Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 7
VON MICHAELIS, H. How energy efficient is HPGR? World Gold Conference 2009, The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2009.
The world is rapidly becoming more green i.e. energy conscious. Since mining and mineral
processing are massive energy users, the mining industry is seeking ways to reduce its energy
footprint. In mining and mineral processing operations, energy is often the most expensive cost item.
Comminution, i.e. grinding, is frequently the most energy-intensive step between mine and metal.
High pressure grinding rolls (HPGR) are being installed in a rapidly growing number of hard rock
mineral processing operations. In the energy conscious cement industry, HPGR grinding has been
standard practice for decades. HPGR is known to be energy-efficient; the question is how energy
efficient? How can the energy efficiency of HPGR be enhanced?
This paper reviews recent HPGR applications for the processing particularly of copper, gold,
platinum, PGM-Ni-Cu and iron ores. HPGR technology is discussed with respect to energy
efficiency. The harder the ore the greater the energy savings are likely to be.
Typical energy savings of 1020% can be expected when installing HPGR vs. a SAG mill. Wipf
(2005) showed why conventional Bond Work index tests on HPGR product is likely to underestimate the energy savings that can be achieved by installing HPGR.
Energy efficiency of HPGR is, however, ore-specific. The biggest energy savings of HPGR tested
thus far is 9.5 kWh/tonne claimed for Vista Golds Mt. Todd gold ore from Western Australia, a
savings of over one-third of conventional SABC comminution energy.
Several commercial scale iron-ore pellet feed plants install HPGR for fine-grinding of concentrate
to increase the surface area of pellet feed in a manner that reduces overall energy consumption.
Energy-consumption in comminution is, however, only part of the energy savings benefit story.
HPGR typically also reduces the amount of steel lost through wear of mill liners and media. Marsden
(2008) showed that when the energy that would have been consumed to produce the steel that is saved
by applying HPGR is factored in, then the overall energy savings of HPGR is considerably greater.
Johnson et al. (1988, 2005) tested HPGR in a flowsheet in which energy savings of around 50%
can be expected if HPGR product screen oversize is recirculated to the HPGR.
Innovative flowsheets have been proposed by Rule et al. (2008) and by Morley (2008) which are
expected to result in significantly increased energy savings.
HPGR applied in flowsheets in conjunction with coarse ore separation devices, e.g. ore sorting or
DMS to remove barren waste from HPGR feed promises significantly greater energy efficiencies.
Fine-grinding and ultra-fine grinding of ore or concentrates in conventional ball mills results in
energy consumptions that increase exponentially with product fineness. Wipf (2009) presented a
flowsheet in which he proposed the installation of HPGR ahead of the Aerosion Disintegrator for
ultra-fine grinding of ores and/or concentrates. This dry grinding arrangement is expected to achieve a
p80 = 7 m using up to 100 kWh/t less energy than could be achieved by wet ball milling.
Using conventional comminution, an ore might require grinding to p80 = 45m ( 325 mesh), for
example, to liberate the valuable components, e.g. magnetite, from gangue, e.g. silica. Inter-particle
comminution in HPGR may break some ores along grain boundaries thereby liberating valuable
minerals from gangue at a much coarser particle sizes. Early magnetic separation rejection of silica
gangue liberated from magnetite by HPGR at coarser grain sizes could further reduce downstream
comminution energy consumption.
Introduction
Daniel (2008) summed up the situation succinctly:
Although it is recognized that the energy efficiency of
most comminution devices, especially ball mills, is
generally very poor, how efficiently energy resources are
used in the future will become more important.
Sustainability drivers such as energy efficiency are soon to
play a very important role in a mines triple bottom line,
and as such innovative ways of improving overall energy
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 8
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 9
In addition to being oredependent, the extent of microcracking is a direct function of the operating pressure and
therefore energy input of the HPGR, and in any given
operation, the benefits of micro-cracking must be weighed
against the incremental power required to achieve those
benefits.
Anguelov et al. (2008) presented the results of HPGR
trade-off studies carried out for six different hard rock ore
processing projects including two 30 000 tpd copper
concentrators one for Pacific Booker Minerals and one for
Imperial Metals. In both cases the HPGR option indicated a
gross power consumption reduction over a similar
conventional SAG mill grinding circuit. Overall operating
cost savings were of the order of 15%. Capital costs for the
HPGR option was slightly higher than the SAG mill option,
but was considered to be the same within the accuracy level
of their study.
Von Michaelis (2005) concluded that Higher energy and
steel prices provide a significant incentive for industry to
consider technologies such as HPGR that reduce energy
and steel consumption..Conventional mills are by their
very nature notoriously energy-inefficient. For many mines,
energy is the single biggest cost item. HPGR offers a way
to save significant amounts of energy.
HPGR has been selected for several mines. The following
summarizes some of them:
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 10
Table
HPGR grinding energyMogalakwena North
Target grind size (m)
Stage 1 HPGR energy (kWh/t)
Ball milling HPGR product (kWh/t)
Total HPGR BM route energy (kWh/t)
Stage 1 Jaw crushing (kWh/t)
Stage 2 HPGR (kWh//t)
Jaw + HPGR energy (kWh/t)
Ball milling for conventional product (kWh/t)
Total conventional route energy (kWh/t)
Net energy saving for HPGR route (kWh/t)
Energy saving (%)
Average energy saving (%)
300
3.3
16.2
19.5
2.4
0.9
3.3
23.6
26.9
7.4
27.6
<
150
3.3
25.6
28.9
2.4
0.9
3.3
33.7
37.0
8.1
22.0
106
3.3
32.8
36.1
2.4
0.9
3.3
40.0
43.3
7.2
16.7
19
75
3.3
57.7
61.0
2.4
0.9
3.3
63.0
66.3
5.3
8.0
45
3.3
53.7
56.9
2.4
0.9
3.3
70.0
73.3
16.4
22.3
>
10
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 11
11
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 12
12
Table
HPGR-BM cost advantage over SABCCerro Verde
Power
Grinding media
Mill and crusher liners
Operating and repair supplies
Operating and repair labour
$0.144 /t
$0.215/t
($ 0.009/t)
($0.022/t)
($0.006/t)
$0.368/t
Table I
Comminution circuit specific energyCerro Verde
Category
Size reduction equipment
Ancillary equipment
SABC
17.8
2.3
HPGR
11.8 kWh/t
4.1 kWh/t
20.1
15.9 kWh/t
Table V
HPGR vs. conventional comminutionNew Celebration
Particle
size
P80 (m)
4000
425
325
HPGR
Residue
(g/t)
Gold
recovery(%)
0.10
0.12
0.11
79.0
78.3
2.1
Conventional
Residue
Gold
(g/t)
recovery(%)
0.22
0.17
0.13
57.9
69.0
73.1
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 13
Table V
Specific power comparisonBoddington Gold Mine
SABC
Pre-Crush/SABC
HPGR/Ball
Throughput (t/h)
Primary Crusher
Secondary Crusher
HPGR Power (MW)
SAG Mill
1440
60 x 110
2600
60 x 110
MP1000
2.03.3
12.2 m dia x 7.3 m
24 MW
3000
60 x 110
2MP 1000s
8
Pebble crusher
Ball mills number
Ball mills size
2 @ MP1000s
Two
10 MW
2 MP 1000s
Two
7.9 m dia x 14.4 m
Three
16 MW
33.3
5155
4353
23.1
20.221.2
18
Table V
Indicative comminution circuit capital and operating costsBoddington Gold Mine
Parameter
Units
Annual throughput
Capital cost estimate
Operating cost estimate
Mt/a
A$/tpa
A$/t
SABC
Pre-crush/SABC
HPGR/Ball Mill
11.2
12.34
4.18
20.8
7.43
3.32
25.0
5.75
2.95
13
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 14
14
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 15
Definitions
Specific energyInput (kWh/t) = net power (kW)/throughput
(dry t/h)
Specific energyinput is the net power draw per unit of
throughput. Typical operating values are in the range of 13
3 kWh/t. In general, a given ore will absorb energy to a point
beyond which little useful work is achieved.
Specific pressure(N/mm 2) = Force (N) / D (mm) x
L (mm)
Specific pressureis the force (Newtons) divided by the
apparent (or projected) area of the roll t~hat is the product of
the roll diameter and length. Typical operating values are in
the range of 14.5 N/mm2.
Conclusions
HPGR followed by ball milling typically saves
1025% of comminution specific energy compared with
SAG, AG or SABC circuits.
Energy efficiency of HPGR is ore-specific. In general,
the harder the ore, the greater the energy savings is likely
to be.
Conventional Bond Work Index measurements
conducted on HPGR product do not reflect the larger
amount of fines generated by HPGR.
Innovative flow sheets that employ HPGR in conjunction
with synergistic technology can save much more energy
overall, e.g. HPGR treating ore sorting or DMS
concentrate and/or HPGR followed by flash flotation.
Wear of HPGR parts is miniscule compared with the
amount of steel lost due to SAG mill liner and media
wear. If the energy required to produce the steel wear
parts lost during comminution is factored in, HPGR is
even more energy efficient than SAG mills.
Heap and vat leaching are more energy efficient (and
more water efficient) ways to produce metal (per lb Cu
or per oz Au). However, for the treatment of highergrade ores, the lower recovery of heap and vat leaching
makes these processes less efficient. Tests indicate that
HPGR-treated ores yield better and faster gold and
copper heap leach recoveries.
HPGR is being tested in closed circuit with fine
screening. This promises to greatly enhance the energy
efficiency of HPGR. A new generation of excellent fine
screening equipment has been developed. Screen
classifying allows material to be classified by size rather
than density.
Frontier research such as HPGR following microwave
pretreatment to weaken ore along grain boundaries offers
still greater energy benefits of HPGR in the future
especially if combined with DMS ahead of the
microwave-HPGR application and followed by flash
flotation and/or gravity to recover sulphides and gold
ahead of ball milling.
References
ANGUELOV, R., GHAFFARI, H., and ALEXANDER, J.
HIGH pressure grinding rolls (HPGR) an alternative
technology versus SAG milling. Comminution 2008
conference, Falmouth, Cornwall. 2008.
DANIEL, M.J. Particle bed compression comminution
using a piston-die to predict the performance of
HPGR. 2008.
DUNNE, R.C., GOULSBRA, A., and DUNLOP, I. HIGH
pressure grinding rolls and the effect on liberation:
Comparative Test Results. Randol Gold Forum 96,
Olympic Valley. 1996.
15
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 16
16
Paper 27:Paper 27
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 17
17
Paper 27:Paper 27
18
10/16/09
2:48 PM
Page 18