Next Article in Journal
A Preliminary Investigation into the Degradation of Asbestos Fibres in Soils, Rocks and Building Materials Associated with Naturally Occurring Biofilms
Previous Article in Journal
A Temperature Perturbation Infrared Spectroscopy Comparison of HY and NaY Zeolite Dehydration/Rehydration
Previous Article in Special Issue
Cathodic Protection System of the Spiral Classifier at the KGHM Polska Miedź S.A. Ore Concentration Plant—Case Study of Commissioning and Control of Operating Parameters
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Correction

Correction: Liao et al. A Comparison of the Fine-Grinding Performance between Cylpebs and Ceramic Balls in the Wet Tumbling Mill. Minerals 2022, 12, 1007

1
School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China
2
Jiangxi Key Laboratory of Mining Engineering, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China
3
Betterwear New Material Co., Ltd., Jingdezhen 333000, China
4
Goldpro New Material Co., Ltd., Handan 057650, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2024, 14(1), 105; https://doi.org/10.3390/min14010105
Submission received: 9 October 2023 / Accepted: 7 December 2023 / Published: 18 January 2024

Error in Equations

In the original publication [1], Equations (1)–(4) in Section 2, Tables 3 and 8 in Section 3, and Figures 5–8, 10 and 11 in Section 4 were not correctly put.
A correction has been made to Equations (1)–(4) in Section 2 to clarify this point. It replaces the text from “where S1(t) is the breakage rate for the top size” with:
d ω 1 t d t = S 1 ( t ) ω 1 ( t )
where S1(t) is the breakage rate for the top size;  ω 1 is the weight fraction of the material with the top size; t is the grinding time (min). If the breakage rate (S1(t)) does not change with time and follows the first-order kinetics, Equation (2) can be given in the following form:
l g ω 1 ( t ) ω 0 = S 1 · t 2.303
l g ω 1 ( t 1 ) ω 1 ( t 2 ) = S 1 ( t 2 t 1 ) 2.303
l g ω 1 ( t 0 ) ω 1 ( t 1 ) = S 1 ( t 1 t 0 ) 2.303

Error in Tables

A correction has been made to Tables 3 and 8 in Section 3 to clarify this point. It replaces the text Table 3 and Table 8 with:

Error in Figures

A correction has been made to Figures 5–8, 10 and 11 in Section 4 to clarify this point. It replaces the text from Figure 5, Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 10 and Figure 11 with:

Text Correction

A correction has been made to Section 4.2, Paragraphs 2–4:
Compared with 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, 17 mm ceramic balls have the same single mass, total number of grinding media, and total mass, but a larger total surface area. As illustrated in Figure 6, the instantaneous breakage rate (0.177 min−1) of 17 mm ceramic balls is larger than that (0.147 min−1) of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. This may reflect the fact that ceramic balls have a larger total surface area than cylpebs, which is beneficial to fine grinding with the same total charge mass and same total number of charges.
Compared with 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, 21 mm ceramic balls have the same total mass, larger total surface area, larger single mass, and smaller total number of charges. As shown in Figure 6, the instantaneous breakage rate (0.164 min−1) of 21 mm ceramic balls is still larger than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. According to Table 5, there are 0.54 times less total number, 1.07 times larger total surface area, and 1.84 times larger single mass than 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, which is also beneficial to fine grinding at the same total charge mass. However, when the size of the ceramic ball continues to increase to 25 mm, the instantaneous breakage rate (0.151 min−1) of 25 mm ceramic balls is more than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. The weight of one single 25 mm ceramic ball is 3.15 times heavier than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, which also shows that the impact break force of ceramic balls is greater than that of cylpebs, and the total number and total surface area of 25 mm ceramic balls are only 0.32 times and 0.92 times smaller, respectively, than those of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs.
When the size of the ceramic ball continues to decrease to 14 mm, the instantaneous breakage rate (0.176 min−1) of 14 mm ceramic balls is larger than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. Although the weight of one single 14 mm ceramic ball is only 0.58 times lighter than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, the total number and total surface area of 14 mm ceramic balls are 1.73 times and 1.57 times larger, respectively, than those of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. When the size of the ceramic ball continues to decrease to 10 mm, the instantaneous breakage rate (0.163 min−1) of 10 mm ceramic balls is more than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. Although the weight of one single 10 mm ceramic ball is 0.22 times lighter than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, the total number of 10 mm ceramic balls is 4.64 times more than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, and the total surface area is 2.15 times larger than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs.
A correction has been made to Section 4.4, Paragraph 1:
The effect of the total surface area on the fine-grinding performance is shown in Figure 8. As presented in Tables 4 and 7, 17 mm ceramic balls have the same total surface area, but 0.75 times less the total number of charges and total mass compared with 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. Moreover, Figure 8 shows that, when the 17 mm ceramic balls shared the same total surface area as 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, an equal instantaneous breakage rate of the ground product could be obtained. This interesting phenomenon may indicate that, when using ceramic balls with an equal single mass instead of cylpebs, the total mass of the ceramic balls can be less than that of the cylpebs. When the size of the ceramic ball is larger than 17 mm and up to 21 mm, the instantaneous breakage rate of the ground product is larger than that produced by 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. This is because, when the total surface area is kept the same, the weight of a single 21 mm ceramic ball is 1.84 times heavier than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, and, hence, the break force of 21 mm ceramic balls is greater than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. Although the total number of 21 mm ceramic balls is only 0.49 times smaller than that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs, which also shows that a larger break force makes up for the lack of collision probability, the former still demonstrates a better effect of the fine grinding. When the size of ceramic balls is less than 17 mm, despite having the same total surface area and a larger total number, the single mass and total mass are both less than those of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs. Therefore, the effect of the fine grinding of 14 mm and 10 mm ceramic balls is inferior to that of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs.
The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.

Reference

  1. Liao, N.; Wu, C.; Li, J.; Fang, X.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Yin, W. A Comparison of the Fine-Grinding Performance between Cylpebs and Ceramic Balls in the Wet Tumbling Mill. Minerals 2022, 12, 1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 5. Instantaneous breakage rates of the grinding media at the same charge volume.
Figure 5. Instantaneous breakage rates of the grinding media at the same charge volume.
Minerals 14 00105 g005
Figure 6. Instantaneous breakage rates of the ground products at the same total mass.
Figure 6. Instantaneous breakage rates of the ground products at the same total mass.
Minerals 14 00105 g006
Figure 7. Instantaneous breakage rates of the ground products at the same total number.
Figure 7. Instantaneous breakage rates of the ground products at the same total number.
Minerals 14 00105 g007
Figure 8. Instantaneous breakage rates of the ground products at the same total surface area.
Figure 8. Instantaneous breakage rates of the ground products at the same total surface area.
Minerals 14 00105 g008
Figure 10. The relationship of the distribution of the percentage passing 0.075 mm in the ground product and the ratio of the total mass of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs at the same charge volume: (a) 21 mm ceramic balls; (b) 17 mm ceramic balls; (c) 14 mm ceramic balls.
Figure 10. The relationship of the distribution of the percentage passing 0.075 mm in the ground product and the ratio of the total mass of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs at the same charge volume: (a) 21 mm ceramic balls; (b) 17 mm ceramic balls; (c) 14 mm ceramic balls.
Minerals 14 00105 g010
Figure 11. The relationship of the distribution of the percentage passing 0.075 mm in the ground product and the ratio of the total mass of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs in a wider charge volume: (a) δ = 20%; (b) δ = 25%; (c) δ = 30%; (d) δ = 35%.
Figure 11. The relationship of the distribution of the percentage passing 0.075 mm in the ground product and the ratio of the total mass of 12 × 12 mm cylpebs in a wider charge volume: (a) δ = 20%; (b) δ = 25%; (c) δ = 30%; (d) δ = 35%.
Minerals 14 00105 g011aMinerals 14 00105 g011b
Table 3. Physical properties of grinding media.
Table 3. Physical properties of grinding media.
Grinding MediaCeramic Balls
Dimension (mm)252117151410
Mass (g)30.0017.509.506.505.502.05
Surface area (cm2)19.6313.849.087.076.153.14
Specific surface (cm2/g)0.650.790.961.091.121.53
Specific density(g/cm3)3.703.703.703.703.703.70
Bulk density (g/cm3)2.202.202.202.202.202.20
Grinding MediaCylpebs
Dimension (mm)14 × 1612 × 1210 × 10
Mass (g)17.69.55.4
Surface area (cm2)10.116.784.71
Specific surface (cm2/g)0.570.710.87
Specific density(g/cm3)7.007.007.00
Bulk density (g/cm3)4.404.404.40
Table 8. Comparison of ceramic balls and cylpebs with different charge volumes.
Table 8. Comparison of ceramic balls and cylpebs with different charge volumes.
Grinding MediaCeramic Balls
Dimension (mm)17171717171717
Charge volume (%)20.0025.0030.0035.0040.0045.0050
Number of media93116139162185208232
Total mass (g)880110013201540176019802200
Total surface area (cm2)844.441053.281262.121470.961679.81888.642106.56
Grinding MediaCylpebs
Dimension (mm)12 × 1212 × 1212 × 1212 × 1212 × 1212 × 1212 × 12
Charge volume (%)20.0025.0030.0035.0040.0045.0050
Number of media185232278324371417463
Total mass (g)1760220026403080352039604400
Total surface area (cm2)1256.081570.111884.132198.152512.172826.193140.21
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Liao, N.; Wu, C.; Li, J.; Fang, X.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Yin, W. Correction: Liao et al. A Comparison of the Fine-Grinding Performance between Cylpebs and Ceramic Balls in the Wet Tumbling Mill. Minerals 2022, 12, 1007. Minerals 2024, 14, 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/min14010105

AMA Style

Liao N, Wu C, Li J, Fang X, Li Y, Zhang Z, Yin W. Correction: Liao et al. A Comparison of the Fine-Grinding Performance between Cylpebs and Ceramic Balls in the Wet Tumbling Mill. Minerals 2022, 12, 1007. Minerals. 2024; 14(1):105. https://doi.org/10.3390/min14010105

Chicago/Turabian Style

Liao, Ningning, Caibin Wu, Jianjuan Li, Xin Fang, Yong Li, Zhongxiang Zhang, and Wenhang Yin. 2024. "Correction: Liao et al. A Comparison of the Fine-Grinding Performance between Cylpebs and Ceramic Balls in the Wet Tumbling Mill. Minerals 2022, 12, 1007" Minerals 14, no. 1: 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/min14010105

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop