M INING

SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
Mining Science and Technology 20 (2010) 0204–0208
www.elsevier.com/locate/jcumt

Influence of some rock strength properties on

jaw crusher performance in granite quarry
OLALEYE B M*
Department of Mining Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria

Abstract: The influence of rock strength properties on Jaw Crusher performance was carried out to determine the effect of rock
strength on crushing time and grain size distribution of the rocks. Investigation was conducted on four different rock samples
namely marble, dolomite, limestone and granite which were representatively selected from fragmented lumps in quarries. Uncon-
fined compressive strength and Point load tests were carried out on each rock sample as well as crushing time and size analysis. The
results of the strength parameters of each sample were correlated with the crushing time and the grain size distribution of the rock
types. The results of the strength tests show that granite has the highest mean value of 101.67 MPa for Unconfined Compressive
Strength (UCS) test, 6.43 MPa for Point Load test while dolomite has the least mean value of 30.56 MPa for UCS test and 0.95
MPa for Point Load test. According to the International Society for Rock Mechanic (ISRM) standard, the granite rock sample may
be classified as having very high strength and dolomite rock sample, low strength. Also, the granite rock has the highest crushing
time (21.0 s) and dolomite rock has the least value (5.0 s). Based on the results of the investigation, it was found out that there is a
great influence of strength properties on crushing time of rock types.
Keywords: rock strength; jaw crusher; crushing time; grain size distribution; efficiency

1 Introduction It is of paramount importance to first carryout size

The strength of a material refers to the material's
ability to resist an applied force. Strength property of
rock is the ability of the rock material to resist failure
when load is applied without yielding or fracture. The
mechanical properties of rock depend upon the inter-
action between the crystals, particles and cementation
material of which it is composed[1]. The yield strength
of a material is an adequate indicator of the material's
mechanical strength and is the parameter that predicts
plastic deformation in the material, from which one
can make informed decisions on how to increase the
strength of a material depending on its micro-struc-
tural properties and the desired end effect. Strength is
considered in terms of compressive strength, tensile
strength, and shear strength, namely the limit states of
compressive stress, tensile stress and shear stress,
respectively[2]. According to Reference [3], the effect
of dynamic loading is probably the most important
practical part of the strength of materials, especially
the problem of fatigue. Repeated loading often initi-
ates brittle cracks, which grow slowly until failure
occurs.
Received 29 August 2009; accepted 12 November 2009
*Corresponding author. Tel: 86 516 83885948
E-mail address: Lhyeven@163.com
doi: 10.1016/S1674-5264(09)60185-X
reduction of an ore or rock material on a laboratory
scale for the ore or rock material to be profitably and
economically processed industrially. This permits the
determination of parameters such as liberation size,
grindability, coarse to medium to fine proportion in
any product of the crushing and grinding equipment
and the proportion of values of gangues in the fines[4].
Jaw Crusher is used for crushing rock material in
mines and quarries. It provides the latest technology
in heavy duty crusher design that delivers high pro-
duction, infinite setting adjustment, larger feed open-
ing bolted mainframe, cast swing, jaw holder and
optional positioning of the crusher support feet to suit
installation requirement. This crusher is designed for
exceptional heavy and continuous application with
heavy duty part for optimum operation and long life
and this can be influenced by the strength properties
of the rock. The influence of rock strength property
can result to the loss of capacity to perform the stipu-
lated function for which jaw crusher was designed.
The UCS was the main quantitative method for char-
acterizing the strength of rock materials[5]. Point load
test is used to determine rock strength indexes in
geotechnical practice. Rock lithologies were classi-
fied into general categories and conversion factors
were determined for each category. This allows for
intact rock strength data to be made available through
OLALEYE B M Influence of some rock strength properties on jaw crusher performance in granite quarry
point load testing for numerical geotechnical analysis
and empirical rock mass classification systems such
as the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR)[6].
Crushing is an integral portion for mineral proc-
essing operations and is critical for the preparation of
ore for downstream process for mineral processing
operations. Crushing of quarried rock is carried out in
stages, with the primary crushing stage typically car-
ried out using Jaw crusher and subsequent (secondary
and tertiary). From field observation, the greater the
number of crushing stage, the higher the amount of
fine produced as a proportion of total plant through-
out. The type of crusher used also directly controls
the amount of fines produced. A recent study of
quarry fines looked at possible relationship between
quarry plant operation and the generation of quarry
fines[7-8]. The conclusion drawn have been critically
revealed that hard rock aggregate plant production is
directly proportional to the number of crushing stages;
it increases with an increase in production stage. Low
reduction fines generation at each stage especially
where the rock or mineral are fragile, however, the
cumulative fines production may be higher than a
process using fewer stages with higher reduction.
The particle size analysis is the method used to
determine the particle size distribution or the grain
size distribution of rock/ore materials. In practice,
close size control of feed to mineral processing
equipment is required in order to reduce the size ef-
fect and make the relative motion of the particles
separation dependent[9]. The particle size distribution
of a material is important in understanding its physi-
cal and chemical properties. It affects the strength and
load bearing properties of rocks. The easiest conven-
tional method of determining mineral particle size is
sieve analysis, where grain size is separated on sieve
of different sizes/apertures using Sieve Shaker. Thus,
the particle size distribution is defined in terms of
discrete size ranges and measured in micron (ȝm). It
is usually determined over a list of size ranges that
covers nearly all the sizes present in the sample.
Some methods of determination allow much narrower
size ranges to be defined that can be obtained by use
of sieves and are applicable to particle sizes outside
the range available in sieves. However, the idea of
notional ‘sieve’ that ‘retains’ particles above a certain
size and ‘passes’ particles below that size is univer-
sally used in presenting particle size distribution data
of all kinds. The size distribution may be expressed as
a ‘range’ analysis, in which the amount in each size
range is listed in order of fineness of particles. It may
also be presented in ‘cumulative form’ in which the
total of all sizes ‘retained’ or ‘passed’ by a single no-
tional ‘sieve’ is given for a range of sizes. Range
analysis is suitable when a particular ideal mid-range
particle size is being sought while cumulative analy-
sis is used where the amount of ‘under-size’ or
‘over-size’ must be controlled.
205
2 Materials and method
2.1 Sample collection, preparation and testing
The rock samples used for the investigation were
obtained from different quarries in Nigeria. Dolomite,
limestone and marble samples were collected from
Edo State and granite rock samples from Ondo State,
Nigeria. Five boulders of each rock type of dimension
90 cm×50 cm×50 cm were representatively selected
from recently blasted portion of the rocks which were
free from natural defects, that is, discontinuities such
as cracks, joints, fractures etc were packed properly
to avoid damage during transportation. For the un-
confined compressive strength test, the rock sample
was cut into square shape with dimension of 60
mm×60 mm with masonry saw and Vernier caliper
was used to measure the dimension. Also, for the
point load test, the rock samples were broken into
irregular shape with sledge hammer. Vernier caliper
was used to measure the diameter and length of ir-
regular shaped rock samples from the different loca-
tions. The mean value for length ad diameter was
determined
The rock samples were prepared and tested in the
laboratory to International Society for Rock Mechan-
ics Standard for each strength test carried out using
Masonry Saw Machine and Compression Testing
Machine and Point Load Tester respectively[10]. The
readings were taken and recorded. The size reduction
of equal weighed of the rock samples was done using
Laboratory Jaw Crusher and the particle size distribu-
tion was carried out in notional set of sieves using
Sieve Shaker. The crushing times were taken and re-
corded and the weights of samples retained on the
sieves recorded for size distribution. The rock sample
were cut into square shape by using masonry cutting
machine, the cut samples were smooth, free of abrupt
irregularities and strength. Five specimen of each of
the rock samples were tested and the failure load was
recorded for each test as the failure was observed
axially in the compressive testing machine.
Some lumps of the different rock types were then
crushed using the Laboratory Jaw Crusher and taken
record of the crushing times. The screening of the
crushed rock samples was carried out in a set of sieve
using the Laboratory Sieve Shaker. The sieve was
arranged in the order of decreasing aperture: 4700,
2000, 1700, 1180, 850, 600, 425, and 212 ȝm by
placing the sieve that has the largest opening at the
top and the least opening at the bottom. A tight fitting
pan or receiver was placed below the bottom sieve to
receive the finest grained which is referred to as un-
dersize. The crushed sample was placed on the top
sieve and a lid was used to cover it to prevent escape
of the rock sample during the process. The set of the
sieve was then placed in a sieve shaker which vi-
brates the sieve for proper screening. This operation
206 Mining Science and Technology Vol.20 No.2

was carried out on each of the rock sample for five Table 1 Results of unconfined compressive strength
minutes. This was achieved by using the automatic tests of rock samples
control timer of the sieve shaker. After the screening Rock samples Mean UCS (MPa) Mean PLI (MPa)
analysis, the retained sample on each sieve was Marble 86.11 5.28
measured on weigh balance and recorded to the cor- Dolomite 34.72 1.98
responding sieve opening size. Limestone 81.94 3.68
Granite 125.00 8.61
3 Results and discussion
Table 2 Results of crushing time of rock samples
Tables 1~6 are the results of unconfined compres- Rock samples Quantity crushed (kg) Crushing time (s)
sive strength tests, crushing time and particle size Marble 5 14.0
distribution of the different rock samples while Figs. Dolomite 5 5.0
1 and 2 are the plots of the compressive strength val-
Limestone 5 11.0
ues and the logs of the size distribution of the rock
Granite 5 21.0
types respectively.

Table 3 Results of particle size distribution of marble sample

Nominal Sieve fraction Cumulative undersize Cumulative oversize
Sieve range (ȝm) logN logM
aperture (ȝm) Wt (g) Wt (%) (%) (%)
+4700 4700 2420 40.33 59.67 40.33 3.68 1.78
−4700 ~ +2000 2000 696 11.60 48.07 51.93 3.30 1,68
−2000 ~ +1700 1700 546 9.10 38.97 61.03 3.23 1,59
−1700 ~ +1180 1180 600 10.00 28.97 71.03 3.07 1.46
−1180 ~ +850 850 576 9.60 19.37 80.63 2.93 1.29
−850 ~ +600 600 610 10.17 9.20 90.08 2.78 0.96
−600 ~ +425 425 192 3.20 6.00 94.00 2.63 0.78
−425 ~ +212 212 140 2.33 3.67 96.33 2,33 0.56
−212 220 3.67

Table 4 Results of particle size distribution of dolomite sample

Nominal Sieve fraction Cumulative undersize Cumulative oversize
Sieve range (ȝm) logN logM
aperture (ȝm) Wt (g) Wt (%) (%) (%)
+4700 4700 2340 39.00 61.00 39.00 3.68 1.79
−4700 ~ +2000 2000 830 13.83 47.17 52.83 3.30 1.67
−2000 ~ +1700 1700 380 6.33 40.84 59.16 3.23 1.61
−1700 ~ +1180 1180 410 6.83 34.01 65.99 3.07 1.53
−1180 ~ +850 850 190 3.17 30.84 69.16 2.93 1.49
−850 ~ +600 600 230 3.84 27.00 73.00 2.78 1.43
−600 ~ +425 425 280 4.67 22.33 77.67 2.63 1.35
−425 ~ +212 212 380 6.33 16.00 84.00 2.33 1.20
−212 960 16.00

Table 5 Results of particle size distribution of limestone sample

Nominal Sieve fraction Cumulative undersize Cumulative oversize
Sieve range (ȝm) logN logM
aperture (ȝm) Wt (g) Wt (%) (%) (%)
+4700 4700 4300 71.67 28.33 71.67 3.68 1.45
−4700 ~ +2000 2000 570 9.50 18.83 81.17 3.30 1.27
−2000 ~ +1700 1700 100 1.67 17.16 82.84 3.23 1.23
−1700 ~ +1180 1180 190 3.16 14.00 86.01 3.07 1.15
−1180 ~ +850 850 110 1.83 12.17 87.84 2.93 1.09
−850 ~ +600 600 130 2.17 10.00 90.01 2.78 1.00
−600 ~ +425 425 160 2.67 7.33 92.68 2.63 0.87
−425 ~ +212 212 245 4.08 3.25 96.76 2.33 0.51
−212 195 3.25
OLALEYE B M Influence of some rock strength properties on jaw crusher performance in granite quarry 207

Table 6 Results of particle size distribution of granite sample

Nominal Sieve fraction Cumulative undersize Cumulative oversize
Sieve range (ȝm) logN logM
aperture (ȝm) Wt (g) Wt (%) (%) (%)
+4700 4700 3800 63.33 36.67 63.33 3.68 1.56
−4700 ~ +2000 2000 940 15.67 21.00 79.00 3.30 1.32
−2000 ~ +1700 1700 118 1.97 19.03 80.97 3.23 1.28
−1700 ~ +1180 1180 210 3.50 15.53 84.47 3.07 1.19
−1180 ~ +850 850 160 2.67 12.86 87.14 2.93 1.11
−850 ~ +600 600 200 3.33 9.53 90.47 2.78 0.98
−600 ~ +425 425 170 2.83 6.70 93.30 2.63 0.83
−425 ~ +212 212 210 3.50 3.20 96.80 2.33 0.51
−212 190 3.20

Note: logN and logM are the logs of sieve range and cumulative oversize (retained) respectively.

upward trend of each plot and the line variation of
each plot is as a result of grain size retained on each
8&6DQG3/,03D
Fig. 1 Plot of strength values of the rock samples
/RJ0
Fig. 2 Plots of logN against logM of the size
distribution of the rock types
The analysis of the tests results in Table 1 shows
the mean Unconfined Compressive Strength values of
86.11, 34.72, 81.94 and 125.00 MPa for marble,
dolomite, limestone and granite respectively; and
mean point load index of 5.28, 1.98, 3.68 and 8.61
MPa for marble, dolomite, limestone and granite re-
spectively. The crushing time of the rock samples as
shown in Table 2 indicates 14.0 seconds for marble,
5.0 seconds for dolomite, 11.0 seconds for limestone
and 21.0 seconds granite. From the results, it was
observed that granite has the highest strength value
and crushing time while dolomite has the least of the
values. The compressive strength and crushing time
follow an increasing trend and implies that the crush-
ing time is directly proportional to the compressive
strength of the rocks, that is, the harder the rock, the
more the crushing time under the impact of the jaw
crusher.
The general size distribution plot in Fig. 2 is the
sieve during the screen analysis. From the Figure, it
would be observed that the size distribution of the
weight retained and other parameters followed a
similar trend, that is, there is a good correlation be-
tween the log plots of the rock samples. Also, this is
an indication that size analysis of the products can be
used to determine the optimum size of the feed to the
process for maximum efficiency and to determine the
size range at which much fine occur in the plant so
that it can be minimized. The effects of rock strength
on the crusher performance can be attributed to the
stiffness of rock and also refer to the state of stress at
which a rock specimen or rock mass element ruptures.
Rock strength generally influenced the performance
of crusher in an aggregate quarry. The influence of
rock strength based on the crushing time and size
distribution affect crusher performance. Also, the
strength parameters will indicate the rock type that
has less influence on the crusher performance during
crushing operation.
4 Conclusions
In correlating the strength parameters of the rock
types with the corresponding crushing times, the
work revealed that the higher the strength value the
higher the crushing of the rock under the influence of
a crusher. According to ISRM classification of rock,
granite rock is considered to have very high strength
and dolomite low strength and corresponding higher
and lower crushing values. The work will assist to
predict the efficiency and performance of crusher
when used to crush different rock types as well as the
influence of rock strength based on the crushing time
and particle size distribution. The strength parameters
will also indicate the rock type that has less influence
on the crusher performance in aggregate quarry and
this will assist quarry managers in the selection of
appropriate rock crushing equipment.
208 Mining Science and Technology Vol.20 No.2

International Conference on Ground Control at West Vir-

References
[1] Franklin J A, Dusseault M B. Rock Engineering. New
York: McGraw Hill Publishing Company, 1999.
[2] Harrison J P, Hudson J A. Engineering Rock Mechanics.
Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd, 2000.
[3] Jaeger J C, Cook N G W. Fundamentals of Rock Me-
chanics. UK: Longman Groups Limited, 2004.
[4] Gaudin A M. Principle of Mineral Dressing. New York:
McGraw Hill, 1990.
[5] Hawkes I, Mellor M. Rock Strength is Characterized by
Methods of Uniaxial Compressive Strength. New York:
Longman Limited, 2002.
[6] Rusnak J, Mark C. Ground control in mining. In: 19th
gina University. West Virgina, 2000.
[7] Manning K. Crushing of quarried rock. Mining Maga-
zine, 2002.
[8] Tao D, Fan M M, Jiang X K. Dry coal fly ash cleaning
using rotary triboelectrostatic separator. Mining Science
and Technology, 2009, 19(5): 642-647.
[9] Adepoju S O, Olaleye B M. Assessment of gravity con-
centration of silica sand from Itakpe iron ore tailings by
tabling. Nigerian Journal of Engineering Management,
2001, 2(2): 51-55.
[10] International Society for Rock Mechanics Commission.
Rock Characterization Testing and Monitoring. UK:
Pergamon Press, 1989.