Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1
, ), the rotational speed n and some empirical correction coefcients,
such as K
s
and K
h
(Lang, 1998). The coefcient K
s
describes the inuence
of the size distributionof the feedoncrusher output, andthe valuerange
is 11.4. The coefcient K
h
describes the inuence of material hardness
on crusher output, and the value range is 0.751.
F x =
m
i =1
M
i
V
i
;
i
; M
1
V
1
;
1
;
2
m 1
_
4
0 V
i
V
min
: 5
The second factor is taken as the boundary constraint in the
crushing chamber geometry optimization. As shown in Eq. (5),
i
is
the nip angle of crushing zone i. With the method above, a crushing
chamber geometry optimization can be achieved, as shown in Fig. 2.
3. Constraints of product quality
3.1. Size reduction model
The crushing process in each crushing zone has been presented by
Evertsson (1997). In that process the material ow through the
crusher is modeled as a series of successive crushing events, as shown
in Fig. 3 and Eq. (6), where P
i +1
represents the feeding material of
crushing zone i, P
i
represents the discharge materials of the same
zone, S
i
is the selection function and B
i
is the Breakage function.
P
i
= B
i
S
i
+ 1 S
i
P
i + 1
6
P =
m
i =1
B
i
S
i
+ 1 S
i
F : 7
As the entire process of crushing is modeled as a series of
successive crushing events, the size distribution of the nal product
can be calculated using Eq. (7), where P represents the nal product
and F represents the initial feed.
The values of S
i
and B
i
are determined by the parameter (s/b)
i
,
which is the compression ratio of crushing zone i. This parameter
describes how much the rock material is compressed and is
determined from the location of the crushing event and the crusher
dynamics. Actually, following the work on the crushing chamber
geometry optimization, the compression ratio of each crushing zone
has already been calculated. As shown in Fig. 2, (s/b)
i
is just the value
of S
C1C2C3C4
/ S
C1C2C5C6
, where S
C1C2C3C4
is the area of quadrangle
C
1
C
2
C
3
C
4
and S
C1C2C5C6
is the area of quadrangle C
1
C
2
C
5
C
6
. So it is
possible to take the size distribution of nal product as the constraint
in the crushing chamber optimization.
3.2. Flakiness prediction model
Generally the product akiness is tested according to European
Standard EN 933-3, which is a part of the European Standard for
classication of aggregate characteristics.
Magnus and Evertsson (2006) revealed that the akiness of the
product can be estimated with the knowledge of the CSS and the
average size of the feed, and presented an empirical model for
predicting product akiness in cone crushing, as shown in Eq. (8),
where FI(F
, CSS, P
SIZE
) is the akiness index, F
1:25x + 20
CSS
_ _
P
SIZE
+ 1:25F:
8
Based on this empirical model and the size reduction model, the
percentage of aky particles in the nal product can be calculated, as
shown in Eq. (9).
FI
total
=
K
j =1
P
j
FI
j
F; CSS; P
SIZEj
_ _
: 9
In Eq. (9) P
SIZEj
is the average size within size range j, FI
i
(F , CSS,
P
SIZEj
) is approximately the percentage of aky particles in size range
j and P
j
is the product matrix of the crushing zone j. Actually, the value
of P
j
is the percentage of the particles in size range j with respect to
the total product. Obviously FI
total
is the percentage of total aky
particles in the nal product. The akiness prediction model can also
be taken as the constraint in optimization of the design of the crushing
chamber.
4. Crushing chamber optimization under multi-constraints
Based on this method for crushing chamber geometry optimiza-
tion, taking the size reduction model and akiness prediction model
as constraints, a crushing chamber optimization model is achieved.
As shown in Eq. (10), the rotational speed n, eccentric angle ,
height of pivot point h, base angle of cone and average nip angle of
Fig. 3. The model of the i crushing process.
206 D. Gang et al. / Int. J. Miner. Process. 93 (2009) 204208
chamber
nip
are taken as the design variables. The other structural
and working parameters, such as the eccentric distance and length of
the stroke, can be determined by the parameters above.
X = x
1
; x
2
; x
3
; x
4
; x
5
= n; ; h; ;
nip
_ _
: 10
The objective of the crushing chamber optimization is to produce
the minimumstandard deviation of the mass of discharge materials of
each crushing zone as shown in Eq. (11). The size reduction model and
akiness prediction model are taken as performance constraints, as
shown in Eq. (12). P
CSS
is the percentage of material whose size is less
thanCSS, andit is akeyparameter for estimatingthecrusher performance.
P
CSS min
is the expected value of the minimum P
CSS
. FI
total max
is the
expected value of the maximumFI
total
.
F x =
m
i =1
M
i
V
i
;
i
; M
1
V
1
;
1
;
2
m 1
_
Ymin 11
P
CSS
z P
CSS min
FI
total
V FI
total max
:
_
12
To ensure that the optimization would succeed and the outcome
would be useful, there should be boundary constraints on the design
variables as shown in Eq. (13). The cone crusher chamber optimiza-
tion is implemented with Matlab, the corresponding owchart is
shown in Fig. 4.
n
min
V n V n
max
min
V V
max
h
min
V h V h
max
min
V V
max
0 V V
min
:
_
_
13
In this work a PYB900 cone crusher (made in China) is taken as an
example. The structural and working parameters of PYB900 are taken
as the initial input for the crushing chamber optimization. The
outcome of the optimization, including these parameters and the
crushing chamber geometry, and the corresponding performance
prediction, are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 5. With the akiness
prediction model, the akiness index of the nal product is calculated,
as shown in Fig. 6.
To verify the validity of the cone crusher chamber optimization
model, we cooperated with the Shanghai Jianshe Luqiao Machinery Co.,
Ltd to redesign the PYB900 cone crusher in accordance with the
outcome of the optimization. The corresponding prototype has been
made. It has been working in a quarry in Huzhou China. The
performance of the prototype has been tested, as shown in Table 1.
The productivity and P
CSS
of the prototype are respectively 105.56t h
1
and 48.15%, which are both greater than those of the original PYB900.
The FI
total
of the prototype is 25.95%, which is less than that of the
original PYB900. Actually, the improvement of output is mainly because
of the increase in the volume of the crushing chamber and the rotation
speed of the shaft. The improvement of product quality is because
interparticle breakage occurs in the process of crushing and rock
materials get crushed thoroughly. The performance of the prototype did
not matchthe outcome of optimization, and several factors such as cone
Fig. 4. The cone crusher chamber optimization owchart.
Table 1
The outcome of optimization and prototype test.
Type of parameters Structural and working parameters Performance parameters
n (r min
1
) (deg) h (mm) (deg) (deg) Q (t h
1
) P
CSS
(%) FI (%)
Initial parameters 270 2 344 40 22 80 45 30
Parameters optimized 332.46 1.8 382.46 44 24.3 125.12 54.88 22.13
Parameters of prototype 330 1.8 380 44 24 105.56 48.15 25.95
Fig. 5. The optimized chamber geometry of PYB900.
207 D. Gang et al. / Int. J. Miner. Process. 93 (2009) 204208
crusher operating conditions, feeding conditions, assumptions of those
models and cone crusher manufacturing deviations, may lead to those
discrepancies. However, basically the validity of the crushing chamber
optimization is veried by the corresponding prototype test.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, in which we have studied rock material in a crushing
chamber, the motion of the material has been traced and the method
for dividing crushing chamber into crushing zones is presented. Based
on the chamber division and population balance model, the method
for the design of the chamber geometry is presented. Combining the
empirical model for predicting particle shape with the size distribu-
tion model, a akiness prediction model is proposed. Using the size
reduction model and akiness prediction model as constraints, the
crushing chamber design optimization is achieved. All this work will
be useful for future cone crusher optimization strategies.
With the cooperation of cone crusher manufacturer, the PYB900
cone crusher has been redesigned in accordance with the outcome of
the optimization procedure. The corresponding prototype has been
working in a quarry in Huzhou China. The validity and reliability of the
crushing chamber optimization have been veried with the prototype
test.
References
Evertsson, C.M., 1997. Output prediction of cone crushers. Miner. Eng. 11, 215231.
Evertsson, C.M., 2000. Cone Crusher Performance. Ph.D. thesis. Chalmers University of
Technology.
European Standard. 1997. EN 933-3. CEN European.
Gauldie, K., 1953. Performance of Jaw Crushers. Engineering. October 9, 1953, 456458;
October 16, 1953, 485486.
Lang, B.X., 1998. Cone Crusher, rst ed. Mechanical Industry Publishing Company,
Beijing.
Magnus, B., Evertsson, C.M., 2006. An empirical model for predicting akiness in cone
crushing. Int. J. Miner. Process. 79, 4960.
Glossary
Roman
B
i
breakage function of crushing zone i
F
i
feeding matrix of crushing zone i
F feeding matrix of initial feed
F
i
nip angle of crushing zone i
nip
average nip angle of crushing chamber
eccentric angle
density of material
i
volumetric lling ratio of crushing zone i
Acronyms
CSS closed side setting
Fig. 6. The akiness index of the nal product.
208 D. Gang et al. / Int. J. Miner. Process. 93 (2009) 204208