3-2-1 tml test procedure-a review of the current methods

10
 TML Test Procedure A review of  the current methods A Presentation to the Iron Ore Fines Workshop September 2013

Upload: apeace-avianiac

Post on 05-Oct-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

3-2-1 TML Test Procedure-A Review of the Current Methods

TRANSCRIPT

  • TMLTestProcedureAreviewofthecurrentmethods

    APresentationtotheIronOreFinesWorkshop

    September2013

  • Tests for Transportable Moisture Limit in the IMSBC Code

    18

    Flow Table Test Penetration Test Proctor-Fagerberg Test

    TML Tests in IMSBC Code are not a direct measure of liquefaction. Measure a materials loss of strength. Loss of strength is one of the key precursors to liquefaction.

  • 19

    TML values for Iron Ore Fines determined by the IMSBC Code tests differ due to particle size distribution and compaction energy conditions.

    The Proctor-Fagerberg test is the simplest and least subjective of the three tests resulting in low variability and good repeatability.

    TMLTest FlowTableTest

    PenetrationTest

    ProctorFagerberg

    TestStandarderror(%)

    0.08 0.05 0.03

    Comparison of the three TML tests in the IMSBC Code

  • 20

    The Proctor/Fagerberg Test always provides a result for the Iron Ore Fines samples tested.

    There are occasions where the other two methods do not provide a result.

    Adequacy of the TML tests for Iron Ore Fines

    Example of Iron Ore Fines (an Australian sample) which do not produce a TML

    when tested with Flow Table Test.

  • 21

    Testing with the full particle size is representative of the cargo and produces a lower TML result.

    X+6

    X+5

    X+4

    X+3

    X+2

    X+1

    X

    TML tests for Iron Ore Fines -particle size distribution

  • 22

    Proctor-Fagerberg is the only TML test in the IMSBC Code that has a solid basis in soil mechanics.

    Based on internationally recognized standards for materials compaction testing.

    Compaction testing is used to identify the relationship between moisture content and density for a given energy input.

    The Proctor-Fagerberg test can be easily and effectively calibrated to real world conditions experienced by Iron Ore Fines.

    Proctor-Fagerberg Test

  • Proctor-Fagerberg Test Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) Explained

    Iron Ore Fines

    1

    1

    2

    2

    3

    3

    4

    4

    OMC

    OMC

    23

  • Proctor-Fagerberg TestOptimum Moisture Content

    for Iron Ore Fines

    Mineral Concentrates Iron Ore Fines

    OMC = 70-75% OMC = 90-95%

    24

  • 25

    The Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) for Iron Ore Fines determined was identified to be between 90-95% saturation.

    Australia A Australia B

    Brazil

    Proctor-Fagerberg Test in the IMSBC Code

  • IMSBC Code - TML Tests

    26

    TML Tests in the IMSBC Code are not a direct measure of liquefaction but a measure a materials loss of strength.

    Loss of strength is one of the key precursors to liquefaction.

    The Proctor-Fagerberg Test is the most precise of the three tests and always produces a result from a sample.

    Proctor-Fagerberg is the only TML test that has a solid basis in soil mechanics.

    Optimum Moisture Content for Iron Ore Fines is different to mineral concentrates.

    The test can be easily and effectively calibrated to real world conditions as they relate to Iron Ore Fines.