 Correspondence for isotherm definition
Model focus example Model focus/SX/SX 1
This Solvent Extraction model is able to simulate a set of N mixer/settler stages in series:
USIM PAC 3.1

A1 O2 A3 O4 ON ON+1
Mixer Mixer
Settler Settler
Settler 2 Settler N
1 3
Mixer Mixer
O1 A2 O3 A4 AN AN+1
The Aqueous (A) stream feeds the first mixer/settler and exit from the last one. Organic (O)
stream flows in counter current and then feeds the last mixer/settler and exits from the first
one.
This set of mixer/settlers is represented by one icon in the flowsheet drawing:
SOLVENT EXTRACTION (1)
Organic feed
2
Loaded organic
1
3
Aqueous feed 1
4
Mixe-settler Barren aqueous
The "Aqueous feed", "Organic feed", "Loaded organic" and "Barren aqueous" streams
correspond respectively to the streams A1, ON+1, O1 and AN+1.
The liquid phases must have different specific gravity as the organic phase is recognized as
the lighter.
The extraction rate between aqueous and organic phases is calculated according to the
isotherm:
USIM PAC 3.1

Isotherm
6
5
Cu in Organic phase (g/l)
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Cu in Aqueous phase (g/l)
Isotherms are obtained from laboratory tests and can be modeled by a fit of the experimental
points. The general expression of the fit allowed by the model is:
f ( X ) if X X 0
Y = 1
f 2 ( X ) if X > X 0
where
X concentration of the extracted component in the aqueous phase
Y concentration of the extracted component in the organic phase
X0 parameter #13
Depending on the parameters #8 and #14, f1 ( X ) and f 2 ( X ) may have a hyperbolic form:
Ai X
fi ( X ) = + Ci
Bi + X
a logarithmic form:
f i ( X ) = Ai ln(1 + Bi X ) + Ci
or a polynomial forms:
fi ( X ) = Ai X 3 + Bi X 2 + Ci X + Di
where A1 , B1 , C1 , D1 , A2 , B2 , C2 and D2 are respectively given by the parameters #9,
#10, #11, #12, #15, #16, #17 and #18.
All the isotherm parameters (#8 through #18) are given for the extracted component in its
starting liquid phase. If there are many extracted components, their corresponding isotherms
can be described independently.
USIM PAC 3.1

The extracted component in its starting liquid phase is associated to the component in the
arrival liquid phase by the aid of the parameter #20. The following figure shows the
parameter interface in the case of a Cu extraction from ion Cu++ in Aqueous to ion Cu++ in
Organic:
The units used for X and Y are given by the parameter #19 and can be a concentration in
g/l, a grade in g/kg or a molal grade in g/kg of solvent.
To complete the description of the extraction, it is necessary to give its associated chemical
reaction (parameters #5 and #6). This reaction will give more information about the ion
exchange as in the following example where an acid counter transfer accompanies the metal
transfer:
2RH + Cu + + R 2Cu + 2H +
In this example, the component used in the organic phase is not simply the copper ion but
the complex R2Cu. If the isotherm uses the Cu concentration in g of Cu/l, it is necessary to
give the molecular mass ratio between the specie used in the isotherm definition and the one
used for material balance (parameter #7).
If parameter #2 is specified (value different from 0) the flowrate of organic phase is

calculated. This parameter MUST be used to initialize the flowrate of organic phase in a
closed-loop circuit. However, to ensure the material conservation in all the streams of the
closed-loop, ONLY ONE mixer-settler has to regulate in the loop.
To achieve the material balance in such an SX circuit, it is necessary to take into account the
entrainment of organic phase in the aqueous stream and conversely, due to the unavoidable
imperfect settling. The parameters #3 and #4 give this entrainment in terms of the quantity
(g) of organic or aqueous phase entrained by kg of aqueous or organic phase.
Use of the model for unit sizing

The main function of this model is to calculate the number of mixer/settlers in series (steps)
to achieve an extraction objective using the McCabe & Thiele method.
The unit sizing is made in two stages:
A simulation using the level 0 model to calculate the output streams fixing the expected
extraction rate and the Organic/Aqueous (O/A) ratio.
A unit sizing calculation using the level 1 model. In that case, the isotherm(s) and
associated chemical reaction(s) are described by the parameters #5 through #20
obtained from laboratory test results. The number of steps and the O/A ratio can then be
back calculated to obtain output streams as close as possible to the ones calculated by
the level 0 model.
USIM PAC 3.1

During simulation, the model writes information in the "Operating Parameters Display" file.
They are divided in three sections:
A description of the internal iterative calculation useful to verify its convergence. This
section can be long.
A detailed description of the feed, of the organic and aqueous outputs and of the
equilibrium state for each step (reactor). Are displayed for each liquid phase: mass and
volumetric flowrate, specific gravity, and concentration of all the components in g/l, g/kg
and g/kg of solvent.
A set of (X, Y) points to be able to plot the each isotherm and the corresponding McCabe
& Thiele diagram.
2 Isotherm
McCabe & Thiele diagram
1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Use of the model for simulation of an existing plant

In that case, the SX circuit can be represented by one icon for the mixer/settler series or as
is using one icon by step. This second solution is better if the chemical conditions are
different in the different reactors and then with different isotherms.
The isotherm(s) and associated chemical reaction(s) are described by the parameters #5
through #20 obtained from laboratory test results.
The parameter #2 is initialized to 0, as the organic flowrate is known. If this flowrate is in a
loop and is not regulated by another mean, one of the reactor has to regulate it using the
parameter #2.
The entrainment parameters #3 and #4 can be adjusted from the operating plant data.
USIM PAC 3.1

4.3 Level 2 models
Two output streams:

output 2 = carbon

3 Mean carbon residence time per tank (h) 24
5 Forward rate constant (1/h) 0.01
6 Reverse rate constant (1/h) 0.001
7 Maximum loading capacity (mg/kg) 15000
13 Selection of agitation (No, Suspension or Dispersion) Dispersion
14 Liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.001
Model focus example Model focus/CIP/CIP 2A
This model was proposed by Dixon et al. (Dixon, S., Cho, E.H., and Pitt, C.H., 1978, The
interaction between gold cyanide, silver cyanide and high surface area charcoal.
Fundamental aspects of hydrometallurgical processes. AIChe symp. Series, vol 74, no 173,
pp 75-83.),(Cho, E.H., Dixon, S. and Pitt, C.H., 1979, The kinetics of gold cyanide adsorption
onto activated charcoal. Metall. Trans. B., vol 10B, pp 185-189.).
A critical evaluation of this model has been made by Johns (Johns M. W., 1985, Model
application. Presented at the School on the Use of Activated Carbon For Gold Recovery.
Johannesburg, South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Lecture 5).
USIM PAC 3.1

It is based on the reversibility of the reaction and includes a term for the loading capacity of
the carbon. It takes into account a rate expression and the equilibrium is represented by the
maximum loading capacity.
The basic reaction rate (mg/h/m3) expression is:
r=
mc
Vs
[ ( )
k f Cc+ Cc Cs kr Cc ]
where:
mc mass of carbon (kg)
Vs volume of solution (m3)
kf forward rate constant (1/h - parameter #4)
kr reverse rate constant (1/h - parameter #5)
Cc concentration on the activated carbon (mg/kg)
Cc+ maximum loading on the carbon (mg/kg)
Cs solution concentration (mg/kg)
The rate at which a component is transferred is

mc dCc dC
r= = s s
Vs dt dt
where s is the solution density.
As for the CIP (1B) model, the contacting takes place in tanks and the flow of carbon is batch
counter-current (see figure).
FL
Csi-1
Csi
Tank i-1
Tank i
Tank i+1
Cci
Cci+1 FC
Series of CIP tanks

To describe this situation mathematically, a rate expression and a mass balance are
required. Each contacting vessel is assumed to be perfectly mixed: the gold concentration in
solution leaving the vessel is the same as the concentration in the vessel.
USIM PAC 3.1

In steady state situation, a mass balance around the tank i on the components in solution
can be written:
ACCUMULATED = IN - OUT - REACTED
dCsi
ms = QsCsi 1 QsCsi Vs r
dt
For the batch counter-current system, the mass balance of the components on the carbon is:
ACCUMULATED = REACTED
dCc
mc = Vs r
dt
where:
ms mass of solution in the tank (kg)
For each tank, the two previous differential equations are solved by the four point Runge-
Kutta method, knowing the concentrations in the input streams. The integration is done using
the residence time of carbon. The transfer time of carbon is supposed to be negligible.
The integration provides Cs and Cc . To begin the calculations, the initial concentration in
tank i (just after the transfer of carbon) is taken as the final concentration in tank i - 1. A
certain number of cycles have to be simulated before the initial concentration in tank i can be
equal to the final one, which represents the cyclic behavior of the system.
Once this is reached, the concentration of the exit solution is calculated as a mean of Cs
over the residence time of carbon, and the final concentration of carbon is taken as the initial
one for the tank i - 1.
The following figure shows the evolution of the concentrations during a cycle in a tank. At the
beginning, carbon concentration is low and adsorption is fast, thus solution concentration
decreases rapidly. When adsorption becomes slower because of carbon loading, and as the
solution is continuously fed to the tank, the solution concentration increases. To describe the
"steady-state" of the system, the mean of Cs is reported to the output stream.
USIM PAC 3.1

Concentrations
Carbon
Solution
Time
Carbon residence time
Evolution of the concentration during a cycle

To calculate the concentrations for a series of tanks, an iterative procedure is used in which,
for each tank, the above procedure is applied. In case of no convergence of this procedure, a
message is written in the operating parameter file.
To accelerate the convergence, an initialization of the concentrations in all streams is made
supposing that the recovery is the same in each tank.
Adsorption and desorption

The adsorption occurs if the concentration of a component on carbon is lower than the
equilibrium value of the Langmuir isotherm, and desorption occurs if it is higher. These
phenomena are taken into account in the equations where the rate can be positive or
negative.
The calculation of the output streams and the messages written in the Operating Parameter
Display are then equivalent to the CIP (1B) model.
Use of the model

a) Calibration using laboratory data.
If lab tests have provided the adsorption isotherm, then a simple fit with the Langmuir
expression can be done with many commercial packages (spreadsheet, statistic or graphic
tools, etc.). The values obtained for kf , kr and Cc+ just need to be entered as model
parameters (respectively parameters #5, #6 and #7).
b) Calibration using industrial data.

In this case, to be efficiently calibrated, this model requires the knowledge or at least a good
estimation of the maximum carbon loading capacity. Once this parameter is known, the
forward ( k f ) and reverse ( k r ) constants can be easily calibrated with the Model Parameter
Adjustment option of USIM PAC. The most efficient way is to calibrate one model, when the
series of tanks is resumed in only one tank icon with:
Number of tanks in series (parameter #1) = n.
Carbon concentration (parameter #4) = average value of the concentration in each tank.
USIM PAC 3.1

Carbon lost by abrasion in the pulp (parameter #9) = average value of the loss for each
tank.
Then the calculated kf and kr values can be used for each model in the extended
flowsheet (one icon and then one model per tank). In this case, each model can use the
existing values of carbon concentration and carbon lost.
Power calculation
P = P0 l N 3 Da5
where:
l NDa2

conditions;
l liquid density;

The rotation speed:

1
K a v 75
3.
N = 2.81
154 K ac Da
where:
considered;
Re p
l d
USIM PAC 3.1

f p Re 2p =
4
( s l ) l 2g d 3 ;
3
Capital cost
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 4.161 0.3622 6.904.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 13.41 0.8097 -1.354.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.74 0.4741 4.739.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 14.01 0.8988 -1.503.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 21.52 0.5150 5.165.10-5
Open Uncoated 10 V 200 8.927 0.5099 -8.803.10-4
200 V 5000 3.754 0.3217 6.164.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.92 0.7199 -1.204.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 17.55 0.4200 4.211.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 13.25 0.7991 -1.336.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.13 0.4578 4.590.10-5
a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

Two output streams:

output 2 = carbon

3 Mean carbon residence time per tank (h) 24
5 Film diffusion coefficient (m/h) 0.1
6 Film area per unit mass of carbon (m2/kg) 1000
7 Freundlich constant (mg/kg) 15000
8 Freundlich power 0.3
12 Percentage of the mass of carbon transferred (%) 100
15 Selection of agitation (No, Suspension or Dispersion) Dispersion
16 Liquid viscosity (kg/m.s) 0.001
This model was proposed by Johns (Johns M. W., 1985, Model application. Presented at the
School on the Use of Activated Carbon For Gold Recovery. Johannesburg, South African
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Lecture 5).
It is based on the reversibility of the reaction. It takes into account a rate expression and the
equilibrium is represented by the Freundlich isotherm.
The basic reaction rate (mg/h/m3) expression is:
mc Ac
C b
1
r= s k Cs c
Vs a
USIM PAC 3.1

where:
Ac film area per unit mass of carbon (m2/kg - parameter #5)
Vs volume of solution (m3)
s solution density (kg/m3)
k film diffusion coefficient (m/h - parameter #4)
Cc concentration on the activated carbon (mg/kg)
Cs solution concentration (mg/kg)
a Freundlich coefficient (kg(b-1).mg(b-1) - parameter #6)

b Freundlich power (parameter #7)
The rate at which a component is transferred is

mc dCc dC
r= = s s
Vs dt dt
The contacting takes place in tanks and the flow of carbon is batch counter-current as for the
previous model (see figure).
FL
Csi-1
Csi
Tank i-1
Tank i
Tank i+1
Cci
Cci+1 FC
Series of CIP tanks

Mathematically the expression of the model is the same as the CIP (2A) one. Two differential
equations are solved with the Runge-Kutta method and provide the same type of results.
Adsorption and desorption

The adsorption occurs if the concentration of a component on carbon is lower than the
equilibrium value of the Freundlich isotherm, and desorption occurs if it is higher. These
phenomena are taken into account in the equations where the rate can be positive or
negative.
Calculation of output streams

The output streams are calculated exactly in the same way as in the CIP (2A) model and the
messages written in the Operating Parameter Display are of the same type.
USIM PAC 3.1

Use of the model

a) Calibration using laboratory data.
If lab tests have provided the adsorption isotherm then a simple fit with the Freundlich
expression can be done with many commercial packages (spreadsheet, statistic or graphic
tools, etc.). The values obtained then for the a and b parameters just need to be entered as
model parameters #7 and #8. Then with the Model Parameter Adjustment option of
USIM PAC, parameter #5 (film diffusion coefficient) and, if unknown, parameter #6 (film area
per unit mass of carbon) can as well be easily calibrated.
b) Calibration using only industrial data.

In this case, a plot of an "industrial isotherm" can be made: for each tank, the measurement
( )
of the solution and of the carbon assays allows to plot ln Cc versus ln Cs . Then, as( )
above, a fit with the Freundlich expression can be done and "industrial" a and b are
determined. If the operation was at the equilibrium, it would mean that these values are the
real isotherm ones and then the kinetic constant (film diffusion coefficient) would be very low.
It is generally not the case when real circuits operate far from the equilibrium with high
kinetics. However, we can assume that the slope of the real isotherm is probably not far from
the slope of the industrial one and b can be kept as a model parameter (#8).
Then knowledge or a good estimation of the film area per unit mass of carbon (parameter #6)
is required. Using the Model Parameter Adjustment option, parameters #5 and #7 can be
calibrated.
If parameter #6 is totally unknown, then assume that the kinetic is maximum (around 0.3)
and calibrate at the same time parameters #6 and #7. This will probably provide less
accurate results, but would allow to use the model in these far from the equilibrium operating
conditions.
In some cases, it may be possible to calibrate four of the parameters, #5, #6, #7 and #8. In
this case, the following hypothesis must be made: operation is far from the equilibrium, thus
kinetic is high.
Power calculation
P = P0 l N 3 Da5
where:
l NDa2

conditions;
l liquid density;

USIM PAC 3.1

The rotation speed:

1
K a v 3.75
N = 2.81
154 K D
ac a
where:
considered;
Re p
l d
f p Re 2p =
4
( s l ) l 2g d 3 ;
3
Capital cost
C = a + bV + cV 2 + a '+ b 'V + c 'V 2

where:
200 V 5000 4.161 0.3622 6.904.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 13.41 0.8097 -1.354.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.74 0.4741 4.739.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 14.01 0.8988 -1.503.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 21.52 0.5150 5.165.10-5
USIM PAC 3.1

Open Uncoated 10 V 200 8.927 0.5099 -8.803.10-4
200 V 5000 3.754 0.3217 6.164.10-5

Natural 10 V 200 11.92 0.7199 -1.204.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 17.55 0.4200 4.211.10-5
Butyl 10 V 200 13.25 0.7991 -1.336.10-3
Rubber
200 V 5000 19.13 0.4578 4.590.10-5
a b c
18.56 0.2068 3.455.10-4
USIM PAC 3.1

USIM PAC 31 Unit Operation Model Guide

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

USIM PAC 31 Unit Operation Model Guide

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Unit Operation Model Guide

BRGM is the author of USIM PAC

USIM PAC 3.1

1 GENERAL MODELS ..............................................................................................10

USIM PAC 3.1

2 COMMINUTION MODELS ......................................................................................46

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 137 SALA Agitated Mill (2) ...................................................................146

3 - SEPARATION MODELS .......................................................................................180

4 HYDROMETALLURGICAL MODELS ..................................................................224

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 302 CIP Carbon-In-Pulp (0A) ............................................................230

USIM PAC 3.1

1.1 Model selection

USIM PAC 3.1

1.2 What is new in the model libraries?

Models 36 to 45 n-Output Split: new numbers of outputs from 6 to 15.

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 204 Spiral Concentrator (1): capital cost calculation.

USIM PAC 3.1

USIM PAC 3.1

1.1 Level 0 models

Model 1 Mixer (0)

Mixer No parameter One output stream

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 2 Solid/Liquid Separator (0)

Two output streams:

# Parameter Default value

Model focus example Model focus/Thickener/Solid-Liquid Separator 0

Phase model requirement

46.72' < D 300 2258.7 0.9235

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 3 Flow Split - % (0)

Splitter 1 parameter Two output streams

# Parameter Default value

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 4 Flow Split - Flowrate (0)

Splitter 2 parameters Two output streams

# Parameter Default value

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 11 Liquid Split (0)

Splitter 2 parameters Two output streams

# Parameters Default value

Phase model requirement

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 24 Splitter with a known output

Splitter 1 parameter Two output streams

# Parameters Default value

Model focus example Model focus/Splitter/Splitter with a known output

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 25 Flow Split - global

Splitter 1 parameter Two output streams

# Parameters Default value

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 32 to 45 n-Output Split

Split n-outputs 2 parameters n output streams

# Parameters Default value

Model focus example Model focus/Splitter/Multi Output Split

USIM PAC 3.1

Model 18 - 2-Output Split + Power

# Parameters Default value

Model focus example Model focus/Splitter/Multi Output Split + Power

This model has two functions:

Use of the model