Abstract
Uncertainty in industrial processes is very common, but it is particularly high in the grinding process (GP), due to the set of interacting operating/design parameters. This uncertainty can be evaluated in different ways, but, without a doubt, one of the most important parameters that characterise all GPs is the particle size distribution (PSD). However, is the PSD a good way to quantify the uncertainty in the milling process? This is the question we attempt to answer in this paper. To do so, we use 10 experimental grinding repetitions, 3 grinding times, and 14 Tyler meshes (more than 400 experimental results). The most relevant results were compared for the weight percentage for each size (WPES), cumulative weight undersize (CWU), or the use of particle size distribution models (PSDM), in terms of continuous changes in statistical parameters in WPES for different grinding times. The probability distribution was found to be changeable when reporting the results of WPES/CWU/PSDM, we detected the over-/under-estimation of uncertainty when using WPES/CWU, and variations in the relationships between sizes were observed when using WPES/CWU. Finally, our conclusion was that the way in which the data are analysed is not trivial, due to the possible deviations that may occur in the uncertainty process.
Subject
Geology,Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
Reference36 articles.
1. Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers;Coleman,2018
2. Theories of Engineering Experimentation
3. ISO—ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008—Uncertainty of Measurement—Part 3: Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM: 1995)https://www.iso.org/standard/50461.html
4. The Purposes of Uncertainty Analysis
5. Verification and validation in computational solid mechanics and the ASME standards committee;Schwer;WIT Trans. Built Environ.,2005
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献