Recent Developments in Classification (a620fb0c-5ef5-4473-adde-8ad0245017f8)

FOLLOWING the presentation at the annual meet-ing of the paper "Recent Developments in Classi-fication," by A. M. Gaudin and W. L. Remick, the discussion presented below took place: H. N. Spicer : I haven't been able to study this paper closely, but I would like to ask 'Mr. Remick something regarding the work done by the mechanical classifier. The screen test given here would appear to show that the classi-fier did very, very poor work. The 44 per cent efficiency calculated from this equation is much lower than any ordinary operation. Nothing is stated regarding the de-tails. of the operation, the slope of the classifier, the dilu-tion, the speed, and such other factors that influence results. I would also like to know something of the material that was worked. The Manhattan schist that I have seen them digging out of the subways is of a flaky nature, so that in any classifier, you might get the factor of fine flakes floating over. Was the same material used in the hydrotator test? The screen tests vary a whole lot. Mr. Remick: You will notice the Dorr classifier han-dled the circulating load. This classifier naturally was run in closed circuit. I should like to be pardoned for quoting from Mr. Bates' paper of last year on "Classifica-tion in the Witwatersrand Mills." In this report only two efficiencies were given for the so-called straight type Dorr classifier. One was 44.6 per cent and the other 61.6. I don't know whether or not an average should be taken for the proper performance. I assume that that test was performed under better conditions, yet the efficiencies av-eraged only 53.1 per cent. I am afraid I am taking the words out of Professor Taggart's mouth, but he has told me that the Dorr classi-fier at Columbia is not the proper size to work with the Hardinge mill with which it is connected. This indicates only the inadvisability of putting commercial sized mat chines in a school laboratory. You cannot, he says, get the proper tonnage from the Hardinge mill to work the Dorr classifier and get the best results. Mr. Bates' results show higher efficiency with the lower capacity. Now, on the other hand, I assume that the classifier described in Mr. Bates' paper was probably run at the proper capacity.. It is a rather puzzling question.