Influence of Agitator Shape on Characteristics and Grinding Efficiency of Attritor Mill

被引:4
|
作者
Ye, Chenzuo [1 ]
Takaya, Yutaro [2 ,3 ]
Tsunazawa, Yuki [2 ,4 ]
Mochidzuki, Kazuhiro [2 ,5 ]
Tokoro, Chiharu [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Waseda Univ, Grad Sch Creat Sci & Engn, 3-4-1 Okubo,Shinju Ku, Tokyo 1698555, Japan
[2] Waseda Univ, Fac Sci & Engn, Tokyo, Japan
[3] Univ Tokyo, Fac Engn, Tokyo, Japan
[4] Natl Inst Adv Ind Sci & Technol, Geol Survey Japan GSJ, Tsukuba, Japan
[5] Retoca Lab LLC, Funabashi, Japan
关键词
photovoltaic panel recycling; attritor mill; ag-itator shape; grinding kinetics; DEM simulation; PRINTED-CIRCUIT BOARDS; PARTICLE SIMULATION; DISCRETE; MODEL; DETACHMENT; RECOVERY;
D O I
10.20965/ijat.2022.p0756
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Grinding is a unit of operation of a pure mechanical process. An attritor is a grinder able to be used for fine or selective grinding. However, few studies have reported on the optimum design for the attritor. The attritor's grinding characteristics and grinding effect depend not only on the operating conditions, but also on the geometry of the agitator. Therefore, we inves-tigated the effect of the agitator shape on the grinding efficiency from the viewpoint of experiments, kinetic analysis, and discrete element method (DEM) simula-tions. We conducted grinding experiments with two different agitators. One was Agitator A, a traditional design with two pairs of 90 degrees staggered mixing arms at the middle and bottom of the mixing shaft. The other was Agitator B, with a lower mixing arm in-clined by 10 degrees along the horizontal direction. We found that the grinding rate constant of Agitator B was ap-proximately 40% greater than that of Agitator A. Al-though the size distribution of the particles was rela-tively dispersed after grinding with Agitator B, the dis-tribution was concentrated mainly within two ranges (<0.5 mm and 2-4 mm) with Agitator A. These re-sults and an elemental analysis of each size fraction suggested that the dominating grinding mode in Agi-tator A was surface grinding, whereas in Agitator B, it was bulk grinding. In terms of the influence of the ag-itator shape, the DEM simulation results showed that the kinetic energy of the grinding media in Agitator B was 0.0046 J/s, i.e., larger than the 0.0035 J/s obtained for Agitator A. A collision energy analysis showed that the dominating collision was between the media and wall in the tangential direction for both models. The collision energy of the media in Agitator B was larger than that of that in Agitator A. The results from the DEM simulation can help us evaluate the experimen-tal results and infer the reasons why the grinding rate constant in Agitator B is larger than that in Agita-tor A.
引用
收藏
页码:756 / 765
页数:10
相关论文
empty
未找到相关数据