Effect of Feed Rate on Comminution Products by Fractal Geometry

Document Type : Research Article


1 Department of Mining & Metallurgical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor,Department of Mining & Metallurgical Eng. Amirkabir University of Technology


The effect of feed rate on the particle size distribution of crushing products was investigated by fractal dimension. The particle size distribution was calculated based on the cumulative particle weight to particle size ratio. An evaluation has been made between laboratory results and the fractal model by the root mean square error (RMSE) method. A comparison between fractal geometry and Rosin-Rammler methods has been made for the particle size distribution description. The comminution of the ore was performed by three-jaw, cone, and roll crushers. Each of the crushers was fed with rates of 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, and 4.5 kilograms per minute. The fractal dimension of the particle size distribution for jaw, cone, and roll crushers was (from 2.18 to 2.32), (from 2.12 to 2.27), and (from 2.30 to 2.43), respectively. The smallness of the fractal dimension of the particles crushed by the cone crusher is due to the uniformity of product particles. The bigness of fractal dimension of the materials crushed by roll crusher is due to the limited range of particle sizes. The limited range of particle sizes causes the uniformity of product weight distribution. A 2 mm opening sieve was selected as a target sieve, from which the weight percentage of the passing particles to the post-crushing stage was calculated. The results show that by increasing the feed rate, the amount of material passing from the target sieve is decreased. The RMSE, in the fractal model, for jaw, cone, and roll crushers were obtained (between 7.87 and 9.31), (between 3.50 and 4.17), and (between 0.83 and 2.62), respectively. The RMSE results, in the Rosin-Rammler method, for jaw, cone, and roll crushers were obtained (between 7.87 and 9.31), (between 3.50 and 4.17), and (between 0.83 and 2.62), respectively. Based on the results, for the particle size distribution description, the fractal geometry is a quantitative and more suitable manner than the Rosin-Rammler method.


Main Subjects

  1. Airikka, Automatic Feed Rate Control with Feed-forward for Crushing and Screening Processes, IFAC- PapersOnline, 48 (17) (2015) 149-154.
  2. D. Flavel, Method of Controlling Feed Rate to Crushing Plant while Crushers are adjusted to Continually Operate at Full Power, US Patent, US4179074A (1979).
  3. Radziszewski, Developing an experimental procedure for charge media wear prediction, J Miner Eng, 13 (8–9) (2000) 949–961.
  4. W. Fuerstenau, J. J. Lutch, A. De, The effect of ball size on the energy efficiency of hybrid high-pressure roll mill/ball mill grinding, J Powder Technol, 105 (1–3) (1999) 199–204.
  5. Sadrai, J. A. Meech, M. Ghomshei, F. Sassani, D. Tromans, Influence of impact velocity on fragmentation and the energy efficiency of comminution, Int. J. Impact Eng, 33 (2006) 723–734.
  6. Allen, Particle size measurement, Powder Sampling and Particle Size Measurement, Powder Technology Series, vol, 1, Chapman and Hall, (1997).
  7. A. M. Ahmed, J. Drrzymala, Two-dimensional fractal linearization of distribution curves, Physicochem. Probl. Miner. Process, 39 (2005) 129–139.
  8. Lu, I. F. Jefferson, M. S. Rosenbaum, I. J. Smalley, Fractal characteristics of loess formation: evidence from laboratory experiments, Engineering Geology, 69 (3-4) (2003) 287–293.
  9. Casini, G. M. B. Viggiani, S. M. Springman, Breakage of an artificial crushable material under loading, GranularMatter, 15 (5) (2013) 661–673.
  10. Wang, W. Dan, Y. Xu, Y. Xi, Fractal and Morphological Characteristics of Single Marble Particle Crushing in Uniaxial Compression Tests, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, (2015).
  11. Cai, Y. Xiong, L. Lin, Experimental Study on the Fractal Characteristics of Rocks Crushing, MATEC Web of Conferences, 25 (02008) (2015).
  12. Delagrammatikas, M. Delagrammatikas, S. Tsimas, Particle size distributions a new approach, Powder Technology, 176 (2007) 57–65.
  13. Mohammadi, M. Shabanpour, M. H. Mohammadi, N. Davatgar, Characterizing Spatial Variability of Soil Textural Fractions and Fractal Parameters Derived from Particle Size Distributions, Pedosphere, 29 (2) (2019) 224-234.
  14. B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature, Freeman, New York, (1982).
  15. Falconer, Fractal geometry mathematical foundations and applications, J. Willi and sons, (2003).
  16. V. Arhangel’skii, J. van Mill, Some aspects of dimension theory for topological groups, Indagationes Mathematicae, 29 (2018) 202–225.
  17. Bartoli, R. Philippy, M. Doirisse, S. Niquet, M. Dubuit, Structure and self-similarity in salty and sandy soils: the fractal approach, J. Soil Sci, 42 (1991) 167–185.
  18. Carpinteri, N. Pugno, A fractal comminution approach to evaluate the drilling energy dissipation, Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech, 26 (2002) 499–513.
  19. Martins, Size–energy relationship in commination, incorporating scaling laws and heat, International Journal of Mineral Processing, 153 (2016) 29-43.
  20. Carpinteri, G. Lacidogna, N. Pugno, Scaling of energy dissipation in crushing and fragmentation: a fractal and statistical analysis based on particle size distribution, International Journal of Fracture, 129 (2004) 131–139.
  21. O. Filippov, R. Joussemet, M. Irannajad, R. Houot, A. Thomas, An approach of the whiteness quantification of crushed and floated talc concentrate, Powder Technology 105 (1999) 106–112.
  22. Barry, Wills, A. James, Finch, Chapter 6 – Crushers, Wills' Mineral Processing Technology (Eighth Edition), Butterworth-Heinemann, (2016) 123-146.
  23. Gupta, D. Yan, Chapter 5 - Gyratory and Cone Crusher, Mineral Processing Design and Operations (Second Edition), Elsevier, (2016) 153-168.
  24. Gupta, D. Yan, Chapter 6 - Roll Crushers, Mineral Processing Design and Operations (Second Edition), Elsevier, (2016) 169-188.
  25. Cui, L. An, W. Gong, Effects of process parameters on the comminution capability of high pressure water jet mill, Int. J. Miner. Process, 81 (2006) 113–121.
  26. L. Turcotte, Fractals and fragmentation, J. Geophys. Res, 91 (1986) 1921–1926.
  27. G. Blenkinsop, Cataclasis and Processes of Particle Size Reduction, Pure appl, geophys, 136 (1991) 1–33.
  28. Tasdemir, Fractal evaluation of particle size distributions of chromites in different comminution environments, Minerals Engineering, 22 (2009) 156–167.
  29. Petrakis, E. Stamboliadis, K. Komnitsas, Evaluation of the relationship between energy input and particle size distribution in comminution with the use of piecewise regression analysis, Journal Particulate Science and Technology, 35 (4) (2017) 479-489.
  30. R. Zhang, Z. L. Hu, Z. D. Liu, Fractal  Features Characterized by Particle Size Distribution of Eco-Material for Erosion Control of Cutting Slope,  http://docplayer.net. (2004).
  31. Zhong, N. He, T. Cosgrove, Y. J. Zhu, L. Fu, Analysis of the Correlation Between Fractal Dimension of Gravelly Soil and Debris-flow Initiation Through in-Situ Experiments, http://www.aloki.hu, (2019).
  32. Gunal, S. Ersahin, B. Y. Uz, M. Budak, N. Acir, Soil Particle Size Distribution and Solid Fractal Dimension as Influenced by Pretreatments, Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 17 (2011) 217-229.
  33. Haki, M. A. El Hadi, A. Bouhafid, Assessment of the pyrolysis, combustion and fractal dimension of fragmented oil shale particles, Powder Technology, 318 (2017) 569-588.
  34. Xu, Fractal dimension of demolition waste fragmentation and its implication of compactness, Powder Technology, 339 (2018) 922-929.
  35. Zhang, M. Li, Z. Liu, N. Zhou, Fractal characteristics of crushed particles of coal gangue under compaction, Powder Technology, 305 (2017) 12-18.
  36. Barry, Wills, A. James, Finch, Chapter 5 – Comminution, Wills' Mineral Processing Technology (Eighth Edition), Butterworth-Heinemann, (2016) 109-122.
  37. Flook, The use of dilation logic on the quantimet to achieve fractal dimension characterization of textured surfaces, Powder Technology, 21 (1978) 295-298.
  38. Hyslip, L. E. Vallejo, Fractal analysis of the roughness and size distribution of granular materials, Eng. Geol, 48 (1997) 231–244.
  39. W. Tyler, S. W. Wheatcract, Fractal scaling of soil particle-size distribution: analyses and limitations, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J, 56 (1992) 362–369.
  40. Carpinteri, N. Pugno, A multifractal comminution approach for drilling scaling laws, Powder Technol., 131 (2003) 93–98.
  41. L. Turcotte, Fractals and Chaos in Geology and Geophysics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1992).
  42. Tasdemir, T. Tasdemir, A Comparative Study on PSD Models for Chromite Ores Comminuted by Different Devices, Part. Part. Syst. Charact, 26 (2009) 69–79.
  43. B. Manohar, S. Sridhar, Size and Shape Characterization of Conventionally and Cryogenically Ground Turmeric (Curcuma Domestica) Particles, Powder Technol, 120 (2001) 292–297.
  44. V. Shcherbakov, A. Brebels, N. L. Shcherbakova, A. P. Tyukov, T. A. Janovsky, V. A. Kamaev, A Survey of Forecast Error Measures, World Applied Sciences Journal, 24 (2013) 171-176.
  45. R. Gharedaghi, Comparison of four classification models by calculating RMSE and MSE criteria, https://www.placabi.com, (2016), (in persian).
  46. Gupta, D. Yan, Chapter 4 - Jaw Crusher, Mineral Processing Design and Operations (Second Edition), Elsevier, (2016) 123-152.
  47. Legendre, R. Zevenhoven, Assessing the energy efficiency of a jaw crusher, Energy, 74 (2014) 119-130.