Tests On The Hardinge Conical Mill (7202cf6a-0ac2-4eae-af7b-c64674331b1e)

R.. B. T. KILIANI, New York, N. Y.-I do not care to discuss Mr. Taggart's paper in the light of theory, as that has been very well done by Prof. Bell,1 but I should like to criticize some of his conclusions, in the light of actual operating practice at plants all over the country. 1. Mr. Taggart's first conclusion is that in crushing average ore, the character of the gangue has little effect on the efficiency of the mill. This, I believe, is not in accordance with the usual practice, since in crushing a hard ore the capacity will be much reduced below what it would be with a softer ore, while the power consumed will be practically independent of the character of the ore, being proportional only, to the load of ore and balls in the mill. 2. Mr. Taggart's second criticism is that the Hardinge mill is not suitable for grinding soft, tough material. In answer to this I might mention that the mill is being used for grinding tough, dnctile material, such as metallic aluminum, and also for grinding licorice root. 3. He says that the ball-mill works more efficiently on material of intermediate size, say 1/2 to 3/4 in., than on either coarser or finer feed.. This is true as to coarser feed. For the most efficient work, I believe that a ball-mill should be fed with material not coarser than 1 1/2 in.; it' will handle material up to 3 and even 4 in., but the reduction from 3 or 4 in. to 1 1/2 in. can be done much more cheaply and efficiently by rolls or disk crushers than in the ball-mill. 4. As to Mr. Taggart's fourth conclusion, that a greater ratio of reduction can be expected with feed of an intermediate size than with a coarse feed, I have not enough information to express an opinion. 5. His next conclusion is that steel balls are much more efficient crushing media than pebbles. Steel balls are undoubtedly more efficient for crushing coarse feed. On fine material they are also more efficient as to tons per horsepower crushed to 10-mesh, but on fine material I think it will be found that flint pebbles are cheaper than cast-iron balls, per ton of ore, although there will be a saving in power per ton by using cast iron instead of flint. The increased cost of crushing with cast iron will be due to the higher cost of iron at the present time. 6. Mr. Taggart's sixth conclusion coincides with present practice, that steel balls will grind as fine or finer than pebbles when working on the same feed.